Native and non-native ruderals experience similar plant-soil feedbacks and neighbor effects in a system where they coexist.

Recent applications of coexistence theory to plant invasions posit that non-natives establish in resident communities through either niche differences or traits conferring them with fitness advantages, the former being associated with coexistence and the latter with dominance and competitive exclusion. Plant–soil feedback is a mechanism that is known to explain both coexistence and dominance. In a system where natives and non-natives appear to coexist, we explored how plant–soil feedbacks affect the performance of nine native and nine non-native ruderal species—the prevalent life-history strategy among non-natives—when grown alone and with a phytometer. We also conducted field samplings to estimate the abundance of the 18 species, and related feedbacks to abundances. We found that groups of native and non-native ruderals displayed similar frequencies of negative, positive, and neutral feedbacks, resulting in no detectable differences between natives and non-natives. Likewise, the phytometer exerted comparable negative impacts on native and non-native plants, which were unchanged by plant–soil feedbacks. Finally, feedbacks explained plant abundances only after removing one influential species which exhibited strong positive feedbacks but low abundance. Importantly, however, four out of five species with negative feedbacks were rare in the field. These findings suggest that soil feedbacks and plant–plant interactions do not confer an advantage to non-native over native species, but do contribute to the observed coexistence of these groups in the system. By comparing natives and non-natives with overlapping abundances and strategies, our work broadens understanding of the consequences of plant–soil feedbacks in plant invasion and, more generally, coexistence within plant communities.