Data from: Empirical test of the native–nonnative distinction: Native and nonnative assemblages of Anolis lizards are similar in morphology and phylogeny

1. Nonnative ("invasive," "exotic,"
"naturalized") species frequently are vilified. However, some
philosophers and ecologists have questioned whether nonnative species and
assemblages are objectively, ahistorically identifiable as different
entities relative to native species and assemblages, once selection biases
are taken into account. 2. We used an unprecedented dataset of morphology,
phylogeny, and assemblage content for 336 species of Anolis lizard to
compare morphological and phylogenetic characteristics of variability and
central tendency between native assemblages and those that include
nonnative species. 3. Equivalence tests demonstrated significant
similarity between native and nonnative assemblages in trait variability,
phylogenetic dispersion, and mean trait values except for body size;
logistic and zero-inflated regression failed to distinguish native and
nonnative assemblages. For most traits, similarity was not due to
assemblages being structured randomly but rather to both native and
nonnative assemblages including similar species. 4. Without historical
information, a naïve observer would be unable to identify Anolis
assemblages as native or nonnative based on morphological assemblage
structure or most mean assemblage trait values, but would have some
success categorizing assemblages based on average body size of species in
the assemblage. 5. Significant phylogenetic and morphological clustering
in native assemblages likely reflects source pools composed of close
relatives that share traits, as well as some environmental filtering
effects; the slightly less phylogenetically clustered but equally
morphologically clustered nonnative assemblages are less constrained to
proximal source pools but still probably subject to filtering. Differences
between native and nonnative assemblages in mean body size likely reflect
assemblage youth. The ontological status of nonnative species is discussed
in light of these results.