Beyond alienness: An impact-centred framework for plant invasions

Graphical abstract

Highlights

• •Native plant invasions can occur within political boundaries under human disturbance and climate change.
• •Invasion impacts should be assessed by ecological effect, not only by biogeographic origin.
• •Distinct ecological processes underlying native and alien invasions require differentiated management strategies.
• •Native invaders reshape local ecosystems through above- and belowground interactions.
• •Restoring resident biotic resistance may help suppress native invaders with lower invasion risk.

1. Escalating plant invasion crises demand cognitive paradigm shift

Biological invasions stand as the second-most significant driver of global biodiversity loss, surpassed only by habitat destruction (Ju et al., 2025). These invasions now inflict over $423 billion in annual economic damages while destabilizing ecosystems worldwide (Roy et al., 2023). Alarmingly, despite decades of research and intervention, invasion impacts continue to intensify rather than diminish (Diagne et al., 2021). This persistence stems from two critical gaps: (1) inadequate understanding of invasion mechanisms (Pyšek and Hulme, 2009; Ricciardi et al., 2013), and (2) failure to account for contextual factors shaping invasion dynamics and undermining control, including trade and transport, land-use change, habitat disturbance, climate change, propagule pressure, and local biotic interactions (McFadyen, 1998; Seebens et al., 2021).

Especially in the study of plant invasions, these complex issues have mainly been explored from the perspective of alien species crossing political or biogeographic boundaries, and this research focus has led to significant achievements. For instance, by comparing the distribution ranges of introduced species in their introduced areas and their native area (Maron and Vilà, 2001), researchers have developed important invasion ecological theories such as the enemy release hypothesis (Blossey and Notzold, 1995), the novel weapons hypothesis (Callaway and Ridenour, 2004), and the resource allocation shift (Keane and Crawley, 2002). In contrast, the expansion phenomena of native plants within their historical distribution ranges that are ecologically comparable to those of invasive alien plants (Valéry et al., 2013; Pivello et al., 2018; Liu et al., 2025; Yang et al., 2025; Xiong et al., 2025; Xue et al., 2025) have received relatively little attention. Importantly, there is still a lack of relevant research evidence regarding how native plants overcome the constraints of competitors, herbivores and pathogens, or how environmental changes within their distribution ranges alleviate ecological limitations (Richardson et al., 2000a; Harvey et al., 2010; Tang et al., 2012). Accordingly, whether native plant range expansion should be incorporated into invasion biology warrants consideration to enable more mechanistic explanations and greater management attention alongside alien plant invasion.

Herein, we posit that native plant range expansion represents both a critical oversight and unique opportunity: (1) from the perspective of ecological impacts, incorporating this phenomenon into the mainstream of invasion science exhibits certain rationality, namely native plant invasion (Nackley et al., 2017); (2) we examine how resident plant–plant, plant–animal, and plant–microbe interactions can suppress native and potentially alien invaders within native ecosystems without introducing non-native control agents. Although modern biocontrol programs apply stricter screening and risk assessment than in the past (Heimpel and Cock, 2018), historical non-target effects highlight the appeal of managing native invaders through resident interactions (Hierro et al., 2005; Simberloff, 2012).

2. Redefining invasion scenarios: a conceptual and management framework incorporating native plant invasion

Current understanding of plant invasion remains strongly shaped by an origin-based paradigm, in which invasion status is typically determined according to whether a species has moved beyond its political boundaries range (Elton, 1958; Richardson et al., 2000b). However, a growing body of evidence suggests that invasive species should be defined predominantly by their persistent expansion dynamics and ecological effects within the study area (Valéry et al., 2009; Carey et al., 2012; Nackley et al., 2017, 2018). Accordingly, the concept of native invasion derived from the ecological impacts caused by native species has remained highly controversial in the field of invasion ecology over the past two decades (Table 1). These discussions show that proponents emphasize ecological impacts, arguing that native species should fall within invasion ecology when they expand rapidly, attain dominance, and alter community structure or ecosystem processes. This allows them to obtain support from relevant mature invasion biology theories and management approaches, thereby achieving the goal of controlling the expansion of native species. Conversely, opponents argue that the core characteristics of biological invasion lie in crossing historical biogeographic boundaries, the absence of co-evolutionary history, and human-mediated dispersal. Classifying the outbreaks of native species as invasion may confuse the outcomes of natural restoration, climate tracking and responses to land degradation, even contradict the theoretical system of alien invasion, and may also trigger confusion in management policies.

Table 1.

Time series of main controversies surrounding the terminology or theory of native invasion.

