No evolution of increased competitive ability or decreased allocation to defense in <Emphasis Type="Italic">Melaleuca quinquenervia</Emphasis> since release from natural enemies

If invasive plants are released from natural enemies in their introduced range, they may evolve decreased allocation to defense and increased growth, as predicted by the evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis. A field experiment using the invasive tree Melaleuca quinquenervia was conducted to test this hypothesis. Seeds were collected from 120 maternal trees: 60 in Florida (introduced range) and 60 in Australia (home range). Plants grown from these seeds were either subjected to herbivory by two insects from Australia that have recently been released as biological control agents or protected from herbivores using insecticides. Genotypes from the introduced range were initially more attractive to herbivores than genotypes from the home range, supporting EICA. However, genotypes from the introduced and home range did not differ in resistance to insects or in competitive ability, which does not support EICA. Plants from the introduced range had a lower leaf hair density, lower leaf: stem mass ratio, and a higher ratio of nerolidol: viridifloral chemotypes compared to plants from the native range. Plants with an intermediate density of leaf hairs and with high specific leaf area were more susceptible to herbivory damage, but there were no effects of leaf toughness or chemotype on presence of and damage by insects. Herbivory had a negative impact on performance of Melaleuca. Other than an initial preference by insects for introduced genotypes, there was no evidence for the evolution of decreased defense or increased competitive ability, as predicted by the EICA hypothesis. It does not appear from this study that the EICA hypothesis explains patterns of recent trait evolution in Melaleuca.     

For or against: the importance of variation in growth rate for testing the EICA hypothesis

The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis proposes that invasive species evolve decreased defense and increased competitive ability following natural enemy release. Previous studies have found evidence both for and against EICA. The resource-enemy release hypothesis (R-ERH) suggests that fast-growing species may experience stronger enemy release than slow-growing species. On the basis of R-ERH, the prediction of EICA will be held true for slow-growing genotypes, i.e., the slow-growing genotypes from the introduced range will be less resistant to herbivory and grow faster than those from the home range; while the EICA will not be held for fast-growing genotypes, i.e., there will be no significant differences in growth and defense traits between the introduced and native fast-growing genotypes. We tested these predictions preliminarily using five populations of the invasive plant Alternanthera philoxeroides. This species has two varieties in its home range, which showed a distinct growth-defense strategy: the northern A. p. var. acutifolia (Apa) had higher growth rate but lower resistance, while the southern A. p. var. obtusifolia (Apo) had lower growth rate but higher resistance level. Our results suggest that the EICA hypothesis is consistent with the slow-growing Apo, but not with the fast-growing Apa. We suggest that evolutionary changes in growth or resistance following enemy release are influenced by variation in growth rate within an invasive alien plant. These findings have important implications for the EICA hypothesis, and may partially explain why previous studies have found evidence both for and against EICA.     

No evidence for an ‘evolution of increased competitive ability’ for the invasive Lepidium draba

The ‘evolution of increased competitive ability’ (EICA) hypothesis states that reduced herbivory in the introduced range causes an evolutionary shift in resource allocation from herbivore defense to growth. Therefore, according to EICA, introduced genotypes are expected to grow more vigorously than conspecific native genotypes when cultivated under common standardized conditions. The EICA hypothesis also assumes that herbivores will perform better on introduced genotypes compared to native genotypes, because they are less well defended. However, selection for either defense or growth will depend on the type of defense (quantitative or qualitative) employed by the plant, and whether the plant is released from generalist or specialist herbivores. The predictions of the EICA hypothesis might be reversed if a plant experiences increased generalist herbivore pressure in the introduced range, and therefore invests more in qualitative defense. We examined this idea with the invasive perennial mustard, Lepidium draba. We grew a total of 16 populations of L. draba from both its native European and introduced western US ranges under common conditions in a greenhouse. We also tested for differences in plant resistance to the specialist herbivore, Psylliodes wrasei, by conducting a leaf disc feeding bioassay with native and introduced L. draba genotypes. Furthermore, we quantified the generalist herbivore load on L. draba in both ranges in order to assess the selection pressure for increased qualitative defense. Contrary to the original EICA prediction, all plant traits (biomass, number of shoots, length and diameter of longest leaf) tended to be greater for the native, rather than introduced L. draba genotypes. There was no significant difference in the proportion of leaf area consumed by the specialist herbivore between native and introduced genotypes. The generalist herbivore load on L. draba was significantly greater in the introduced range. Our data suggest that the EICA hypothesis does not explain the invasion success of L. draba in the US. Instead, we propose that the reduced vigor of introduced genotypes may be due to selection for increased defense against generalist herbivores in the introduced range.     

