Predicting global ascidian invasions

Abstract

Aim: Many species of ascidians are invasive and can cause both ecological and economic losses. Here, we describe risk assessment for nineteen ascidian species and predict coastal regions that are more vulnerable to arrival and expansion.Location: Global. Methods:We used ensemble niche modelling with three algorithms (Random Forest, Support Vector Machine and MaxEnt) to predict ecologically suitable areas and evaluated our predictions using independent (area under the curve-AUC) and dependent thresholds (true skill statistics-TSS). Environmental variables were maximum and the range of sea surface temperature, mean salinity and maximum chlorophyll. We used our niche modelling results and a modified invasibility index to compare invasion risk among 15 coastal regions. Results: Currently, the most invaded regions are in temperate latitudes of the Northern Hemisphere and Temperate Australasia, which are regions most prone for new invasions. In the tropics, the West and Central Indo-Pacific are two regions of strong concern, the former with high risk of primary invasion by Botryllus schlosseri and Didemnum perlucidum. In the Southern Hemisphere, the Southwest and Southeast Atlantic are most at risk, both subject to invasion by Botrylloides violaceus, Didemnum vexillum, Molgula manhattensis and Styela clava among others. Regions most at risk of expansion of established invasive species are the Central Indo-Pacific, Northwest Pacific, Mediterranean and West Indo-Pacific. Main conclusions: All regions studied have areas that are suitable and connected to receive new ascidian introductions or that may permit the spread of already established species. Risk comparison of primary introductions and expansion of establishedintroduced ascidians among regions will allow managers to prioritize species of concern for each region both for monitoring future introductions or to enforce control actions towards established species to decrease the risk of regional expansion. K E Y W O R D Secological niche modelling, invasibility index, invasion debt, marine trade, risk assessment, species distribution models, Tunicata

Testing the forest refuge hypothesis in sub-Saharan Africa using species distribution modeling for a key savannah tree species, Senegalia senegal (L.) Britton

“…Models with higher mean values and smaller variations were considered as being the most accurate ones (Duque-Lazo et al 2016). We used three evaluation metrics to assess model performance: AUC of the Receiver Operating Characteristic plot (Lins et al 2018), Cohen's Kappa (Franklin 2010), and True Skill Statistics (TSS; see Allouche et al 2006). Two of the measures (TSS, Kappa) are threshold dependent and one (AUC) is independent of threshold.…”

ENMTML: An R package for a straightforward construction of complex ecological niche models

“…Ecological Niche and Species Distribution Models (ENMs and SDMs, respectively), are widely applied in ecology, providing important basal information for the most diverse fields, such as conservation (e.g. Keppel et al, 2012;Razgour et al, 2018), biological invasions (Peterson, 2003;Campos et al, 2014;Lins et al, 2018), phylogenetic/evolutionary studies (e.g. Carstens & Richards, 2007;Chifflet et al, 2016) and disease management (Peterson & Shaw, 2003).…”

Niches and radiations: a case study on the Andean sapphire‐vented puffleg Eriocnemis luciani and coppery‐naped puffleg E. sapphiropygia (Aves, Trochilidae)

“…The interplay between the conservatism and divergence of niches in shaping lineage differentiation is far from completely understood (Pyron and Burbrink 2009, Peterson 2011, Hu et al 2015, despite its relevance for forecasting changes in biodiversity under changing environmental conditions or invasion risks (Hadly et al 2009, Hortal et al 2011, Lavergne et al 2013, Torres et al 2018. The use of ENMs has become instrumental in recent years (Lobo et al 2010) and is applied in a wide range of fields, such as those pertaining to geographic distributions (Ramoni-Perazzi et al 2012, 2017, past and potential future distributions in response to climate change (Dyderski et al 2018, Simpson et al 2018, Warren et al 2018, species invasions (Lins et al 2018, Oliveira et al 2018, diseases and agricultural pest organisms (Carmona-Castro et al 2018, Carvajal et al 2019, Marchioro and Krechemer 2018, biodiversity conservation priorities (Bonfim et al 2018), and even archaeology (Banks 2017, d'Errico et al 2017. The use of ENMs has become instrumental in recent years (Lobo et al 2010) and is applied in a wide range of fields, such as those pertaining to geographic distributions (Ramoni-Perazzi et al 2012, 2017, past and potential future distributions in response to climate change (Dyderski et al 2018, Simpson et al 2018, Warren et al 2018, species invasions (Lins et al 2018, Oliveira et al 2018, diseases and agricultural pest organisms (Carmona-Castro et al 2018, Carvajal et al 2019…”

“…Environmental niche models (hereafter ENMs) are predictions of species distributions in geographic space (hereafter G-space) that use computer algorithms and mathematical representations of the species' known distribution in environmental space (hereafter E-space; Leathwick 2009, Peterson 2011). The use of ENMs has become instrumental in recent years (Lobo et al 2010) and is applied in a wide range of fields, such as those pertaining to geographic distributions (Ramoni-Perazzi et al 2012, 2017, past and potential future distributions in response to climate change (Dyderski et al 2018, Simpson et al 2018, Warren et al 2018, species invasions (Lins et al 2018, Oliveira et al 2018, diseases and agricultural pest organisms (Carmona-Castro et al 2018, Carvajal et al 2019, Marchioro and Krechemer 2018, biodiversity conservation priorities (Bonfim et al 2018), and even archaeology (Banks 2017, d'Errico et al 2017. ENMs have been combined with multivariate analyses of the E-space (Broennimann et al 2012), reviving the interest in ecological niches (Kozak et al 2006, Warren et al 2008, McCormack et al 2010, Peterson 2011.…”