Controversial topic	Major opinion	Representative reference
The native invasion hypothesis and term native-invasive species was proposed.	Similar to alien species, native species invasions can also pose threats to endemic species in ecosystems.	Scott and Helfman (2001)
Does invasion necessarily presuppose alienness as a precondition?	The concept of invasiveness should not be entirely constrained by the alien and native dichotomy, as some native species undergo population outbreaks and rapid expansion within their ranges, causing impacts comparable to invasive alien species.	Valéry et al. (2009)
Should species be evaluated based on their ecological impacts rather than geographic origins?	For conservation and management, priority should be given to assessing the ecological impacts imposed by the species, rather than rendering value judgments based on the native or non-native classification in advance.	Davis et al. (2011)
Opposition to the weakening of criteria regarding the foreign origin of elements.	Excluding geographic origin from assessment may obscure the distinctive risks of alien invasive species, including biogeographic boundary crossing, absent co-evolutionary history, enemy release, and novel biotic interactions.	Simberloff (2011)
Is native invader an operationalizable concept?	Anthropogenic activities can turn native species into invaders by increasing their abundance or biomass, amplifying per capita impacts through environmental change, or enabling them to occupy historical distribution gaps through artificial stocking or migration. Recognizing native invasion creates distinct scientific, managerial, policy, and social challenges.	Carey et al. (2012)
Can an outbreak of a native species be classified as an invasion?	Sudden dominance or outbreaks of native species should not be classified as invasions, which require colonization beyond the historical native range. Native outbreaks, cyclical population fluctuations, and alien invasions differ in biogeography, evolutionary history, and management logic.	Blondel et al. (2014)
Will the term native invader mislead management practices?	The native invader label adds limited value and may merely repackage native population dysregulation. Its negative connotations may bias public and managerial perceptions of native species and obscure differences in the causes and regulation of native range expansion and alien invasion.	Méndez et al. (2015)
Should the expansion of native plant species be incorporated into invasion ecology?	In the Anthropocene, alien species are no longer the only taxa crossing historical community boundaries and expanding rapidly. Climate driven native plants can similarly alter community structure and function after colonizing adjacent communities and should therefore be incorporated into ecological theory and adaptive management.	Nackley et al. (2017)
Expansion or invasion?	Native expansion and alien invasion are mechanistically distinct. When native plants colonize adjacent communities, the process is more accurately termed expansion.	Tong et al. (2018)
Should native species be excluded from invasion ecology?	Excluding native species from invasion ecology may constrain its theoretical development. Although native range expansion differs from alien invasion, both involve comparable processes of dispersal, establishment, community reassembly, and ecological impact.	Nackley et al. (2018)
Is it necessary to introduce a third category of terminology, instead of simply using the term native invasion?	The neonative concept describes species expanding their ranges in response to anthropogenic environmental change. Distinct from alien invasion and natural range expansion, it is well suited to climate and land use driven native expansions.	Essl et al. (2019)
Should climate tracking species be classified as invasive species?	Forcing native species that shift their ranges in response to climate change into an invasive species framework will generate an adversarial, localized and static conservation paradigm, which may impede global biodiversity conservation efforts.	Urban (2020)
Should management prioritize risk-based ranking regardless of geographical origin?	Some dominant expanding native species pose ecological and socioeconomic risks comparable to invasive alien species. Those with substantial negative impacts should be management priorities but termed expanding rather than invasive.	Yazlık and Ambarlı (2022)

This study argues that within the field of invasion biology, the concept of native invasion holds certain rationality. Given the increasing severity and frequency of native plant expansion (Nackley et al., 2017), defining it as native invasion may attract greater public and regulatory attention. Like alien invasions, native invasions can be driven by climate change (Nackley et al., 2017) and human disturbance (Carey et al., 2012), and may profoundly affect invaded ecosystems (Scott and Helfman, 2001). Nevertheless, it must be acknowledged that the specific inducing factors and ecological processes of native invasion differ from those of alien invasion (Han et al., 2024). Moreover, the social acceptance of this concept remains relatively low, and its application in resource management may face practical operational difficulties and even lead to policy confusion (Carey et al., 2012; Urban, 2020). Despite potential academic debate, recognizing native plant invasion hypothesis could support a unified invasion framework and differentiated management strategies, informing both invasion biology and management systems.

Prior to proceeding with subsequent analyses, it is necessary to conceptually define the management objects of native invasion scenarios, which facilitates the establishment of consensus among researchers, policymakers and the general public. Specifically, the terms native and non-native defined in this study are still used to describe the origin of species, and the core lies in the interpretation of invasion, which covers both the expansion process and its associated ecological impacts. Native invaders with harmful population fluctuations are key research and management targets because they can damage adjacent community structure, biodiversity, and ecosystem functions (Scott and Helfman, 2001; Valéry et al., 2009; Davis et al., 2011; Carey et al., 2012; Nackley et al., 2017, 2018; Carlton and Schwindt, 2026). Therefore, with greater precision and specificity, native invasion refers to the phenomenon whereby native species form monodominant communities within geopolitical boundaries against the backdrop of the Anthropocene, an era characterized by intensifying human disturbance and global climate change. Such communities display the characteristics of climax communities, are resistant to natural replacement, and exert long-lasting harmful ecological impacts.

At present, for native plants that exhibit invasive behavior, there exist other terminologies in addition to the designation native-invasive species: weeds (Richardson et al., 2000b), super-dominant species (Pivello et al., 2018), overabundant species (Jose et al., 2016), range-expanding species (Essl et al., 2019), and poisonous plants (Silang et al., 2015; Liu et al., 2025; Xue et al., 2025). We adopt the term native-invasive species to highlight the invasion effect driven by species range expansion, which can effectively address the rapidly growing demand for native invasion management globally, while avoiding implicit or biased judgments based on anthropogenic economic values (such as weeds and poisonous plants labeled as harmful species, while the latter may not necessarily have invasive characteristics) (Richardson et al., 2000b; Pivello et al., 2018). Although the super-dominant or overabundant species reflect the numerical imbalance of biological communities, and range-expanding species emphasizes the expansion behavior, these terms to some extent downplay the negative ecological consequences that may be caused by the invasiveness of such species. This may lead managers and policymakers to view native range expansion as a natural process requiring no intervention, thereby overlooking its potential “invasion debt” (Nackley et al., 2017). Importantly, the current invasion governance system is largely structured around geopolitical boundaries, namely the boundaries of a nation-state or sovereign jurisdiction, this framework has been effective in identifying many cases of alien plant invasion (Mack et al., 2000; Prévost and Van den Bossche, 2005). However, this may result in a prolonged neglect in theoretical cognition and management of the “backyard fires” triggered by native plants within a single country or local adjacent ecosystems without crossing national borders (Yang et al., 2025). Therefore, retaining the existing governance system may therefore be prudent. The concept of native invasion, which specifies species origin, can complement current invasion governance, raise public awareness, and support coordinated management of alien and native-invasive species within national boundaries. It is also proposed that several native species described by the aforementioned terms be categorized as native invader, thereby reducing terminological redundancy and improving the potential for effective and coordinated management (Soto et al., 2024).

