Nativeness and invasion biology

 

The dataset about nativeness and invasion biology was prepared by János Csiky1, Lajos Balogh2, István Dancza3, Ferenc Gyulai4, Gusztáv Jakab5, Gergely Király B.6, Éva Lehoczky7, Attila Mesterházy8, Patrícia Pósa9 and Tamás Wirth10.

1 University of Pécs, Faculty of Sciences, Institute of Biology, Department of Ecology, H-7624 Pécs, Ifjúság u. 6., Hungary, e-mail: moon@gamma.ttk.pte.hu, ORCID id.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7920-5070

2 Savaria Museum, Natural History Department, H-9700 Szombathely, Kisfaludy Sándor u. 9., Hungary, e-mail: balogh.lajos@savariamuseum.hu

3 Agrofórum Kiadó Kft., H-2120 Dunakeszi, László köz 10., Hungary, e-mail: danczai@gmail.com; ORCID id.: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2881-8982

4 Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Environmental Sciences Doctoral School, H-2100 Gödöllő, Páter Károly u. 1., Hungary, e-mail: andor20@gmail.com

5 Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences Institute of Environmental Sciences, Páter Károly utca 1., Gödöllő 2100, Hungary;
Institute of Archaeology, Research Centre for the Humanities, Tóth Kálmán utca 4., Budapest 1097, Hungary, e-mail: jakab.gusztav@uni-mate.hu, ORCID id.: https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2569-5967

6 University of Sopron, Institute of Silviculture and Forest Protection, H-9400 Sopron, Bajcsy-Zs. u. 4., Hungary, kiraly.gergely@uni-sopron.hu; https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8439-2616

7 Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, KRC, Institute of Environmental Sciences, Agroecology Group, H-3200 Gyöngyös, Mátrai út 36., Hungary;    
Centre for Agricultural Research, Institute for Soil Sciences, H-1022 Budapest, Herman Ottó út 15., Hungary, e-mail: lehoczky.eva@uni-mate.hu 

8 Centre for Ecological Research, Wetland Ecology Research Group, Bem tér 18/C, Debrecen, H-4026, Hungary, e-mail: amesterhazy@gmail.com

9 Balaton-felvidéki National Park Directorate, Ecotourism and Environmental Education Department, H-8229 Csopak, Kossuth Lajos u. 16., Hungary 
Hungarian University of Agriculture and Life Sciences, Environmental Sciences Doctoral School, H-2100 Gödöllő, Páter Károly u. 1., Hungary, e-mail: posapatricia@gmail.com, ORCID id: https://orcid.org/0000-0003-3025-1313

10 University of Pécs, Botanic Garden, H-7624 Pécs, Ifjúság útja 6., Hungary, e-mail: wirth.tamas@pte.hu, ORCID id: https://orcid.org/my-orcid?orcid=0000-0001-8008-4782

 

The categories describing the main invasion biology attributes are partly consistent and/or comparable with attributes already available in databases in neighbouring countries.

 

Nativeness

Categories:

  • Native species: Those species are considered native which were present in Hungary in the Holocene (≈5000 BC) or were present in nature at least intermittently in subsequent periods (e.g., Quercus robur). Species that became extinct during the Holocene, before the Neolithic, and were later introduced into Hungary with human assistance are not considered indigenous.
  • Alien species: Species that settled in Hungary after the appearance of major human population and the associated interventions (appearing since the beginning of the Neolithic period in the territory of Hungary, ≈ 5000 BC), mainly those that would have been unable to overcome the natural barriers that prevented their spread without human interventions (e.g., Centaurea cyanus).
  • Cryptogenic species: Any species for which it is debatable whether it is native or alien in Hungary (e.g., Abies alba). Here we interpret this term only in terms of species’ nativeness to Hungary.
  • Not confirmed: Species with no confirming specimens from Hungary (e.g., Pyrola media).
  • Planted only: Only planted, cultivated specimens or stands are known from Hungary (e.g., Metasequoia glyptostroboides).

 

Residence time

In case of species not native to Hungary.

Categories:

  • Archaeophytes: alien plant species for which there is historical, archaeological or archaeobotanical evidence of occurrence in Hungary before 1500 AD (e.g., Agrostemma githago).
  • Neophytes: alien plant species that appeared in Hungary after 1500 AD (e.g., Bromus catharticus).
  • Unclear: any plant species of doubtful indigenous origin (e.g., Larix decidua) or alien species which may have been established in Hungary before or after 1500 AD (e.g., Ficus carica).

For any alien or cryptogenic species for which it is not possible to determine with certainty whether it is an archaeophyte or a neophyte, the following four possibilities apply:

  • native/alien?: probably native, less likely to be an alien species (and if it is alien, it is most likely to be archaeophyte) (e.g., Spiraea crenata).
  • alien/native?: probably alien species (most likely archaeophyte), less likely to be native (e.g., Castanea sativa).
  • archaeophyte/neophyte?: probably archaeophyte in Hungary, but this can only be stated with some uncertainty (it may be neophyte) (e.g., Eranthis hyemalis).
  • neophyte/archaeophyte?: probably neophyte in Hungary, but this can only be stated with some uncertainty (it may be archaeophyte) (e.g., Chenopodium strictum).

 

Invasion status

Following the traditional approach, we distinguish three main phases of establishment (casual, naturalised, and invasive species). Among invasive species we distinguish species that significantly change the species composition and structure of habitats (transformer species).

