A conceptual framework for prioritization of invasive alien species for management according to their impact

Kumschick, Sabrina; Bacher, Sven; Dawson, Wayne; Heikkilä, Jaakko; Sendek, Agnieszka; Pluess, Therese; Robinson, Tamara B.; Kühn, Ingolf

doi:10.3897/neobiota.15.3323

Cited by 120 publications

(163 citation statements)

References 73 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

160

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…Refining risk assessment (RA) protocols is one such major challenge for the management of invasive species (Ricciardi and Rasmussen 1998;Parker et al 1999;Byers et al 2002;Andersen et al 2004;Kumschick et al 2012;Leung et al 2012;Kumschick and Richardson 2013), and impact is usually not satisfactorily included in RAs (Kumschick et al 2012). Including comparative functional responses in risk assessments for invasive species could be a useful way of improving the prediction of ecological consequences, namely impact (measures of per capita effects; Parker et al 1999) of species introductions and therefore increase the predictive power of RA.…”

Section: Challenges Future Research and Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This may, in part, be due to a lack of rigour in defining these hypotheses (Heger et al 2013) and lack of focus on demographic processes. These two major challenges need to be simultaneously addressed to advance the fundamental science of invasion ecology and to provide practical methodologies that prioritize and mitigate invasion threats by, for example, refining risk assessment protocols (Ricciardi and Rasmussen 1998;Parker et al 1999;Byers et al 2002;Andersen et al 2004;Kumschick et al 2012;Leung et al 2012) and managing biological communities to provide maximum biotic resistance (Taylor and Duggan 2012).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Advancing impact prediction and hypothesis testing in invasion ecology using a comparative functional response approach

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasion ecology urgently requires predictive methodologies that can forecast the ecological impacts of existing, emerging and potential invasive species. We argue that many ecologically damaging invaders are characterised by their more efficient use of resources. Consequently, comparison of the classical 'functional response' (relationship between resource use and availability) between invasive and trophically analogous native species may allow prediction of invader ecological impact. We review the utility of species trait comparisons and the history and context of the use of functional responses in invasion ecology, then present our framework for the use of comparative functional responses. We show that functional response analyses, by describing the resource use of species over a range of resource availabilities, avoids many pitfalls of 'snapshot' assessments of resource use. Our framework demonstrates how comparisons of invader and native functional responses, within and between Type II and III functional responses, allow testing of the likely population-level outcomes of invasions for affected species. Furthermore, we describe how recent studies support the predictive capacity of this method; for example, the invasive 'bloody red shrimp' Hemimysis anomala shows higher Type II functional responses than native mysids and this corroborates, and could -013-0550-8 have predicted, actual invader impacts in the field. The comparative functional response method can also be used to examine differences in the impact of two or more invaders, two or more populations of the same invader, and the abiotic (e.g. temperature) and biotic (e.g. parasitism) context-dependencies of invader impacts. Our framework may also address the previous lack of rigour in testing major hypotheses in invasion ecology, such as the 'enemy release' and 'biotic resistance' hypotheses, as our approach explicitly considers demographic consequences for impacted resources, such as native and invasive prey species. We also identify potential challenges in the application of comparative functional responses in invasion ecology. These include incorporation of numerical responses, multiple predator effects and trait-mediated indirect interactions, replacement versus non-replacement study designs and the inclusion of functional responses in risk assessment frameworks. In future, the generation of sufficient case studies for a meta-analysis could test the overall hypothesis that comparative functional responses can indeed predict invasive species impacts.Biol Invasions (2014) 16:735-753 DOI 10.1007/s10530

show abstract

Section: Challenges Future Research and Applicationsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Advancing impact prediction and hypothesis testing in invasion ecology using a comparative functional response approach

et al. 2013

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The broad nature of the GISS and its applicability across taxa and environments allows for the establishment of comparative lists and country-wide rankings that can be used for prioritization (Kumschick et al 2012). Comparative lists have the advantage that a result obtained for a newly scored species can be put into a meaningful context in relation to other species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…By default, all impact categories are considered to be of equal value, but it is possible to put individual weights to some categories, for example, to take into account different value systems of stakeholders (Kumschick et al 2012; see also Supplementary Material). A potential downside of summing up scores is that impacts leading to the same outcome but through different mechanisms may be double-counted, e.g., competition and predation can both lead to a decline in the same native species' population.…”