Accordingly, the construction of plant invasion scenarios can be improved to consist of two major subjects from the geopolitical perspective. The first is cross-border alien plant invasion, in which a species crosses geopolitical boundaries and becomes invasive in the recipient region (e.g., Reynoutria japonica; Fig. 1A) (Mack et al., 2000; Richardson et al., 2000b; Zhang et al., 2024). This is the best-recognized type of invasion and has understandably received the greatest scientific and policy attention. However, the prominence of this scenario has also reinforced the entrenched assumption that invasiveness is inherently linked to alien origin.

Fig. 1.

A conceptual and management framework for plant invasion redefined through ecological processes and impacts from the geopolitical perspective. (A) Cross-border Alien Plant Invasion scenario of Reynoutria japonica. Native to Japan, this species has established large populations in the U.S. due to climate change (longer growing seasons, tropicalization) and ornamental introduction, threatening native biodiversity and projected to expand northward. Its rapid leaf (1) and stem (2) growth contribute to high biomass (3), enhancing its invasiveness (Photos by Xiao-Liang Xue). (B) Within-country Native Plant Invasion scenario of Stellera chamaejasme. In China, this northern grassland species has expanded due to transport infrastructure, selective grazing, and its competitive traits. It colonizes meadows on the Qinghai-Tibet Plateau, leading to degradation and impacting livestock. Notable phenotypes include yellow (4) and white (5) flowers (Photos by Xiao-Liang Xue and Ya-Zhou Zhang). (C) The Landscape of Inter-ecosystem Native Plant Invasion for Ligularia cymbulica. On the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau, this species invades open alpine meadows from forests and shrublands, forming dense populations (1). It spreads to alpine meadows (3) through understory populations (2). The phenotype is depicted (4), and plateau pika burrowing facilitates invasion through soil disturbance (5) (Photos by Tao Cheng and Xiao-Liang Xue).

The second scenario is within-country native plant invasion, in which a native species becomes invasive across different regions within the same country while remaining within its historical distribution range (e.g., Stellera chamaejasme; Fig. 1B) (Valéry et al., 2008; Yan et al., 2012; Ma and Li, 2013; Xue et al., 2025). Native to a vast range extending from northern China to the Qinghai-Xizang Plateau (Guo and Wang, 2018), S. chamaejasme can form dense and expanding populations that are closely associated with grassland degradation. Its detrimental effects manifest through multiple mechanisms, including toxicity (Sun et al., 2010; Yang et al., 2025), pollen allelopathic interference (Luo et al., 2021; Gao et al., 2021), resource competition (Guo and Wang, 2018) and the “soil fertile island effect”—the localized enrichment of soil nutrients and microbial activity beneath and around plant patches, which strengthens positive plant–soil feedbacks and further promotes its spread (Xue et al., 2025). However, the central challenge in this scenario lies in surveillance and coordinated governance across administrative units such as provinces, counties and other subnational jurisdictions. Prior to large-scale invasion within a country, native plants typically expand locally into adjacent ecosystems that lie within the vicinity of their natural distribution range, where such species were previously absent or only sparsely distributed (e.g., Ligularia cymbulifera; Fig. 1C). L. cymbulifera is native to forest understories and shrublands in the eastern Qinghai–Xizang Plateau, but it can invade adjacent alpine meadows when disturbance factors such as habitat fragmentation and soil disturbance caused by plateau pika activity create opportunities for establishment (Jia et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2025). Once successfully established, L. cymbulifera can alter plant community composition, pollination dynamics, and soil microbial community structure through its high biomass accumulation and allelopathic effects. The ecological impacts it generates are no less severe than those caused by widely recognized alien invasive species (Liu et al., 2025; Yang et al., 2025; Xiong et al., 2025). If managers can pay attention to this process or landscape characteristics of inter-ecosystem native plant invasion (Fig. 1C), they will gain opportunities to carry out monitoring, prevention and control on potential native invaders at the early stage, thereby reducing the risk of fragmented management responsibilities across different administrative regions.

In conclusion, expanding the scope of invasion biology to include native invaders would therefore help establish a mechanism-oriented research framework centered on ecological impact. It would also promote the development of a more comprehensive and sustainable framework for both research and management, better suited to addressing plant invasions under increasingly intense environmental disturbance.

3. What are the distinctions between alien and native plant invasion in ecological processes?

Alien and native plant invasion can be regarded as two types of closely related but non-identical ecological phenomena (Fig. 2A and B; Table 2).

Fig. 2.

Contrasting ecological pathways of alien and native plant invasion and an impact-based management framework for native invader. (A) Alien plant invasion commonly originates from direct human-mediated introductions across geopolitical or biogeographical boundaries, followed by jump-type long-distance dispersal, repeated propagule inputs, and the establishment of spatially discontinuous invasion foci. Limited co-evolutionary history with recipient communities may facilitate enemy release, novel allelopathic interactions, mutualism reorganization, and defence mismatch. (B) Native plant invasion primarily occurs when anthropogenic activities indirectly induce environmental changes in the species’ habitats, which weaken the ecological constraints within the historical distribution ranges or adjacent areas. The expansion of native plants generally progresses gradually along environmental gradients and ecotones. Specialists at the expansion front form the “happy edge” effect, and this process involves partial coevolutionary relationships between the species and native competitors, herbivores, pathogens and pollinators. (C) Management of native plant invasions should first determine whether range expansion causes net ecological harm, then diagnose disturbance-release, resource-subsidized, or anthropogenically transferred invasion pathways. Following intervention, long-term monitoring and adaptive reassessment shall be conducted. For cimate-tracking or succession-driven expansions that have not caused significant negative impacts, regular monitoring and feedback are also required. Artificial isolation shall be implemented when such expansions threaten other protected species.

Table 2.

Differences in major ecological processes between alien and native plant invasion.