Categories:

  • Casual species: species with casual (spontaneous or subspontaneous) occurrences (e.g., Cucumis sativus), excluding plants established by deliberate planting or seeding.
  • Naturalised species: alien species with self-sustaining populations in Hungary (e.g., Cabomba caroliniana).
  • Invasive species: alien species that reproduce rapidly and spread over large areas (e.g., Erigeron annuus).
  • Transformer species: invasive species that significantly alter their biotic and/or abiotic environment, resulting in the permanent alteration or disappearance of the original vegetation (e.g., Asclepias syriaca).

 

Introduction mode

Categories:

  • Accidental: plant species unintentionally introduced by humans, or species that have migrated from neighbouring countries on their own (e.g., Plantago coronopus).
  • Deliberate (subspontaneous): alien species that got out from stands deliberately established in Hungary (e.g., Opuntia humifusa).
  • Both: both cases (accidental and deliberate introductions) are known for the species (e.g., Sorghum halepense).
  • Unknown: no reliable data is available for the species in this respect (e.g., Ranunculus psilostachys).

 

As a result of the classifications, the distribution of the attributes was as follows:

From the 2745 species included in PADAPT:

  • 1839 taxa are native,
  • 790 taxa are alien,
  • 84 taxa are cryptogenic,
  • 23 taxa have no confirmed occurrences in Hungary,
  • 9 taxa occur only planted.

From the 874 alien and cryptogenic taxa:

  • 301 taxa are archaeophytes,
  • 447 taxa are neophytes,
  • 126 taxa are unclear.

From the 126 unclear taxa:

  • 67 taxa are native/alien?,
  • 17 taxa are alien/native?,
  • 24 taxa are archaeophyte/neophyte?,
  • 18 taxa are neophyte/archaeophyte?

According to invasion status, from the 874 alien taxa:

  • 318 taxa are casual,
  • 471 taxa are naturalized,
  • 63 taxa are invasive,
  • 22 taxa are transformer.

According to the mode of introduction, from the 874 alien taxa:

  • 442 taxa were introduced accidentally,
  • 371 taxa were introduced deliberately,
  • 38 taxa were introduced both ways,
  • 23 taxa are unknown.

 

Data source and citation:

Csiky, J., Balogh, L., Dancza, I., Gyulai, F., ... & Wirth, T. (2023). Checklist of alien vascular plants of Hungary and their invasion biological characteristics. Acta Botanica Hungarica, 65: 53-72.

Sonkoly, J., Tóth, E., Balogh, N., Balogh, L., Bartha, D. ... Török, P. (2022) PADAPT 1.0 – the Pannonian Database of Plant Traits. bioRxiv, doi: https://doi.org/10.1101/2022.12.05.519136

 

Other references:

Balogh, L., Dancza, I., Király, G. (2004) A magyarországi neofitonok időszerű jegyzéke, és besorolásuk inváziós szempontból. [Actual list of neophytes in Hungary and their classification according to their success.] In: Mihály, B., Botta-Dukát, Z. (eds.): Biológiai inváziók Magyarországon: Özönnövények. [Biological invasions in Hungary: Invasive plants.] – A KvVM Természetvédelmi Hivatalának tanulmánykötetei 9, TermészetBÚVÁR Alapítvány Kiadó, Budapest, pp. 61-92. [in Hungarian].

Balogh, L., Dancza, I., Király, G. (mscr. 2016) A magyarországi flóra újjövevénynövényeinek jegyzéke [Catalogue of neophytes of Hungary], 2016. márc. 27. In: Balogh L., Dancza I., Gyulai F., Király G.: A magyarországi flóra jövevénynövényeinek jegyzéke. [Catalogue of alien plants of Hungary.] Kéziratos adatbázis (manuscript of database). Savaria Múzeum, Szombathely, 2016. márc. 27. [in Hungarian].

Balogh L., Gyulai F. (mscr. 2004) A magyarországi flóra ójövevénynövényei; előzetes jegyzék [Catalogue of arcaeophytes of Hungary; a preliminary list], 2004. júl. 15. In: Balogh L., Dancza I., Gyulai F., Király G.: A magyarországi flóra jövevénynövényeinek jegyzéke. [Catalogue of alien plants of Hungary.] Kéziratos adatbázis (manuscript of database). Savaria Múzeum, Szombathely, 2016. márc. 27. [in Hungarian].

Gyulai, F. (2010) Archaeobotany in Hungary. Seed, Fruit, Food and Beverages Remains in  the Carpathian Basin: an Archaeobotanical Investigation of Plant Cultivation and Ecology from the Neolithic until the Late Middle Ages. Archaeolingua, Budapest, 479 p.

Pósa, P., Gyulai, F. (2019) A tájtörténet fontos forrásának, a Magyar Archaeobotanikai Adatbázisnak a bemutatása. In: Módosné Bugyi I. et al. (eds.): XII. tájtörténeti tudományos konferencia. Füleky György emlékkonferencia. Szarvas 2019. június 27-29. Érdi Rózsa Nyomda, 190 p, 82-87. [in Hungarian].

Pósa, P., Vinogradov, Sz., Gyulai, F. (2020) The developement of weed vegetation in the Pannonian Basin as seen in the archaeobotanical records. Applied Ecology and Environmental Research 18(5), 7431-7444.