Submitted:
06 May 2024
Posted:
08 May 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
2. Materials and Method
2.1. Materials Used
2.2. Study Area Description
2.3. Data Collection
2.3.1. Field Survey
- i)
- Compile taxonomic data, which includes species identification, morphological traits, growth habit and abundance.
- ii)
- Analyze the ecological effects of the invasive species, and conduct diligent observation within and around the species' range.
- iii)
- Take GPS readings of the species occurrences' geolocations. Each GPS samples were include a note of the ecological characteristics where the species is situated.
2.3.2. Identification and Description of Invasive Species
2.4. Data Analysis
3. Result
3.1. Invasive Species in Gullele Botaic Garden

3.2. Habit of Invasive Species

3.3. Abundance and Relative Frequencies of of Invasive and Potentially Invasive Species in Gullele Botanic Garden
3.4. Invasive Species Distribution in Different Land Use Types
3.5. Invasive Species Abundance and Density in the Land Use Types
3.6. Rate of Invasive Species
3.7. Distribution and Impact Rate of Invasive Species

3.8. Top 3 Abundant Invasive Species in GBG

4. Discussion
4.1. Invasive and Potentially Invasive Species in Gullele Botanic Garden
4.2. Distribution of Invasive and Potentially Invasive Species in the Garden
4.3. Impact Rank Invasive and Potentially Invasive Species in the Garden
4.4. Management Mechanisms of Invasive
- Biological method: by bringing in a natural adversary, like a fungus or insect that objects the target species solely and spares native or economically significant species.
- Mechanical Methods: techniques including mowing, hoeing, tilling, chopping, and constructing barriers using tools or machines to harvest invasive plants by removing and collecting them, and transporting elsewhere and allowing them to decompose in place. This mechanism could be complement herbicide (chemical) control
- Chemical Control Methods: implemented through using of pesticides, herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides. Although chemical use can be very effective, they can be dangerous to other species or to the ecosystem in general. Chemical control may be difficult, expensive, and create concerns about environmental health.
5. Conclusion
Reference
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jackson, P.S.W. & Sutherland, L.A. International Agenda for Botanic Gardens in Conservation. Botanic Gardens Conservation International, U.K, 2000.
- Kelbessa, E.; Demissew, S. Diversity of vascular plant taxa of the flora of Ethiopia and Eritrea. Ethiopian. J. Biol. Sci. 2014, 13, 37–45. [Google Scholar]
- Girmay, M.; Bekele, T.; Demissew, S.; Lulekal, E. Ecological and floristic study of Hirmi woodland vegetation in Tigray Region, Northern Ethiopia. Ecol. Process. 2020, 9, 1–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Mittermeier, R. A.; Turner, W. R.; Larsen, F. W.; Brooks, T. M.; Gascon, C. Global biodiversity conservation: the critical role of hotspots. Biodiv. hotspo. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, 2011; pp. 3–22.
- Girmay, M. Roles of Botanical Gardens for Conservation and Requirements for their Establishment. DAAGU INTERN. J. BASIC and APPL. RES. 2023, 5, 182–192. [Google Scholar]
- Kumar, K. P. A Study of Invasive Alien Plant Species of Kuttadan Kole Wetlands of Thrissur District, Kerala. Intern. J. Envir., Agri. and Biot. 2018, 3, 2198–2200. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Girmay, M.; Gebrehiwot, K.; Atinafe, E.; Tareke, Y.; Belay, B. The Study of Exotic and Invasive Plant Species in Gullele Botanic Garden, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia. J Zool. Botanic. Gard. 2024, 5, 36–50. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Sonwa, D. J.; Dieye, A.; El Mzouri, E. H.; Majule, A.; Mugabe, F. T.; Omolo, N.; Brooks, N. Drivers of climate risk in African agriculture. Clim. Devel. 2017, 9, 383–398. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kumar, N. H.; Murali, M.; Girish, H. V.; Chandrashekar, S.; Amruthesh, K. N.; Sreenivasa, M. Y.; Jagannath, S. Impact of climate change on biodiversity and shift in major biomes. Glob. Clim. Chan. 2021, 33–44. [Google Scholar]
- Goldberg, P. K.; Reed, T. Growing Threats to Global Trade. FINAN. DEVELOP. 2023. [Google Scholar]