Comparison dimension	Alien plant invasion	Native plant invasion	References
Initial drive	Direct human introduction	Human-induced environmental change	(Simberloff, 2011; Carey et al., 2012; Essl et al., 2019; Dong et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2024)
Dispersal characteristic	Leapfrog, long-distance, multi-center	Progressive expansion along environmental gradients or ecotones	(Chen et al., 2011; Urli et al., 2016; Evans, 2018; Dong et al., 2008; Zhang et al., 2024)
Propagule pressure	Repeated input, large quantity	Primarily derived from adjacent core or edge populations	(Callaway and Aschehoug, 2000; Simberloff, 2009)
Co-evolutionary relationship	Absence or extreme limitation	Partial sharing, with weakened constraints	(Urli et al., 2016)
Focus of prediction	Introduction pathways and species traits	Environmental change, range front dynamics, and biological interactions	(Leffler et al., 2014; Ainsworth, 2021; Han et al., 2024)
Typical management	Detection, containment, and eradication	Driver restoration, impact assessment, and ecological network recovery	(Davis et al., 2000; Nackley et al., 2017; Pivello et al., 2018; Evans, 2018)

The establishment and spread of invasive alien species are predicated on their cross-border introduction into an invaded region, and this process generally relies on intentional or unintentional human activities as vectors, such as global trade, horticultural introduction, transportation and ecological engineering (Elton, 1958; Pyšek and Richardson, 2006). Under the direct impact of human activities, the invasion of alien plants is often characterized by jump-type long-distance dispersal, which consequently enables species originally confined to a specific region to establish multiple discontinuous invasion centers in neighboring countries or even across the globe. For instance, Reynoutria japonica, among the world’s most harmful invasive alien plants, is native to eastern China, Korea, and Japan but was introduced to Europe and North America as an ornamental in the mid 19th century (Zhang et al., 2024). Similarly, Native to South America, Ageratina adenophora was introduced to Asia, Europe, and Australia as an ornamental, later invading southern Yunnan Province, China from Myanmar via international transport routes. It is most frequent and abundant along newly constructed roads and at construction spoil sites (Dong et al., 2008). The strong propagule pressure formed by the above-mentioned alien plants in invaded areas is mainly attributed to frequent and continuous anthropogenic introduction, the large number of individuals involved in each introduction event, and the extensive spatial range of introductions (Simberloff, 2009). This is critical for the species to eliminate or weaken the founder effect and genetic bottleneck (Lockwood et al., 2005), successfully establish an initial breeding population, and facilitate large-scale invasion (Gioria et al., 2023). Native to the Atlantic coast of the US, Spartina alterniflora was repeatedly introduced along China’s southeast coast during the 20th century for sediment accretion, wave attenuation and coastal protection, facilitating its rapid and large-scale invasion of local wetlands (Meng et al., 2020). Furthermore, during the dispersal process of alien species in invaded ranges, newly established invasive alien populations and recipient communities typically lack a co-evolutionary history or only share a limited one, making them more prone to the formation of novel allelopathy, enemy release, mutualism reorganization, or defense mismatch of recipient species (Callaway and Aschehoug, 2000; Rodgers et al., 2008).

In contrast, the occurrence of invasions by native plant species predominantly arises as a response to habitat disturbances indirectly induced by human activities, such climate change, land use alteration, over-exploitation, and wildfire (Carey et al., 2012; Nackley et al., 2017; Essl et al., 2019). This is exemplified by Stellera chamaejasme’s invasion across northern China’s grasslands to southwestern alpine meadows, shrublands, and forest understories following road construction and selective grazing pressures (Yang et al., 2025). Similar patterns emerge globally: Brazilian woody bamboos proliferating in fragmented habitats (Pivello et al., 2018), and Juniperus occidentalis encroaching on U.S. grasslands through grazing and fire regime alterations (Miller et al., 2005), while natural climate variability also contributes to range expansions (Andersen and Baker, 2006). These native plants are able to exhibit dispersal potential beyond the normal range of variation because their inherent biological characteristics can form positive feedback with the aforementioned environmental changes in the same manner as alien invasive species, allowing them to capitalize on opportunities for ecological release (Gioria et al., 2023). These traits are similar to those of alien invasive plants and include (1) resource acquisition efficiency (e.g., structural parasitism in vines (Gentry et al., 1992) and belowground microbe-mediated facilitation in S. chamaejasme (Hu et al., 2023; Xue et al., 2025)), (2) adaptive growth strategies (such as high-density “leaf assault” in palms (Queenborough et al., 2012)), (3) reproductive capacity and (4) allelopathic effects (exemplified by S. chamaejasme (Guo and Wang, 2018; Liu et al., 2020; Gao et al., 2021; Yang et al., 2025) and L. cymbulifera (Jia et al., 2022; Liu et al., 2025; Xiong et al., 2025)).

In addition, native opportunistic invasive populations generally share a partial co-evolutionary history with adjacent biotic communities, and may co-utilize local trophic resources, herbivores, pathogens, pollinators and soil organisms. This sympatric evolution results in long-standing strong biotic and abiotic environmental constraints surrounding potential native invaders. Generally, only when the aforementioned environmental disturbance occurs in the local environment and the constraining effects are relaxed, can the front-edge populations of native invaders rely on their propagules such as seeds, fruits and clones to naturally disperse beyond their historical distribution range, thereby forming regional natural enemy release (Callaway and Aschehoug, 2000a). Taking the elevational range invasion of the native tree species sugar maple (Acer saccharum) as an example, the herbivory-induced mortality rate of seedlings in the core area at low elevation reaches as high as 70%, while the seedling survival rate at the expansion front (upper elevational limit) exceeds 75%, demonstrating the “happy edge” effect (Urli et al., 2016). The dispersal pattern of native invasions is mostly characterized by a progressive spread along ecotones in terms of spatial distribution. For example, in the ecotone between coniferous forests and temperate forests, Anthropocene-driven global warming is promoting the expansion of forest lines toward high-latitude and high-altitude regions, and this shift occurs continuously along ecological gradients (Chen et al., 2011; Evans, 2018).

