When does invasive species removal lead to ecological recovery? Implications for management success DOI
Kirsten M. Prior, Damian C. Adams, Kier D. Klepzig

et al.

Biological Invasions, Journal Year: 2017, Volume and Issue: 20(2), P. 267 - 283

Published: Sept. 4, 2017

Language: Английский

Existing and emerging high impact invasive species are characterized by higher functional responses than natives DOI Creative Commons
Mhairi E. Alexander,

Jaimie T. A. Dick,

Olaf L. F. Weyl

et al.

Biology Letters, Journal Year: 2014, Volume and Issue: 10(2), P. 20130946 - 20130946

Published: Feb. 1, 2014

Predicting ecological impacts of invasive species and identifying potentially damaging future invaders are research priorities. Since damage by is characterized their depletion resources, comparisons the 'functional response' (FR; resource uptake rate as a function density) natives might predict invader impact. We tested this comparing FRs ecologically 'world's worst' fish, largemouth bass (Micropterus salmoides), with native equivalent, Cape kurper (Sandelia capensis), an emerging invader, sharptooth catfish (Clarias gariepinus), river goby (Glossogobius callidus), in South Africa, global invasion hotspot. Using tadpoles (Hyperolius marmoratus) prey, we found that consumed significantly more than natives. Attack rates at low prey densities within invader/native reflected similarities predatory strategies; however, both displayed higher Type II comparators. This was driven lower handling times invaders, resulting maximum feeding rates. The these thus congruent with, can predict, on communities. Comparative may be rapid reliable method for predicting species.

Language: Английский

Citations

180

Biogeomorphic Impacts of Invasive Species DOI Open Access
Songlin Fei, Jonathan D. Phillips,

Michael Shouse

et al.

Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, Journal Year: 2014, Volume and Issue: 45(1), P. 69 - 87

Published: Sept. 24, 2014

Invasive species, often recognized as ecosystem engineers, can dramatically alter geomorphic processes and landforms. Our review shows that the biogeomorphic impacts of invasive species are common, but variable in magnitude or severity, ranging from simple acceleration deceleration preexisting to landscape metamorphosis. Primary effects flora bioconstruction bioprotection, whereas primary fauna bioturbation, bioerosion, bioconstruction. Land-water interfaces seem particularly vulnerable species. Although not different general, far more likely lead major changes metamorphosis, which have long-lasting impacts. In addition, selection pressures both macroevolution microevolution by changing processes. However, differing timescales biological invasions, evolution, evolution complicate assessment evolutionary organisms.

Language: Английский

Citations

170

Impacts of invasive plants on resident animals across ecosystems, taxa, and feeding types: a global assessment DOI
Jens Schirmel, Mirco Bundschuh, Martin H. Entling

et al.

Global Change Biology, Journal Year: 2015, Volume and Issue: 22(2), P. 594 - 603

Published: Sept. 22, 2015

As drivers of global change, biological invasions have fundamental ecological consequences. However, it remains unclear how invasive plant effects on resident animals vary across ecosystems, animal classes, and functional groups. We performed a comprehensive meta-analysis covering 198 field laboratory studies reporting total 3624 observations animals. Invasive plants had reducing (56%) or neutral (44%) abundance, diversity, fitness, ecosystem function different feeding types while we could not find any increasing effect. Most importantly, found that reduced overall diversity fitness. this significant effect was contingent taxa, Decreasing were most evident in riparian possibly because frequent disturbance facilitates more intense compared to other types. In accordance with their immediate reliance for food, strongest herbivores. Regarding taxonomic groups, birds insects strongly affected. insects, may be explained by high frequency herbivory, demonstrate can also cascade up secondary consumers. Since data impacts are rather limited many groups argue overcoming gaps knowledge differentiated discussion native fauna.

Language: Английский

Citations

167

Misleading criticisms of invasion science: a field guide DOI Creative Commons
David M. Richardson, Anthony Ricciardi

Diversity and Distributions, Journal Year: 2013, Volume and Issue: 19(12), P. 1461 - 1467

