Options for reducing uncertainty in impact classification for alien species

Clarke, Douglas G.; Palmer, David J.; McGrannachan, Chris; Burgess, Treena I.; Chown, Steven Loudon; Clarke, Rohan H.; Kumschick, Sabrina; Lach, Lori; Liebhold, Andrew M.; Roy, Helen E.; Saunders, Manu E.; Zalucki, Myron P.; McGeoch, Melodie A.

doi:10.1002/ecs2.3461

Cited by 23 publications

(54 citation statements)

References 69 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This factor certainly in uences the frequency with which studies that show evidence of this type of ecological impact appear in the literature on non-native zooplankton species. In addition, the when differences incumbent on the researchers' own assessments are considered, the uncertainties generated regarding the impact are high, especially when attributed to the severity of the impacts (Clarke et al 2021). Thus, even though the impacts at the population level are evident, especially in relation to well-studied predatory species (Vehmaa et al 2018; Hasnain and Arnott 2019; Berges et al 2020),we must not fail to link these facts with biases, since many of the registered demographic changes are due to the ease of identifying these parameters.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: The Ecological Biases of Zooplankton Invasions: Taxonomic, Geographical And Methodological Perspectives

Pedroso

Vitule

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The introduction of non-native species is one of the most important causes of biodiversity loss. Non-native organisms are not recognized by native communities, leading to differential predation rates and differential impacts on a variety of ecological interactions. In this context, the present study was intended to carry out a review of the literature on the impacts of non-native zooplankters on the zooplankton and the dynamics of aquatic ecosystems--literature reviews are a valuable tool that can highlight gaps and find possible biases in our understanding of biological invasions. We carried out a review of the current literature (20 years) looking for any alteration in the natural dynamics of the environment at all ecological levels. A total of 181 studies that addressed some type of non-native zooplankton effect were included in the review. Most studies focused on a just few non-native species and evidenced demographic changes at the population level. A geographic bias in favor of North America was also found. The various gaps in the literature on non-native zooplankton are derived from the same problem, an excessive number of investigations of the same taxa in the same places. Consequently, the recorded impacts are similar since they come from the same groups, and neglect less studied, but not necessarily less impactful, species. A greater focus on studies of lesser-known species could generate more comprehensive knowledge about the effects of non-native zooplankton and contribute to the distribution of conservation efforts beyond the better-known species.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

WITHDRAWN: The Ecological Biases of Zooplankton Invasions: Taxonomic, Geographical And Methodological Perspectives

Pedroso

Vitule

2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The data set identifies 179 species that have been introduced outside their native range (AntWeb, 2020); (2) The GISD lists 19 species that are considered invasive in their introduced range, that is, those with negative effects (ISSG, 2015); (3) trait‐based profiles (Fournier et al, 2019) were derived from the AntProfiler database (Bertelsmeier, Luque, Confais, et al, 2013) of ants possessing traits associated with invasiveness. Thirty‐seven species have been assigned “superinvasive” or “invasive” profiles, including some native species that are not recorded as introduced elsewhere, which may be future invaders (Fournier et al, 2019); (4) A global assessment of uncertainty in EICAT studies using insects as a model included a priori 17 ant species (Clarke et al, 2021).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Our EICAT assessments differed for six out of the 17 species assessed by Clarke et al (2021), with a variation of only one category in all cases (Table 1). We classed M. pharaonis (Linnaeus, 1758)) as having impacts of minimal concern (MN) versus minor concern (MC) by Clarke et al (2021). Solenopsis geminata, T. melanocephalum and Lasius niger (Linnaeus, 1758) were classed as having MR impacts by us, and MO impacts by Clarke et al (2021).…”

Section: Environmental Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Solenopsis geminata, T. melanocephalum and Lasius niger (Linnaeus, 1758) were classed as having MR impacts by us, and MO impacts by Clarke et al (2021). We classed S. invicta as having MV impacts, and this species was classed by Clarke et al (2021) as having MR impacts. Clarke et al (2021) classed S. richteri as having major impacts, whereas we classed it as having MO impacts.…”

Section: Environmental Impactmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

A global review of socioeconomic and environmental impacts of ants reveals new insights for risk assessment