Although the spatial spread of native invaders is typically relatively slow and localized (Han et al., 2024), it may inherently be constrained by the initial population size, the species’ own dispersal capacity, and the rate of environmental change. For example, under the synergistic influence of multiple factors including land use change, altered fire management, CO₂ enrichment, and changes in temperature and precipitation in southern Africa, the native-invasive tree species Vachellia karroo, Terminalia sericea and Colophospermum mopane have expanded their ranges by 10–20 million hectares in the grassland biome from 1925 to 2011, forming extensive woody encroachment landscapes (Nackley et al., 2017). Affected by similar factors, North America has historically experienced the encroachment of 330 million hectares of non-forest land by woody plants (Eldridge et al., 2011). Furthermore, in recent years, two native-invasive species in China, Stellera chamaejasme and Ligularia cymbuliferum, have spread extensively from north–central to southwestern regions of the country, triggering large-scale grassland degradation and severely impeding the development of China’s livestock husbandry economy (Yang et al., 2025; Xue et al., 2025). This indicates that in the current context of intensive human activities and intensifying climate change, native plant invasion has every possibility to match alien invasive species in terms of its spatiotemporal scale, rate of occurrence, as well as its ecological and socio-economic impacts. Accordingly, there is an urgent need to conduct effective risk prediction for native plant invasion.

However, compared with the relatively mature and accurate prediction system for alien invasions, the overall predictability of native invasions is considerably lower (Carey et al., 2012). The reasons for this are as follows: (1) Native invasions are primarily driven by environmental changes, and both the trajectory and rate of environmental change themselves exhibit inherent uncertainty, which substantially limits the predictive capacity of species trait-based models (Han et al., 2024); (2) Most native expanders are specialists dependent on specific environmental changes. Their narrow niches and reliance on site specific gradients limit expansion and hinder universal prediction (Ainsworth, 2021); (3) Native species generally share co-evolutionary histories with natural enemies and competitors in their native habitats, and biotic interactions may undergo unpredictable changes during the invasion process (e.g., spatiotemporal variations in competitive release or natural enemy escape) (Leffler et al., 2014), which further increases the difficulty of prediction. In the future, if current niche models can be improved by resolving these uncertain ecological processes through long-term monitoring, it will facilitate more accurate prediction of changes in the distribution range of native-invasive species (Leffler et al., 2014; Han et al., 2024).

Based on the above analysis, native plant invasions indeed differ from alien plant invasions in terms of ecological processes, and thus differentiated management strategies should be formulated in accordance with the aforementioned occurrence mechanisms (Fig. 2C). For native plant invasions, the prevention targets should be large-scale populations that exceed their historical distribution ranges, possess functional traits similar to those of alien invaders, maintain high propagule input and are capable of long-distance dispersal (e.g., rapidly crossing biogeographic barriers via wind, animals, water drift, etc.). The leading edges of their historical distribution ranges and adjacent ecologically vulnerable natural corridors should be included in the key monitoring scope. For established native invasions, managers should conduct a comprehensive assessment of the drivers that confer invasiveness to native species, and implement corresponding management strategies based on the invasion type: (1) For disturbance-release invasions driven by fire, irrigation, overgrazing, farmland abandonment, logging, road construction and soil disturbance, priority should be given to restoring the corresponding disturbance regime to facilitate habitat restoration; (2) For resource-subsidized invasions where nitrogen deposition, eutrophication, irrigation, groundwater table changes and reservoir operation alter resource patterns, priority should be given to controlling resource inputs and hydrological processes; (3) In rare cases, native-invasive species may jump to disperse into regions where they have never been distributed before via human transportation, and may establish satellite populations (nascent foci) near scenic areas, pastures, roads or other infrastructure with intensive human activities and cause joint invasions (Moody and Mack, 1988). Such anthropogenically-transferred invasions can be treated as “local alien invasions” (Essl et al., 2019), requiring strict control over invasive source populations and invasion pathways. Notably, the climate tracking or successional restoration-driven range expansion of some native plant species may represent the adaptive response of these species to avoid climate extinction, restore ecological functions, or form new stable community states (Walther et al., 2007; Essl et al., 2019), and does not produce significant invasive effects. Artificial isolation is required when their expansion threatens protected species. Therefore, the decision-making basis for native invasion management should shift to net ecological impact (Davis et al., 2011; Pivello et al., 2018). This requires managers to comprehensively and scientifically assess the causes of native species range expansion, whether the associated negative impacts reach the threshold requiring intervention, and whether intervention will cause greater ecological damage. Otherwise, categorizing all range expansion events of native plants as biological invasion and implementing management accordingly may run counter to the established conservation objectives. Furthermore, to maintain local ecological balance, scientific management of native-invasive species cannot adopt the strict “detection-eradication” protocol applied to alien invasive species. This results in persistent and complex ecological interactions between the dispersal core area and the surrounding environment, meaning that mechanical removal alone may still lead to invasion recurrence, and thus this approach must be integrated with the restoration of disturbance regimes (Ding and Eldridge, 2023). Finally, continuous monitoring of the population dynamics and distribution boundaries of target species is required: this facilitates the evaluation of management efficacy, while feeding monitoring results back into invasive risk assessment (Wallingford et al., 2020).