Interactive effects of habitat productivity and herbivore pressure on the evolution of anti-herbivore defense in invasive plant populations

The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis predicts that plants released from natural enemies should evolve to become more invasive through a shift in resource allocation from defense to growth. Resource availability in the environment is widely regarded as a major determinant of defense investment and invasiveness, and thus should be incorporated into the conceptual framework of EICA. Analysis of a simple model from the optimal defense literature demonstrates that, in contrast to the EICA hypothesis, enemy release is neither sufficient nor necessary for evolution of reduced resistance among introduced plants when habitat productivity co-varies. In particular, if the invasive range is more nutrient-poor than the native range, there could be selection for more plant defenses even with enemy release.     

Comparison of the herbivore defense and competitive ability of ancestral and modern genotypes of an invasive plant,Lespedeza cuneata

The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis provides a compelling explanation for the success of invasive species. It contends that because alien plants have escaped their coevolved natural enemies, selection pressures favor a diversion of resources from herbivore defense to traits that confer increased competitive ability. Here, we provide evidence for EICA in the noxious grassland invader Lespedeza cuneata, by comparing the ancestral genotype introduced to North America in 1930 with modern‐day invasive (North American) and native (Japanese) genotypes. We found that the invasive genotype was a better competitor than either the native or the ancestral genotype. Further, the invasive genotype exhibited greater induced resistance but lower constitutive resistance than the ancestral and native genotypes. Our results suggest that selection has played a pivotal role in shaping this invasive plant species into a more aggressive, but less constitutively defended competitor.     

Decreased indirect defense in the invasive tree, Triadica sebifera

In the absence of coevolved natural enemies, plants are expected to experience selection away from costly herbivore defenses toward growth and reproduction [evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis (EICA)], yet no one has demonstrated EICA for an indirect defense trait. Likewise, we have little understanding of how constitutive and induced levels of defense vary among native and invasive plant populations. We conducted a greenhouse experiment in the introduced range to test whether invasive populations have reduced constitutive and induced investment in an indirect defense trait, extrafloral nectar (EFN) production, compared to native populations of Chinese tallow tree, Triadica sebifera, through an experimental leaf damage treatment. Overall, native populations invested more in indirect defense: Native populations had a greater number (+16?%) and percentage of leaves producing EFN (35 vs. 28?%), produced more EFN (63?% greater volume), and produced more sugar (+33?%) compared to invasive populations, independent of damage treatment. Of these traits, number of leaves producing EFN and volume of EFN exhibited a trade-off between constitutive and induced investment but these did not depend on plant origin. Our results are the first to support the EICA hypothesis for an indirect defense trait. This suggests that tri-trophic interactions such as indirect defense are under similar selection as direct defense traits within introduced populations. Despite reduced investment in EFN production, invasive populations still retain the ability to produce EFN, which may enable invasive plants to defend against herbivores in the introduced range.     

Meta‐analysis reveals evolution in invasive plant species but little support for Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability (EICA)

Ecological explanations for the success and persistence of invasive species vastly outnumber evolutionary hypotheses, yet evolution is a fundamental process in the success of any species. The Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability (EICA) hypothesis (Blossey and Nötzold 1995) proposes that evolutionary change in response to release from coevolved herbivores is responsible for the success of many invasive plant species. Studies that evaluate this hypothesis have used different approaches to test whether invasive populations allocate fewer resources to defense and more to growth and competitive ability than do source populations, with mixed results. We conducted a meta‐analysis of experimental tests of evolutionary change in the context of EICA. In contrast to previous reviews, there was no support across invasive species for EICA's predictions regarding defense or competitive ability, although invasive populations were more productive than conspecific native populations under noncompetitive conditions. We found broad support for genetically based changes in defense and competitive plant traits after introduction into new ranges, but not in the manner suggested by EICA. This review suggests that evolution occurs as a result of plant introduction and population expansion in invasive plant species, and may contribute to the invasiveness and persistence of some introduced species.     