- McGeoch, M.A.; Butchart, S.H.M.; Spear, D. , Marais, E.; Kleynhans, E.J.; Symes, A.; Chanson, J.; Hoffmann, M. Global indicators of biological invasion: species numbers, biodiversity impact and policy responses. Diver. Distrib. 2010, 16, 95–108. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pyšek, P.; Richardson, D. M.; Pergl, J. , Jarošík, V.; Sixtová, Z.; Weber, E. Geographical and taxonomic biases in invasion ecology. Trend. ecol evol. 2008, 23, 237–244. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Pauchard, A.; Kueffer, C.; Dietz, H.; Daehler, C. C.; Alexander, J.; Edwards, P. J.; Seipel, T. Ain't no mountain high enough: plant invasions reaching new elevations. Front. Ecol. Envir. 2009, 7, 479–486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- GBG (Gullele Botanic Garden). Organization’s website accessed on October 2022 (https://gullelebotanicgarden.yolasite.com/more-info.php#!).
- Seta, T.; Belay, B. BOTANIC GARDEN PROFILE Gullele Botanic Garden, Addis Ababa (Ethiopia): Current status, Challenges and Opportunities. Sibbaldia Inter. J. Bot. Gard. Horti. 2022, 21, 13–34. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Morton, W. H. Geological Map of Addis Ababa. Addis Ababa University. Geology Department, Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, 1974.
- Kolar, C. S.; Lodge, D. M. Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders. Trend.ecol. & evol, 2001, 16, 199–204. [Google Scholar]
- Ascensão, F.; Capinha, C. Aliens on the move: Transportation networks and non-native species. Railway ecol. 2017, 65–80. [Google Scholar]
- Thompson, J. D. The biology of an invasive plant. BioSci. 1991, 41, 393–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Strayer, D. L.; Eviner, V. T.; Jeschke, J. M.; Pace, M. L. Understanding the long-term effects of species invasions. Trend. ecol. evol. 2006, 21, 645–651. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wittenberg, R.; Simons, S. A.; Mauremootoo, J. R. Instrument and tools for assessing the impact of invasive alien species in Africa. Report Procedures under the PDF-B phase of UNEP GEF Project-Removing Barriers to invasive plant Management in Africa. CAB. International. Nairobi, Kenya, 2004.
- Morse, L. E.; Randall, J. M.; Benton, N.; Hiebert, R.; Lu, S. An invasive species assessment protocol: Evaluating non-native plants for their impact on biodiversity, 2004.
- Perrings, C. Mitigation and adaptation strategies for the control of biological invasions. Ecol. econ. 2005, 52, 315–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Richardson, D.M.; Pyšek, P.; Rejmanek, M.; Barbour, M.G.; Panetta, F.D.; West, C.J. Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: Concepts and definitions. Diver. Distrib. 2006, 93–107. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Hobbs, H.A. Invasive Species in a Changing World; Island Press: Washington, DC, USA, 2000. Washington, DC, USA.
- Witt, A.; Beale, T.; Van Wilgen, B. W. An assessment of the distribution and potential ecological impacts of invasive alien plant species in eastern Africa. Transactions of the Royal Society of South Africa 2018, 73, 217–236. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Balogh, M. B.; Kertész, M.; Török, K.; Visztra, G. V.; Szilassi, P. Changes in the Occurrence of Five Invasive Plant Species in Different Ecosystem Types between 2009–2018 in Hungary. Land. 2023, 12, 1784. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Fessehaie, R.; Tessema, T. Alien Plant Species Invasions in Ethiopia: Challenges and Responses. In Proceedings of the International Workshop on Parthenium Weed in Ethiopia, Ethiopia. Available online: https://ipmil.cired.vt.edu/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/10-Fessehaie.pdf (accessed on 23 April 2023).
- Huebner, C. D. Effects of global climate change on regeneration of invasive plant species from seeds. In Plant Regeneration from Seeds. Acad. Pres. 2022; pp. 243–257.
- Mathakutha, R.; Steyn, C.; le Roux, P. C.; Blom, I. J.; Chown, S. L.; Daru, B. H.; Greve, M. Invasive species differ in key functional traits from native and non-invasive alien plant species. J. Veg. Sci. 2019, 30, 994–1006. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Omeer, A. A.; Deshmukh, R. R. Improving the classification of invasive plant species by using continuous wavelet analysis and feature reduction techniques. Ecol. Informat. 2021, 61, 101181. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- McKinney, M.L. Species introduced from nearby sources have a more homogenizing effect than species from distant sources: evidence from plants and fishes in the USA. Divers. Distrib. 2005, 11, 367–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- IUCN. Guidelines for invasive species planning and management on islands. Cambridge, UK and Gland, Switzerland: IUCN. 2018; pp. 40.
- Flory, S. L.; Clay, K. Invasive plant removal method determines native plant community responses. J. Appl. Ecol. 2009, 46, 434–442. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Crowley, S. L.; Hinchliffe, S.; McDonald, R. A. Invasive species management will benefit from social impact assessment. J. Appl. Ecol. 2017, 351–357. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]