Gruber

Santoro

Cooling

et al. 2022

Ecological Applications

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Risk assessments are fundamental to invasive species management and are underpinned by comprehensive characterization of invasive species impacts. Our understanding of the impacts of invasive species is growing constantly, and several recently developed frameworks offer the opportunity to systematically categorize environmental and socioeconomic impacts of invasive species. Invasive ants are among the most widespread and damaging invaders. Although a handful of species receives most of the policy attention, nearly 200 species have established outside their native range. Here, we provide a global, comprehensive assessment of the impacts of ants and propose a priority list of risk species. We used the Socioeconomic Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (SEICAT), Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) and Generic Impact Scoring System (GISS) to analyze 642 unique sources for 100 named species. Different methodologies provided generally consistent results. The most frequently identified socioeconomic impacts were to human health. Environmental impacts were primarily on animal and plant populations, with the most common mechanisms being predation and competition. Species recognized as harmful nearly 20 years ago featured prominently, including Wasmannia auropunctata (little fire ant, electric ant), Solenopsis invicta (red imported fire ant), Anoplolepis gracilipes (yellow crazy ant), and Pheidole megacephala (African big‐headed ant). All these species except W. auropunctata have been implicated in local extinctions of native species. Although our assessments affirmed that the most serious impacts have been driven by a small number of species, our results also highlighted a substantial number of less well publicized species that have had major environmental impacts and may currently be overlooked when prioritizing prevention efforts. Several of these species were ranked as high or higher than some of the previously recognized “usual suspects,” most notably Nylanderia fulva (tawny crazy ant). We compared and combined our assessments with trait‐based profiles and other lists to propose a consensus set of 31 priority species. Ever‐increasing global trade contributes to growing rates of species introductions. The integrated approaches we used can contribute to robust, holistic risk assessments for many taxa entrained in these pathways.

show abstract

“…Most of the documented effects of invasive ants on native invertebrate species are considered direct and are attributed to the high abundance invasive ants achieve (Holway et al 2002). Invasive ants outcompete or prey on native ants and other invertebrates, often leading to population declines or local extinctions (Clarke et al 2021). Documented effects of invasive ants on vertebrate populations are less common (Lach and Hooper-Bùi 2010), but have been observed as direct effects via predation and harassment (Allen et al 2004;Plentovich et al 2018).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Invasive ants reduce abundance of small rainforest skinks

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Invasive ants are among the world’s most damaging invasive species, often directly or indirectly affecting native fauna. Insecticidal baits are the main method for suppressing or eradicating invasive ant populations, but their use must be considered against potential for unintended effects on native organisms. The invasive yellow crazy ant (Anoplolepis gracillipes) is widespread in the tropics, particularly on islands, where they have displaced a range of invertebrates. Effects of this ant on vertebrates, and in continental ecosystems generally, are less studied. We investigated the effects of yellow crazy ants and bait application on rainforest skinks and their invertebrate prey. We compared skink and skink prey abundance across four replicated rainforest site categories: high and low yellow crazy ant sites had both been baited but differed in yellow crazy ant activity; control sites had never had yellow crazy ants or been baited; and buffer sites had never had yellow crazy ants but had been baited. We recorded significantly lower abundance of two small skink species (Lygisaurus laevis and Saproscincus tetradactylus) in high yellow crazy ant sites compared to all other site categories. The differences persisted even after baiting reduced yellow crazy ant activity by 97.8% ± 0.04% (mean ± SD). A larger rainforest skink species (Carlia rubrigularis) was not negatively affected by yellow crazy ant invasion. Skink prey abundance was significantly lower in high yellow crazy ant sites compared to control sites and low yellow crazy ant sites, but not compared to buffer sites. These differences did not persist following baiting. We found no evidence that baiting negatively affects skinks or their invertebrate prey. Our data suggest that yellow crazy ants, but not the bait used to treat them, pose a direct threat to small rainforest skinks.

show abstract

Options for reducing uncertainty in impact classification for alien species

Abstract: Impact assessment is an important and cost-effective tool for assisting in the identification and v www.esajournals.org 1 April 2021 v Volume 12(4) v Article e03461

Cited by 23 publications

References 69 publications

WITHDRAWN: The Ecological Biases of Zooplankton Invasions: Taxonomic, Geographical And Methodological Perspectives

WITHDRAWN: The Ecological Biases of Zooplankton Invasions: Taxonomic, Geographical And Methodological Perspectives

A global review of socioeconomic and environmental impacts of ants reveals new insights for risk assessment

Invasive ants reduce abundance of small rainforest skinks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About