Increased competitive ability and herbivory tolerance in the invasive plant <Emphasis Type="Italic">Sapium sebiferum</Emphasis>

The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis predicts that release from natural enemies in the introduced range favors exotic plants evolving to have greater competitive ability and lower herbivore resistance than conspecifics from the native range. We tested the EICA hypothesis in a common garden experiment with Sapium sebiferum in which seedlings from native (China) and invasive (USA) populations were grown in all pairwise combinations in the native range (China) in the presence of herbivores. When paired seedlings were from the same continent, shoot mass and leaf damage per seedling were significantly greater for plants from invasive populations than those from native populations. Despite more damage from herbivores, plants from invasive populations still outperformed those from native populations when they were grown together. Increased competitive ability and higher herbivory damage of invasive populations relative to native populations of S. sebiferum support the EICA hypothesis. Regression of biomass against percent leaf damage showed that plants from invasive populations tolerated herbivory more effectively than those from native populations. The results of this study suggest that S. sebiferum has become a faster-growing, less herbivore-resistant, and more herbivore-tolerant plant in the introduced range. This implies that increased competitive ability of exotic plants may be associated with evolutionary changes in both resistance and tolerance to herbivory in the introduced range. Understanding these evolutionary changes has important implications for biological control strategies targeted at problematic invaders.     

Testing Predictions of the ‘Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability’ Hypothesis for an Invasive Crucifer

The successful spread of invasive plants may result from an evolutionary shift in resource allocation from defence to growth due to release from enemies, as proposed by the ‘evolution of increased competitive ability’ hypothesis (EICA). The crucifer Lepidium draba was used to test this hypothesis, measuring growth and levels of glucosinolates and myrosinase of leaves as constitutive defence parameters. Individuals from 21 populations of the native (Europe) and the invasive range (North-America) were grown under common greenhouse conditions. According to the EICA hypothesis it was predicted that plants from the invasive range might show stronger growth and have lower levels of defence as a result of selection favouring such genotypes. There was significant variation between populations in shoot, root, total biomass, and number of ramets of 3-month-old plants but no difference due to origin from both continents. The main glucosinolate p-hydroxybenzyl glucosinolate was significantly higher in seedlings of the invasive range while myrosinase activity was higher in old plants of the invasive range. Therefore, the EICA hypothesis does not hold, however, alternatively there is evidence for selection favouring stronger defence in the invasive range. The binary defence system of this crucifer is discussed with respect to the degree of specialisation of potential herbivores.     

Genetic variation and evolution of secondary compounds in native and introduced populations of the invasive plant Melaleuca quinquenervia

We examined multivariate evolution of 20 leaf terpenoids in the invasive plant Melaleuca quinquenervia in a common garden experiment. Although most compounds, including 1,8-Cineole and Viridiflorol, were reduced in home compared with invaded range genotypes, consistent with an evolutionary decrease in defense, one compound (E-Nerolidol) was greater in invaded than home range genotypes. Nerolidol was negatively genetically correlated with Cineole and Viridiflorol, and the increase in this compound in the new range may have been driven by this negative correlation. There was positive selection on all three focal compounds, and a loss of genetic variation in introduced range genotypes. Selection skewers analysis predicted an increase in Cineole and Viridiflorol and a decrease or no change in Nerolidol, in direct contrast to the observed changes in the new range. This discrepancy could be due to differences in patterns of selection, genetic correlations, or the herbivore communities in the home versus introduced ranges. Although evolutionary changes in most compounds were consistent with the evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis, changes in other compounds as well as selection patterns were not, indicating that it is important to understand selection and the nature of genetic correlations to predict evolutionary change in invasive species.     

Changes in Defense of an Alien Plant Ambrosia artemisiifolia before and after the Invasion of a Native Specialist Enemy Ophraella communa

The evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis (EICA) predicts that when alien plants are free from their natural enemies they evolve lower allocation to defense in order to achieve a higher growth rate. If this hypothesis is true, the converse implication would be that the defense against herbivory could be restored if a natural enemy also becomes present in the introduced range. We tested this scenario in the case of Ambrosia artemisiifolia (common ragweed) – a species that invaded Japan from North America. We collected seeds from five North American populations, three populations in enemy free areas of Japan and four populations in Japan where the specialist herbivore Ophraella communa naturalized recently. Using plants grown in a common garden in Japan, we compared performance of O. communa with a bioassay experiment. Consistent with the EICA hypothesis, invasive Japanese populations of A. artemisiifolia exhibited a weakened defense against the specialist herbivores and higher growth rate than native populations. Conversely, in locations where the herbivore O. communa appeared during the past decade, populations of A. artemisiifolia exhibited stronger defensive capabilities. These results strengthen the case for EICA and suggest that defense levels of alien populations can be recuperated rapidly after the native specialist becomes present in the introduced range. Our study implies that the plant defense is evolutionary labile depending on plant-herbivore interactions.     