4. Two-dimensional ecological impacts of native plant invasion

At the local scale, native plant invasions exert profound ecological impacts through both aboveground and belowground mechanisms, driving ecosystem degradation and homogenization (Lima et al., 2012; S. Liu et al., 2026). Aboveground effects manifest primarily through two interconnected pathways: competitive exclusion and reproductive interference. Certain native invaders like Aulonemia aristulata and lianas in the Brazilian Atlantic Forest achieve dominance through superior growth strategies, utilizing CO₂ assimilation advantages and structural parasitism to outcompete neighboring vegetation for resources (Grombone-Guaratini et al., 2013). Other species employ sophisticated chemical warfare, as demonstrated by Ligularia cymbulifera and Euphorbia jolkinii, whose allelopathic compounds suppress seed germination and growth of co-occurring species (H. Wang et al., 2022; Z. Wang et al., 2022; Yang et al., 2025). Perhaps more insidiously, E. jolkinii in Southwest China’s grasslands disrupts community reproduction through pollinator dilution effects, where its prolific flowering reduces pollination success for neighboring plants, potentially compromising long-term community viability (Zhao et al., 2021). Belowground impacts reveal even greater complexity, with allelopathy serving as a critical mediator of plant-soil-microbe interactions (Hierro and Callaway, 2021; Revillini et al., 2023). Native invaders can utilize these allelochemicals as “novel weapons” to selectively reshape the soil microbiome and biogeochemical cycles, thereby establishing a self-reinforcing feedback loop (Callaway and Ridenour, 2004). For instance, Ceratiola ericoides in U.S. ecosystems alters soil microbial structure and nutrient cycling through allelochemical release, favoring its own growth (Revillini et al., 2023). Similarly, Pteridium arachnoideum in Brazilian biomes modifies root-associated microbiomes and soil chemistry via proanthocyanidin-laden litter (Jatoba et al., 2016). The α-pinene, benzoic acid, caffeic acid and p-hydenzoic acid secreted by invasive weeds in China can directly harm their competitors while suppressing the activity of their rhizosphere microorganisms, and at the same time enhance their own nutrient availability (Chen et al., 2025; Liu et al., 2025; Xiong et al., 2025). As evidenced, the negative ecological impacts of native-invasive plants, mediated by human disturbances and climate fluctuations, primarily stem from imbalanced aboveground community resource competition, reproductive dynamics, and plant-soil microbe interaction patterns in their habitats. Therefore, the prevention and mitigation of ecological effects caused by native plant invasions require coordinated management of both aboveground and belowground subsystems.

However, research on the belowground ecological processes of native-invasive plants remains severely inadequate compared to aboveground impacts. Moreover, due to their longer co-evolutionary history with local soil biota, the persistent yet imbalanced “soil legacy effects” of native-invasive plants may be more subtle and nuanced than those of alien invaders, making them prone to oversight by managers and difficult to accurately identify (De Long et al., 2023). Thus, there is an urgent need to employ advanced metabolomic and metagenomic technologies to elucidate the interplay between allelochemicals and microbes, coupled with long-term monitoring networks to validate plant-soil feedback mechanisms on a large scale. Building on this knowledge, interventions such as microbial inoculation can be developed to disrupt feedback loops, while stable isotope tracing and network analysis can reveal belowground metabolic fluxes. Adopting this integrated research framework that combines aboveground and belowground research approaches will facilitate a more comprehensive and effective management of the ecological impacts caused by native-invasive plants in future.

5. Biological control measures of native plant invasion and future prospects

The variation of biotic resistance in adjacent communities of native-invasive plants constitutes a critical factor enabling them to overcome inherent ecological constraints and facilitate outward expansion. From a management perspective, a key challenge lies in restoring the intrinsic biological interactions within native ecosystems that historically contained the proliferation of such species. Biocontrol remains a cornerstone of sustainable invasion management (Invasive Species Advisory Committee, 2016; DiTomaso et al., 2017), yet its application to alien plant invasions often depends on introducing or reconstructing missing biotic interactions (Oduor et al., 2015), with potential risks of secondary invasions (Mack et al., 2000; DiTomaso et al., 2017) and establishment failure (Schulz et al., 2019). Although some studies have proposed the use of locally adapted native species to control alien plant invasions, such applications remain uncommon because the two lack an evolutionary history of association (Clark and Crawford, 2025). Comparatively, native plant invasion scenarios offer a unique perspective for biocontrol, for which the multitrophic-level management framework is particularly suitable. Since native plant invasions occur within the historical distribution range of the invasive species or across adjacent ecosystems, the peripheral biocontrol networks associated with the invader may not have been eliminated, but merely weakened by environmental change (Yang et al., 2025). Under such conditions, certain traits of the invasive species may respond positively to these alterations, enabling them to gain breakthrough advantages in growth and reproduction, while local natural enemies fail to track and suppress the invader effectively during critical periods or within specific microhabitats. This reaffirms that biocontrol targeting native-invasive species should first identify which ecological constraints, such as interspecific competition, herbivory and plant–soil microbial feedback which have been relaxed in the invaded habitat, and subsequently aim to restore these limiting factors. This appears to be a unique form of the natural enemy release hypothesis applicable to native plant invasions (Zhao et al., 2024). This approach differs in emphasis from conventional biocontrol methods applied to numerous non-native invaders: the key to managing native ecosystems lies not in introducing missing natural enemies (Simberloff, 2012), but in reactivating indigenous biotic resistance with reduced non-target risks.

On this basis, this section draws on governance experiences of alien invasions, and focuses on exploring three interaction-based management approaches: plant–plant interactions, plant–animal interactions, and plant–microbe interactions. Although these biocontrol mechanisms are not unique to native plant invasions, their continuity, lower introduction risk and applicability across spatial scales make them especially valuable for managing within-country and inter-ecosystem native plant invasions. Simultaneously, these native-based solutions may also help address a range of challenges posed by alien plant invasions.

