Predicting invasiveness in exotic species: do subtropical native and invasive exotic aquatic plants differ in their growth responses to macronutrients?

We investigated whether plasticity in growth responses to nutrients could predict invasive potential in aquatic plants by measuring the effects of nutrients on growth of eight non-invasive native and six invasive exotic aquatic plant species. Nutrients were applied at two levels, approximating those found in urbanized and relatively undisturbed catchments, respectively. To identify systematic differences between invasive and non-invasive species, we compared the growth responses (total biomass, root:shoot allocation, and photosynthetic surface area) of native species with those of related invasive species after 13 weeks growth. The results were used to seek evidence of invasive potential among four recently naturalized species. There was evidence that invasive species tend to accumulate more biomass than native species (P = 0.0788). Root:shoot allocation did not differ between native and invasive plant species, nor was allocation affected by nutrient addition. However, the photosynthetic surface area of invasive species tended to increase with nutrients, whereas it did not among native species (P = 0.0658). Of the four recently naturalized species, Hydrocleys nymphoides showed the same nutrient-related plasticity in photosynthetic area displayed by known invasive species. Cyperus papyrus showed a strong reduction in photosynthetic area with increased nutrients. H. nymphoides and C. papyrus also accumulated more biomass than their native relatives. H. nymphoides possesses both of the traits we found to be associated with invasiveness, and should thus be regarded as likely to be invasive.

The climate change risk management matrix for the grazing industry of northern Australia

The complexity, variability and vastness of the northern Australian rangelands make it difficult to assess the risks associated with climate change. In this paper we present a methodology to help industry and primary producers assess risks associated with climate change and to assess the effectiveness of adaptation options in managing those risks. Our assessment involved three steps. Initially, the impacts and adaptation responses were documented in matrices by ‘experts’ (rangeland and climate scientists). Then, a modified risk management framework was used to develop risk management matrices that identified important impacts, areas of greatest vulnerability (combination of potential impact and adaptive capacity) and priority areas for action at the industry level. The process was easy to implement and useful for arranging and analysing large amounts of information (both complex and interacting). Lastly, regional extension officers (after minimal ‘climate literacy’ training) could build on existing knowledge provided here and implement the risk management process in workshops with rangeland land managers. Their participation is likely to identify relevant and robust adaptive responses that are most likely to be included in regional and property management decisions. The process developed here for the grazing industry could be modified and used in other industries and sectors. By 2030, some areas of northern Australia will experience more droughts and lower summer rainfall. This poses a serious threat to the rangelands. Although the impacts and adaptive responses will vary between ecological and geographic systems, climate change is expected to have noticeable detrimental effects: reduced pasture growth and surface water availability; increased competition from woody vegetation; decreased production per head (beef and wool) and gross margin; and adverse impacts on biodiversity. Further research and development is needed to identify the most vulnerable regions, and to inform policy in time to facilitate transitional change and enable land managers to implement those changes.