Postintroduction evolution contributes to the successful invasion of Chromolaena odorata

1. The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis states that, when introduced in a novel habitat, invasive species may reallocate resources from costly quantitative defense mechanisms against enemies to dispersal and reproduction; meanwhile, the refinement of EICA suggests that concentrations of toxins used for qualitative defense against generalist herbivores may increase. Previous studies considered that only few genotypes were introduced to the new range, whereas most studies to test the EICA (or the refinement of EICA) hypotheses did not consider founder effects.
2. In this study, genetic and phenotypic data of Chromolaena odorata populations sampled across native and introduced ranges were combined to investigate the role of postintroduction evolution in the successful invasion of C. odorata.
3. Compared with native populations, the introduced populations exhibited lower levels of genetic diversity. Moreover, different founder effects events were interpreted as the main cause of the genetic structure observed in introduced ranges. Three Florida, two Trinidad, and two Puerto Rico populations may have been the sources of the invasive C. odorata in Asia.
4. When in free of competition conditions, C. odorata plants from introduced ranges perform better than those from native ranges at high nutrient supply but not at low nutrient level. The differences in performance due to competition were significantly greater for C. odorata plants from the native range than those from the introduced range at both nutrient levels. Moreover, the differences in performance by competition were significantly greater for putative source populations than for invasive populations.
5. Quantities of three types of secondary compounds in leaves of invasive C. odorata populations were significantly higher than those in putative source populations. These results provide more accurate evidence that the competitive ability of the introduced C. odorata is increased with postintroduction evolution.

     

Induced chemical defenses in invasive plants: a case study with Cynoglossum officinale L.

The ‘evolution of increased competitive ability’ (EICA) hypothesis is an extension of optimal defense theory and predicts that reduced pressure from insect herbivores in the introduced range results in evolution of reduced defenses in invading plant populations, allowing greater allocation of resources to competitive traits such as growth rate and reproduction. The EICA hypothesis considered levels of defensive chemistry to be fixed within a particular genotype. In this paper, we propose that if herbivory is reduced in the introduced range, but chemical defenses are inducible in response to herbivory, evolution of reduced defenses and any associated increase competitive ability should not occur. Rather, mean induced and constitutive levels of induced defenses should be similar in introduced and native ranges, but the variance about mean induced levels should be greater in the introduced range. This is predicted because induced levels will occur less frequently in the introduced range where herbivory is reduced, thereby insulating these levels from the stabilizing selection expected in the native range where induced levels occur more frequently. We conducted a preliminary study to examine this by comparing constitutive and induced concentrations of total pyrrolizidine alkaloids (PAs) from native (European) and introduced (western North America) populations of Cynoglossum officinale L. The mean constitutive and induced concentrations of PAs did not differ between continents, but the variability of the induced concentrations was significantly greater for plants from the introduced range. Although our study with C. officinale is provisional due to a small sample size, it supports our predictions for evolution of inducible defenses in introduced ranges where herbivore pressure is reduced. Most chemical defenses in plants have been found to be inducible, so similar patterns may occur widely. If so, this weakens the generality of EICA’s predictions concerning chemical defenses. The effects of inducible defenses should be considered in cross-continent comparisons of other invasive plant species.     

No difference in competitive ability between invasive North American and native European <Emphasis Type="Italic">Lepidium draba</Emphasis> populations

The evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis states that plants introduced into a new range experience reduced herbivory, which in turn results in a shift in resource allocation from herbivore defense to growth. If genotypes of an invasive plant species from its native and introduced ranges are grown under common conditions, introduced genotypes are expected to grow more vigorously than conspecific native genotypes. We tested predictions of the EICA hypothesis with the invasive species Lepidium draba by comparing the growth of genotypes from its native European and introduced western US ranges under common conditions. To test potential differences in competitive ability, we grew L. draba from both continents with either Festuca idahoensis, a weak competitor native to North America, or Festuca ovina, a strong competitor native to Europe. Contrary to EICA predictions, there were no differences in the performance of native and introduced L. draba, independent of whether plants were grown with F. idahoensis, F. ovina, or alone. The strong competitor, F. ovina impaired the growth of L. draba more than the weak competitor F. idahoensis and conversely, F. idahoensis was generally more impaired by L. draba than was F. ovina. While the native F. idahoensis was equally affected by L. draba regardless of range, F. ovina was not: US L. draba had a stronger negative effect on F. ovina growth than European L. draba. Our data suggest that the EICA hypothesis is not suitable to explain the invasion success of L. draba in the US. Instead, the greater competitive effect of L. draba on the North American F. idahoensis and the asymmetric competitive effect of L draba from different origins on F. ovina may indicate superior competitive ability for resources, or the presence of allelopathic traits in L. draba, to which plant species in non-native ranges are maladapted.     

Introduced plants of the invasive Solidago gigantea (Asteraceae) are larger and grow denser than conspecifics in the native range

Introduced plant species that became successful invaders appear often more vigorous and taller than their conspecifics in the native range. Reasons postulated to explain this better performance in the introduced range include more favourable environmental conditions and release from natural enemies and pathogens. According to the Evolution of Increased Competitive Ability hypothesis (EICA hypothesis) there is a trade‐off between investment into defence against herbivores and pathogens, and investment into a stronger competitive ability. In this study, we conducted field surveys to investigate whether populations of the invasive perennial Solidago gigantea Ait (Asteraceae) differ with respect to growth and size in the native and introduced range, respectively. We assessed size and morphological variation of 46 populations in the native North American range and 45 populations in the introduced European range. Despite considerable variation between populations within continents, there were pronounced differences between continents. The average population size, density and total plant biomass were larger in European than in American populations. Climatic differences and latitude explained only a small proportion of the total variation between the two continents. The results show that introduced plants can be very distinct in their growth form and size from conspecifics in the native range. The apparently better performance of this invasive species in Europe may be the result of changed selection pressures, as implied by the EICA hypothesis.     

Increased reproductive capacity and physical defense but decreased tannin content in an invasive plant

Abstract Plant invasions create novel plant–insect interactions. The EICA (evolution of increased competitive ability) hypothesis proposes that invasive plants will reallocate resources from defense to growth and/or reproduction because they have escaped from their co‐evolved insect natural enemies. Testing multiple herbivory by monophagous and oligophagous herbivores and simultaneous measurement of various plant traits will provide new insights into the evolutionary change of invasive plants. In this context, we conducted a common garden experiment to compare plant growth and reproduction, chemical and physical defense, and plant responses to herbivory by different types of herbivores between invasive North American populations and native East Asian populations of mile‐a‐minute weed, Persicaria perfoliata. We found that invasive mile‐a‐minute exhibited lower biomass, flowered earlier and had greater reproductive output than plants from the native range. Compared with native populations, plants from invasive populations had lower tannin content, but exhibited higher prickle density on nodes and leaves. Thus our results partially support the EICA hypothesis. When exposed to the monophagous insect, Rhinoncomimus latipes and the oligophagous insects, Gallerucida grisescens and Smaragdina nigrifrons, more damage by herbivory was found on invasive plants than on natives. R. latipes, G. grisescens and S. nigrifrons had strong, moderate and weak impacts on the growth and reproduction of mile‐a‐minute, respectively. The results indicate that mile‐a‐minute may have evolved a higher reproductive capacity in the introduced range, and this along with a lack of oligophagous and monophagous herbivores in the new range may have contributed to its invasiveness in North America.     

Palatability to a generalist herbivore,defence and growth of invasive and native <Emphasis Type="Italic">Senecio</Emphasis> species: testing the evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis

This paper tests the prediction that introduced plants may become successful invaders because they experience evolutionary changes in growth and defence in their new range [evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis (EICA)]. Interspecific and intraspecific binary feeding choices were offered to the snail Helix aspersa. The choices were between: (1) plants of the invasive Senecio inaequidens and Senecio pterophorus derived from populations in the introduced range (Europe) and plants of three indigenous species (Senecio jacobea, Senecio vulgaris and Senecio malacitanus) from populations in Europe; (2) plants of the invasive S. inaequidens and S. pterophorus from populations in the introduced range (Europe) and from populations in the native range (South Africa). We did not find a clear pattern of preference for indigenous or alien species of Senecio. However, we found that European invasive populations of S. inaequidens and S. pterophorus were less palatable than South African native populations. Moreover, in contrast to the predictions of the EICA hypothesis, the invasive genotypes of both species also showed a higher total concentration of pyrrolizidine alkaloids, and in the case of S. inaequidens we also found higher growth than in native genotypes. Our results are discussed with respect to the refinement of the EICA hypothesis that takes into account the difference between specialist and generalist herbivores and between qualitative and quantitative defences. We conclude that invasive populations of S. inaequidens and S. pterophorus are less palatable than native populations, suggesting that genetic differentiation associated with founding may occur and contribute to the plants’ invasion success by selecting the best-defended genotypes in the introduced range.     