Plant–plant interactions: Where the invasion by native species is primarily due to the collapse of competitive resistance in local vegetation, plant–plant interaction-based management approaches can play a crucial role. Native-invasive plants, when occurring within their historical ranges, are naturally regulated by established plant competitors that limit their invasion through competition for essential resources including light, nutrients, and space (Paolucci et al., 2013). A compelling example is provided by native invader Ligularia cymbulifera, which fails to achieve dominance in forest understory and shrubland habitats due to intense competition from established woody plant communities (Fig. 3A). Therefore, such governance efforts should be oriented toward the restoration or enhancement of native competitive species assemblages adapted to the invaded habitat.

Fig. 3.

Utilizing biological control mechanisms among native ecological species to manage invasive native plants effectively eliminates the risks associated with non-native biocontrol agents while promoting comprehensive ecological sustainability. (A) Plant–plant interactions: Native-invasive plants such as Ligularia cymbulifera and Euphorbiajolkinii compete for resources within constrained habitats, forming mixed populations that contribute to the maintenance of local biodiversity. This observation supports the strategy of promoting antagonistic plant species to suppress invasive tendencies (Approach 1). Alternatively, high-density planting of resistant forage grasses can effectively restrict the spread of invasive plants - a approach that necessitates field-based selection of well-adapted species (Approach 2). (B) Plant-animal interactions: Employing native specialist insects, coupled with continuous monitoring and timely intervention, offers a safer and more effective biocontrol strategy (Approach 1). For large mammals and rodents, active human management is essential to regulate their ecological influence. For instance, elephants help suppress invasive plants through trampling and foraging behavior (Photos by Sheng-Dong Yuan and Yun–Yun He), whereas burrowing activities by marmots can disturb grassland ecosystems and potentially facilitate plant invasion (Photo by He-Chun Ding) (Approach 2). (C) Plant-microbe interactions: Invasive plants release allelochemicals via root exudates and litter deposition, altering soil microbial composition. Certain microorganisms metabolize these compounds, obtaining a competitive edge while simultaneously enhancing soil carbon and nitrogen cycling. This process mitigates allelopathic inhibition and facilitates the recovery of native vegetation. Recently discovered Associative Nitrogen-Fixing Bacteria (ANFB) show promise for developing synthetic microbial communities (SynComs), advancing Carbon–Nitrogen Synergy Management (CNSM) and promoting biodiversity. Nevertheless, the practical application of SynComs under field conditions continues to pose significant challenges.

Several case studies demonstrate the efficacy of this approach. In western U.S. grasslands, the introduced perennial grass Agropyron desertorum has proven remarkably effective at reducing both coverage and density of the invasive annual grass Taeniatherum caput-medusae (Davies et al., 2010). Similarly, the native wetland sedge Carex hystericina exhibits strong competitive suppression of the highly invasive Phalaris arundinacea (Perry et al., 2004). Recent experimental evidence further confirms that high-density sowing of competitive or antagonistic native species can significantly reduce the colonization success of invasive species (Csákvári et al., 2023). Field observations of co-invasion dynamics reveal complex interaction outcomes including synergistic, additive, antagonistic, and reversal effects (Ahmad et al., 2025), suggesting that invasion management must evolve from single-species eradication to sophisticated multi-species interaction management. This paradigm shift emphasizes the strategic manipulation of key nodes of the interaction relationship network. Particularly through amplifying antagonistic relationships while minimizing synergistic or additive effects, coupled with targeted resource allocation interference to develop more efficient and cost-effective ecological defenses.

The application of these principles is particularly promising in human-managed systems where native plant resistance can be strategically harnessed (Fig. 3A). Grassland ecosystems provide an instructive example, where certain native forage plants effectively impede invasive grass colonization through multiple mechanisms including root competition, allelopathic inhibition, and light interception via shading (Liu et al., 2025). An alternative approach leverages biodiversity effects, where diverse native plant communities indirectly suppress invaders by enhancing habitats for herbivorous natural enemies (Shan and Hou, 2024). These findings suggest that careful selection of highly resistant forage species, combined with the establishment of complex grass species interaction networks, can simultaneously mitigate invasion impacts while enhancing ecosystem productivity (Liu et al., 2025). In summary, an integrated understanding of plant interaction mechanisms will establish a robust foundation for developing targeted management strategies that address native plant invasions—strategies that align with, rather than counteract, natural ecological processes.

Plant-animal interactions: they present both opportunities and challenges in biocontrol (Fig. 3B). In certain ecosystems, indigenous specialist insects or native herbivores can suppress the growth or reproduction of invasive species. However, the efficacy of such suppression is environmentally dependent and requires rigorous monitoring for accurate assessment. Classical biocontrol approaches employing introduced herbivorous insects have demonstrated remarkable successes, most notably Australia’s 1926 introduction of Cactoblastis cactorum, which effectively controlled approximately 24 million hectares of invasive cacti through larval feeding activity (Schoonhoven et al., 2005). Similarly, China’s deployment of six specialized phytophagous insects, including Zygogramma suturalis, has proven effective against multiple invasive weed species (Yan et al., 2022). However, the polyphagous nature of many herbivores necessitates careful consideration, as non-target plant species may be adversely affected (Rodríguez et al., 2019). Consequently, in scenarios involving the invasion of native flora, the introduction of specialized herbivores has been demonstrated to yield effective suppression outcomes (Fig. 3B). This further underscores the critical importance of comprehensive pre-release screening, sustained monitoring throughout the process, and adaptive management measures within the framework of biocontrol implementation.

The interaction between herbivorous mammals and invasive plant species presents a particularly complex dynamic. Although such intervention strategies may not be immediately applicable, the critical insight regarding native-invasive species lies in the feasibility of leveraging existing faunal interactions within the invaded ecosystem for management purposes. This approach, compared to controlling alien plant invasions, offers greater operational viability and can be effectively employed for targeted regulation and prevention. Large herbivores, including elephants and bison, exert substantial control through combined foraging pressure and physical disturbance (Mungi et al., 2023), as dramatically illustrated in Mozambique where Mimosa pigra populations fluctuated inversely with large mammal abundances (Guyton et al., 2020). Native herbivores frequently display feeding preferences for invasive plants over native vegetation (Parker et al., 2006), while smaller mammals present a more nuanced dynamic. The activities of pikas, marmots, and other rodents (Fig. 3B) can either suppress or facilitate invasions depending on plant resistance traits and disturbance regimes (Shan and Hou, 2024). This complex relationship highlights the need for tailored management approaches that account for both the inhibitory and promotional effects of mammalian herbivory on native plant invasions.

