Predicting which nonnative species become invasive is critical for their successful management, and Charles Darwin provided predictions based on species' relatedness. However, Darwin provided two opposing predictions about the relatedness of introduced nonnatives to indigenous species. First, environmental fit is the dominant factor determining invader success; thus, we should expect that invasive species are closely related to local native residents. Alternatively, if competition is important, we should expect successful invaders are distantly related to the native residents. These opposing expectations are referred to as Darwin's naturalization conundrum. The results of studies that examine nonnative species relatedness to natives are largely inconsistent. This inconsistency arises from the fact that studies occur at different spatial and temporal scales, and at different stages of invasion, and so implicitly examine different mechanisms. Further, while species have evolved ecological differences, the mode and tempo of evolution can affect species' differences, complicating the predictions from simple hypotheses. We outline unanswered questions and provide guidelines for collecting the data required to test competing hypotheses.
Keywords: community assembly; competition; exotic species; pathogens; phylogeny; species invasion; trophic interactions.