| Scale | Abundances | Descriptions |
|---|---|---|
| 0 | Absent | No invasive alien weeds is found |
| 1 | Present | Individuals plentiful, but coverage small |
| 2 | Rare | Individuals very numerous; covering at least 5% of the area |
| 3 | Occasional | Individuals few or many; collectively covering 6–25% of the area |
| 4 | Frequent | Individuals few or many; collectively covering 26–50% of the area |
| 5 | Abundant | Weeds cover 51–75 % of the area |
| 6 | Very Abundant | Weeds cover 76–100% of the area |
| Section | Sub-rank values | ∑ Impact rank interval | Impact rank | |||
| High | Moderate | Low | Insignificant | |||
| Current distribution & abundance | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | > 4 2.1 - 4 1 -2 0 |
High Moderate Low Insignificant |
| Ecological impact | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Trend in distribution and abundance | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| Management difficulty | 3 | 2 | 1 | 0 | ||
| No. | Name of the species | Abundance | Plot occurred | Scale of abundance | Relative frequency |
| 1 | Acacia decurrens | 1255 | 17 | Very abundant | 42.5 |
| 2 | Ageratum conyzoides | 780 | 9 | Very abundant | 22.5 |
| 4 | Acacia melanoxylon | 90 | 8 | Very abundant | 20 |
| 5 | Orobanche crenata | 29 | 4 | Frequent | 10 |
| 7 | Nerium oleander | 11 | 3 | Occasional | 7.5 |
| 3 | Cyathula uncinulata | 320 | 2 | Rare | 5 |
| 6 | Senna didymobotrya | 22 | 2 | Rare | 5 |
| 8 | Acacia saligna | 8 | 2 | Rare | 5 |
| 9 | Lantana camara | 7 | 2 | Rare | 5 |
| 10 | Ricinus communis | 7 | 2 | Rare | 5 |
| 12 | Psidium guajava | 4 | 2 | Rare | 5 |
| 11 | Striga gesnerioides | 7 | 1 | Rare | 2.5 |
| 13 | Argemone mexicana | 3 | 1 | Rare | 2.5 |
| 14 | Cuscuta campestris | 3 | 1 | Rare | 2.5 |
| 15 | Acacia mearnsii | 2 | 1 | Present | 2.5 |
| 16 | Nicotiana glauca | 2 | 1 | Present | 2.5 |
| Land Use Types | Abundance | Sampled plots | Sample area in hectare | Density (number of species/hectare) |
| Natural Forest | 761 | 12 | 0.12 | 6341.7 |
| Plantation | 381 | 8 | 0.08 | 4762.5 |
| Roadside | 1408 | 20 | 0.2 | 7040 |
| Total | 2550 | 40 | 0.4 | 6,375 |
| SN | Species Name | Rate of impact | Distribution and description |
| 1 | Acacia decurrens | High | High distribution and high rate of impacts |
| 2 | Acacia mearnsii | Low | Due to less abundance and distribution and easily manageable |
| 3 | Acacia melanoxylon | High | High distribution and high rate of impacts |
| 4 | Acacia saligna | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
| 5 | Argemone mexicana | Low | Due to less abundance and distribution and easily manageable |
| 6 | Cuscuta campestris | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
| 7 | Cyathula uncinulata | High | High distribution and high rate of impacts |
| 8 | Ageratum conyzoide | Moderate | High distribution and dominance, but they annual species |
| 9 | Lantana camara | Low | Due to less abundance and distribution and easily manageable |
| 10 | Nerium oleander | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
| 11 | Nicotiana glauca | Moderate | Has moderate distribution and impact |
| 12 | Psidium guajava | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
| 13 | Ricinus communis | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
| 14 | Senna didymobotrya | Moderate | Moderate distribution and impact |
| 15 | Striga gesnerioides | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
| 16 | Orobanche crenata | Low | The distribution and impact is less |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).