Plant-microorganism interactions: they offer innovative solutions through Carbon–Nitrogen Synergy Management (CNSM) (Fig. 3C). At the core of these interactions lies the plant-soil-microorganism feedback system, where allelopathy emerges as a critical mediator (De Long et al., 2023). Invasive plants release substantial quantities of specialized metabolites that alter soil chemistry (Liu et al., 2023), creating selective pressures that drive microbial community homogenization (Zhang et al., 2019). It is noteworthy that existing evidence indicates certain associative nitrogen-fixing bacteria can actively enrich through recognizing allelopathic signals (e.g., phenolic acids) released by native-invasive plants (Liu et al., 2025; Shi et al., 2025; Liu et al., 2026), demonstrating remarkable adaptability. Furthermore, these microorganisms are capable of utilizing such allelopathic compounds as carbon sources, thereby providing dual ecosystem services: degrading phytotoxic substances while enhancing soil carbon sequestration and nitrogen fixation capacity (Chan, 1986; Chen et al., 1993; Blum, 1996). This “using carbon to fix nitrogen” mechanism forms the foundation of CNSM, with particular microbial taxa showing enhanced efficiency in processing root-derived allelochemicals.

Associative nitrogen-fixing bacteria (ANFB) such as Azospirillum (Bennett et al., 2020), Azorhizobium (Haskett et al., 2022), Azotobacter (Boddey et al., 1995), Burkholderia (Liu et al., 2024), Klebsiella (Iniguez et al., 2004), Bradyrhizobium (Ong and O’Brian, 2024) and Herbaspirillum (Boddey et al., 1995) have attracted significant research attention due to their host-independent lifestyles and broad environmental adaptability. While their nitrogen fixation capacity may be lower than rhizobial symbionts, their ecological flexibility presents unique opportunities for invasion management. Inoculation with specific synthetic microbial communities (SynComs) represents a promising phytoremediation strategy, wherein these tailored consortia are engineered to degrade allelopathic compounds released by invasive plants, offering a sustainable technological approach (Xu et al., 2025) (Fig. 3C). However, before applying the laboratory-isolated ANFB strains to the restoration of the invaded land, it is necessary to verify in field experiments the stability of the synthetic microbial community constructed by them under natural conditions, the dynamic of the synergistic effects among the strains, and the possible long-term impact on the native soil microbiome (Delgado-Baquerizo et al., 2025). Agricultural systems already demonstrate the feasibility of this approach, where microbial consortia successfully mitigate allelopathic challenges in continuous cropping systems (Liu et al., 2024).

Beyond direct invasion control, these plant–microbe interactions offer broader ecosystem benefits. By converting invasive plant compounds into stable microbial biomass, CNSM enhances both carbon sequestration and nitrogen fixation capacities (Gao et al., 2022). This addresses two critical global challenges: the sluggish recovery of soil nutrient pools and the need for enhanced ecosystem multifunctionality. The CNSM framework thus provides a practical pathway to simultaneously achieve “nutrient sink” functionality and ecosystem multifunctionality (Li et al., 2025), representing a significant advance in sustainable and native-based invasion management that aligns with broader environmental goals.

6. Conclusion

The current focus in invasion biology on alien species must evolve to prioritize ecological impact over geographic origin. Our framework reveals that native species, under human-driven changes, can become equally impactful invaders, yet they are consistently neglected in research and policy. Excessive reliance on non-native biocontrol measures will incur ecological risks, whereas strategies based on native species, such as competitive plantation, introduction of herbivores and microbe-mediated control, provide a safer and more adaptable alternative. Innovations such as CNSM simultaneously control invasions and enhance ecosystem services such as carbon storage and nutrient cycling. Owing to the misalignment between the ecological processes of native-invasive plants and the current monitoring systems, it is imperative to (1) establish a continuous monitoring network and develop a standardized evaluation framework based on biodiversity impact and ecosystem service disruption to promptly identify potential distribution expansion of native species with invasive traits; (2) implement integrated management by establishing nature reserves to reduce outbreak inducing disturbances, controlling source areas and marginal habitats to limit propagule influx, and developing sustained native solutions based on multitrophic interactions to restore disrupted ecological networks; (3) leverage the established framework of alien plant invasion ecology can rapidly advance comprehensive aboveground and belowground research on native invasion mechanisms, providing a robust basis for targeted management. We call for the explicit inclusion of native invasion scenarios in global biosecurity and conservation frameworks. Future efforts should focus on scaling native-based interventions across ecosystems and operationalizing microbial-assisted strategies. Shifting from an origin based to an impact based paradigm can help invasion science address biodiversity loss and climate change by reframing how plant invasions are perceived, studied, and managed in the Anthropocene.

CRediT authorship contribution statement

Xiao-Liang Xue: conceptualization, visualization, writing – original draft, writing – review and editing. Tao Cheng: visualization. Hang Sun&Ya-Zhou Zhang: conceptualization, project administration, writing – review and editing. Hang Sun and Ya-Zhou Zhang should be considered joint corresponding author.

Ethical statement

All ethical practices have been followed in relation to the development, writing, and publication of the article. All authors agreed on the ethics policy of the Journal.

Data availability statement

Empirical data were not used for this research.

Open research statement

Empirical data were not used for this research.

Declaration of competing interest

The authors Hang Sun and Ya-Zhou Zhang are Editorial Board Members for Plant Diversity and were not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. The other authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.