Identifying safe cultivars of invasive plants: six questions for risk assessment, management, and communication

Datta, Arunava; Kumschick, Sabrina; Geerts, Sjirk; Wilson, John R.

doi:10.3897/neobiota.62.51635

Cited by 9 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 65 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Probability of hybridization between ornamental biotypes and native species may be altered by climate change because of greater or reduced range overlap and more or less favorable climate conditions for naturalization (van der Veken et al 2008;Klonner et al 2017). While traits have been identified that could reduce invasion risk (e.g., reduced pollinator rewards, inedible fruit, sterility, or programmed death prior to seed production; Anderson et al 2006;Datta et al 2020) these efforts are not yet widely used in the ornamental plant industry (van Kleunen et al 2018).…”

Section: Ornamental Biotypes Under Variable Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The overlap in traits related to domestication and invasion risk (Table 1) needs to be holistically evaluated and incorporated into management decisions about invasive species. A better understanding of how traits related to invasion risk are involved in selection of domesticated biotypes could aid management of invasive species, such as by improving trait-based risk assessment protocols (Gordon et al 2010;Datta et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Potential effects of domestication on non-native plant invasion risk

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Plant domestication can increase propagule pressure and alter functional traits that may contribute to invasion risk, such as high productivity. Domesticated biotypes (i.e., any cultivar, variety, or other infraspecific taxa that have been domesticated) have a unique evolutionary history that often involves enhanced propagule pressure, selection of traits for human use, and cultural practices to increase establishment success. These elements can alter the invasion process from that of non-domesticated non-native species. Understanding which traits are consistently selected for, how strongly those traits are altered by selection, and in which cases they influence invasion risk would facilitate actions that reduce impacts of domesticated biotypes on natural and agricultural systems. We identified commonalities in trait selection and management intensity among groups of domesticated biotypes selected for particular purposes (e.g., food, ornamental, and biomass production) that indicate predictable invasion risk and management approaches for biotypes from each group. Broadly, food crops that rely on high intensity management tend to have relatively low invasion risk, while biotypes developed for ornamental purposes are subject to more variable management intensity and may have greater risk of establishment and spread in natural areas without cultural practices (e.g., weeding, Communicated by Scott J Meiners.

show abstract

Section: Ornamental Biotypes Under Variable Managementmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Potential effects of domestication on non-native plant invasion risk

et al. 2021

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…certain taxa of mites or plant pathogenic rust fungi); and if there are important differences between sub-species or infra-specific entities (e.g. varieties and cultivars; see Datta et al 2020 andGordon et al 2016). Ideally the analysis should consider whatever taxonomic grouping for which the risk is the same (e.g.…”

Section: ) Backgroundmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A related issue is that of subspecific entities -certain cultivars or varieties could be considered safe for cultivation even if the "parental stock" is invasive (e.g. Datta et al 2020;Gordon et al 2016). There is provision within the RAAT framework to assess sub-specific entities separately, but often data on underlying traits are missing (e.g., proof of sterility).…”

Section: Dealing With Risks That Vary Significantly With Contextmentioning

confidence: 99%

A framework to support alien species regulation: the Risk Analysis for Alien Taxa (RAAT)

Kumschick¹,

Wilson²,

Foxcroft³

2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Human livelihoods and well-being in almost all regions of the world depend on taxa which are alien. Such taxa also, however, threaten human health, sustainable development, and biodiversity. Since it is not feasible or desirable to control all alien taxa, decision-makers increasingly rely on risk analyses to formalise the best available evidence of the threats posed and whether and how they can be managed. There are a variety of schemes available that consider the risks of alien taxa, but we argue a new framework is needed: 1) given major recent developments in international frameworks dealing with biological invasions (including the scoring of impacts); 2) so that decisions can be made consistently across taxa, regions and realms; 3) to explicitly set out uncertainties; and 4) to provide decision-makers with information both on the risks posed and on what can be done to mitigate or prevent impacts. Any such scheme must also be flexible enough to deal with constraints in capacity and information. Here we present a framework to address these points – the Risk Analysis for Alien Taxa (RAAT). It outlines a series of questions related to an alien taxon’s likelihood of invasion, realised and potential impacts, and options for management. The framework provides a structure for collating relevant data from the published literature to support a robust, transparent process to list alien taxa under legislative and regulatory requirements, with the aim that it can be completed by a trained science graduate within a few days. The framework also provides a defensible process for developing recommendations for the management of assessed taxa. We trialled the framework in South Africa and outline the process followed and some of the taxa assessed to date.

show abstract

“…3 Datta et al (2020) (v) is supplemented by a set of indicators that can be applied to track progress; and that it (vi) can be evaluated at medium-(2030) and long-term (2050) time horizons".…”

Section: Acknowledgementsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Frameworks used in invasion science: progress and prospects

Wilson¹,

Bacher²,

Daehler³

et al. 2020

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Our understanding and management of biological invasions relies on our ability to classify and conceptualise the phenomenon. This need has stimulated the development of a plethora of frameworks, ranging in nature from conceptual to applied. However, most of these frameworks have not been widely tested and their general applicability is unknown. In order to critically evaluate frameworks in invasion science, we held a workshop on ‘Frameworks used in Invasion Science’ hosted by the DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology in Stellenbosch, South Africa, in November 2019, which led to this special issue. For the purpose of the workshop we defined a framework as “a way of organising things that can be easily communicated to allow for shared understanding or that can be implemented to allow for generalisations useful for research, policy or management”. Further, we developed the Stellenbosch Challenge for Invasion Science: “Can invasion science develop and improve frameworks that are useful for research, policy or management, and that are clear as to the contexts in which the frameworks do and do not apply?”. Particular considerations identified among meeting participants included the need to identify the limitations of a framework, specify how frameworks link to each other and broader issues, and to improve how frameworks can facilitate communication. We believe that the 24 papers in this special issue do much to meet this challenge. The papers apply existing frameworks to new data and contexts, review how the frameworks have been adopted and used, develop useable protocols and guidelines for applying frameworks to different contexts, refine the frameworks in light of experience, integrate frameworks for new purposes, identify gaps, and develop new frameworks to address issues that are currently not adequately dealt with. Frameworks in invasion science must continue to be developed, tested as broadly as possible, revised, and retired as contexts and needs change. However, frameworks dealing with pathways of introduction, progress along the introduction-naturalisation-invasion continuum, and the assessment of impacts are being increasingly formalised and set as standards. This, we argue, is an important step as invasion science starts to mature as a discipline.

show abstract

Identifying safe cultivars of invasive plants: six questions for risk assessment, management, and communication

Cited by 9 publications

References 65 publications

Potential effects of domestication on non-native plant invasion risk

Potential effects of domestication on non-native plant invasion risk

A framework to support alien species regulation: the Risk Analysis for Alien Taxa (RAAT)

Frameworks used in invasion science: progress and prospects

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About