Section: Impact Levels and Scoresmentioning

confidence: 99%

The generic impact scoring system (GISS): a standardized tool to quantify the impacts of alien species

Nentwig

Bacher

Pyšek

et al. 2016

Environ Monit Assess

Self Cite

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Alien species can exert negative environmental and socio-economic impacts. Therefore, administrations from different sectors are trying to prevent further introductions, stop the spread of established species, and apply or develop programs to mitigate their impact, to contain the most harmful species, or to eradicate them if possible. Often it is not clear which of the numerous alien species are most important in terms of damage, and therefore, impact scoring systems have been developed to allow a comparison and thus prioritization of species. Here, we present the generic impact scoring system (GISS), which relies on published evidence of environmental and socio-economic impact of alien species. We developed a system of 12 impact categories, for environmental and socio-economic impact, comprising all kinds of impacts that an alien species may exert. In each category, the intensity of impact is quantified by a sixlevel scale ranging from 0 (no impact detectable) to 5 (the highest impact possible). Such an approach, where impacts are grouped based on mechanisms for environmental impacts and receiving sectors for socio-economy, allows for cross-taxa comparisons and prioritization of the most damaging species. The GISS is simple and transparent, can be conducted with limited funds, and can be applied to a large number of alien species across taxa and environments. Meanwhile, the system was applied to 349 alien animal and plant species. In a comparison with 22 other impact assessment methods, the combination of environmental and socio-economic impact, as well as the possibility of weighting and

show abstract

“…But this is unrealistic. What is required is an open, transparent process whereby the options are expressed and the pros and cons of each are identified and discussed (e.g., Kumschick et al 2012a, for the management of nonnative species). In this paper we propose a decisionmaking protocol (Table 4) based on the achievement of the highest level of understanding with the lowest level of costs involved, the lowest level of false positives and negatives, the highest level of public acceptance, and the lowest level of costs of implementation (Table 3).…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Soft Touch or Heavy Hand? Legislative Approaches for Preventing Invasions: Insights from Cacti in South Africa

Novoa

Kaplan

Kumschick

et al. 2015

Invasive plant sci. manag.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The rate of transportation, introduction, dissemination, and spread of nonnative species is increasing despite growing global awareness of the extent and impact of biological invasions. Effective policies are needed to prevent an increase in the significant negative environmental and economic impacts caused by invasive species. Here we explore this issue in the context of the history of invasion and subsequent regulation of cacti introduced to South Africa. We consider seven approaches to restricting trade by banning the following: (1) species already invasive in the region, (2) species invasive anywhere in the world, (3) species invasive anywhere in the world with a climate similar to the target region, (4) genera containing invasive species, (5) growth forms associated with invasiveness, (6) cacti with seed characteristics associated with invasiveness, and (7) the whole family. We evaluate each approach on the basis of the availability and complexity of information required for implementation, including the cost of the research needed to acquire such information, the likely numbers of false positives and false negatives, the likely degree of public acceptance, and the costs of implementation. Following a consultative process, we provide recommendations for how to regulate nonnative cacti in South Africa. The simplest option would be to ban all cacti, but available evidence suggests that most species pose negligible risk of becoming invasive, making this option unreasonable. The other extreme-reactively regulating species once they are invasive-would incur significant control costs, likely result in significant environmental and economic impacts, and limit management goals (e.g., eradication might be unfeasible). We recommended an intermediate option-the banning of all genera containing invasive species. This recommendation has been partly incorporated in South African regulations. Our study emphasizes the importance of scientific research, a legal framework, and participation of stakeholders in assessments. This approach builds awareness, trust, and support, and ensures that all interests are reflected in final regulations, making them easier to implement and enforce.

show abstract

A conceptual framework for prioritization of invasive alien species for management according to their impact

Cited by 120 publications

References 73 publications

Advancing impact prediction and hypothesis testing in invasion ecology using a comparative functional response approach

Advancing impact prediction and hypothesis testing in invasion ecology using a comparative functional response approach

The generic impact scoring system (GISS): a standardized tool to quantify the impacts of alien species

Soft Touch or Heavy Hand? Legislative Approaches for Preventing Invasions: Insights from Cacti in South Africa

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About