Evolution of growth but not structural or chemical defense in <Emphasis Type="Italic">Verbascum thapsus</Emphasis> (common mullein) following introduction to North America

Post-introduction evolution of increased growth or reproduction has been observed in many species of invasive plants; however, it is not consistently associated with a loss of defense, as predicted by the influential evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis. Inconsistent support for the EICA hypothesis likely reflects the fact that, although invasive plants are released from attack by some enemies, typically specialists, they often do not escape attack from generalists. Thus, different types of defense (e.g., structural versus chemical) may evolve in different directions following introduction. We used a common garden experiment to test whether a shift in allocation among defenses (as opposed to a simple increase or decrease in a single defense) is associated with increased growth in introduced Verbascum thapsus populations. Introduced populations had significantly greater shoot biomass than natives. However, root biomass was similar between ranges, and highly variable, resulting in only marginal differences in total biomass. Mean investment in all three defenses was remarkably similar between the native and introduced populations, providing no evidence for range-level, post-introduction evolution of defense. This finding was consistent with the fact that, despite significant population-level variability for all defenses, there was little evidence of trade-offs between growth and defense or among different types of defense. These results suggest that evolution of increased growth in V. thapsus is not fueled by decreased allocation to defense, and that selection on defense may vary more at the population scale than the continental scale.     

Is the increased vigour of invasive weeds explained by a trade-off between growth and herbivore resistance?

Blossey and Nötzold (1995) recently hypothesised that the increased vigour of certain invasive plant species has been at the expense of defences against natural enemies. A prediction of their evolution of increased competitive ability (EICA) hypothesis is that invasive genotypes are relatively poorly defended. We tested this prediction with herbivore bioassays and with direct quantification of plant secondary metabolites comparing non-indigenous genotypes of Lythrum salicaria L. (purple loosestrife) with indigenous forms. The herbivore bioassays revealed no significant intra-specific variation in herbivore resistance between indigenous and non-indigenous hosts. The phenolic content of L. salicaria leaves was significantly higher in indigenous genotypes, as predicted by the EICA hypothesis. The average phenolic content of leaves (regardless of their origin) was, however, low, implying that the role of plant phenolics in purple loosestrife anti-herbivore defence is probably limited. It is suggested that the EICA hypothesis, as tested in the current study, does not explain the increased vigour of L. salicaria in non-indigenous habitats.     

No evolution of reduced resistance and compensation for psyllid herbivory by the invasive <Emphasis Type="Italic">Genista monspessulana</Emphasis>

The evolution of redirecting resources from plant defense to growth or reproduction may explain why some exotic species are successful invaders in new environments. For example, the evolution of increased competitive ability hypothesis posits that escape from herbivores by invasive plants results in the selection of more vigorous genotypes that reduce their allocation of resources to defense. In addition, understanding the defense strategy of an invasive plant may help forecast the likely impact of herbivory. We tested the prediction of reduced defense (i.e., resistance) in Genista monspessulana, measured indirectly as the performance of a specialist psyllid herbivore, by comparing five native and introduced plant populations. We also examined the ability of G. monspessulana to compensate for herbivory in the presence and the absence of psyllids for a single plant population from the native and introduced regions. Plant origin (native or introduced) did not influence the psyllid’s abundance and population growth rate, suggesting no change in resistance to herbivory for introduced plants. Similarly, we found no overall difference in plant performance between individuals in the presence and the absence of psyllid herbivory, suggesting that G. monspessulana was able to fully compensate for herbivory. Damaged plants compensated by changing the pattern of branching, which also resulted in greater dry leaf biomass. We conclude that evolution of reduced defenses does not explain the success of G. monspessulana as an invader and that compensation for herbivory may limit the efficacy of the psyllid as a biological control agent.