Published: Nov. 7, 2013

Invasion science is the study of causes and consequences introduction organisms to areas outside their native ranges. It concerns all aspects relating transport, establishment spread in a new target region, interactions with resident organisms, costs benefits invasion reference human value systems. 'Invasion science' more appropriate name for broad domain than 'invasion ecology' or biology' because importance engaging many disciplines other biology ecology understanding managing invasions (Richardson et al., 2011). The scientific has become increasingly popular, as indicated by explosive growth publications academic books on topic over past two decades (Simberloff, 2004; Richardson & Pyšek, 2008). Aspects now feature virtually textbooks synthetic monographs ecology, conservation biology, biogeography evolution. Another metric burgeoning impact research its coverage most highly cited journals disciplines: Figure 1 shows this 15 years. Clearly, there been growing recognition that invaluable how ecosystems work. Studies have yielded novel insights key ecological concepts, including inter alia diversity–stability relationship, trophic cascades, keystone species, role disturbance community assembly, naïveté, fitting, rapid evolution, island biogeography, ecosystem engineering niche construction. field also contributed concepts own (e.g. propagule pressure, biotic resistance, invasional meltdown, enemy release) stimulated productive both theoretical applied importance. A motivation studying environmental impact. Non-native species are far likely socio-economic impacts do those that, various reasons, undergo range expansions increase abundance 'weedy' (Simberloff 2012). negative non-native consumers greater Paolucci 2013). Numerous studies demonstrate driver loss at local regional scales Wyatt 2008; Burghardt 2010; Baider Florens, 2011; Roy 2012; Gilbert Levine, 2013), even where confounding stressors play Light Marchetti, 2007; Hermoso Evidence points major cause global animal extinctions (Clavero García-Berthou, 2005; Clavero 2009). They raise extinction likelihood plant populations; substantial time-lags inherent these population frequently ignored, resulting spurious conclusions magnitude eroders biodiversity (Gilbert implicated components lethal cocktail (van der Wal Schweiger Blaustein Even already diminished populations, can accelerate declines Ricciardi, 2004). Finally, disrupt processes. Many such disruptions subtle Stinson 2006) may take unfold implications manifest, case plant–animal mutualisms (Traveset Richardson, 2006; Davis Sekercioglu, societal biological illustrated agriculture, forestry, aquaculture, apiculture, technological water supply) systems health, well potentially myriad positive effects services (Cook Pejchar Mooney, 2009; Pyšek Rothlisberger Thus, it not surprising viewed an issue national security Penman, 1998; Meyerson Reaser, 2003; Chomel Sun, Ricciardi Despite accumulation rigorous evidence society, criticisms from relatively small but vocal number scientists academics – naysayers guises. Challenges philosophical underpinnings methods young necessary force practitioners sharpen However, against simply withstand scrutiny. These be grouped into six non-exclusive categories (Table 1). Some critics issues particular notions assumptions agendas field, some dispute links between results management, whereas others go so question need long-term viability, call 'participants [to] consider abolishing discipline' (Davis, p. 191) 'the end (Valéry criticism benign thus merit oft-repeated claim management efforts being wasted innocuous activities described 'irrational' 'deliberate persecution' (Thomas, In reality, managers constrained limited resources seek prioritize problematic. effort hampered several facts generally ignored naysayers: (1) studied, important remain undetected, (2) invaders apparently one region disruptive regions, (3) unrecognizable without careful technical produce enormous changes time, (4) currently appear damaging years later when no longer feasible eradicate them Simberloff, 2013; Simberloff Focusing richness counts ('the numbers game') misleading approach quantifying impact, especially persistence recorded long time periods verified. Extinction measure function. Assessment influence distribution (and functioning ecosystems) crucial. Hybridization shown contemporary force, accompanied habitat homogenization, causing through introgression, genetic swamping reproductive interference. biogeographic origins irrelevant should bearing (Davis similar vein, native/non-native dichotomy entire field) holds Thompson Davis, Valéry claims countered demonstrated evolutionary history outcome invasions. Such helps explain why inflict damage populations (Salo incidence pest among versus plants 2012), stronger ranges (Callaway 2012) phylogenetically (Short 2002; Atkinson, Strauss 2006). matter others. Reformulations arguments summarized Table continue published, after challenged refuted. our view, escalation cavalier bashing discipline undermining systematic science-based improve efficiency problematic invaded (Lambertini Why upsurge 'obituaries' ecology/science? Perhaps reflecting phenomenon false premature obituaries humans shed light regard. An entry 'premature obituaries' Wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_premature_obituaries; accessed September 2013) details impressive list people whose death was chronicled while they were still alive. article lists general ascribes records demise mentioned following reasons: 'accidental publication'; 'brush death'; 'fraud victim'; 'hoax'; 'impostor'; 'misidentified body'; 'missing action'; 'misunderstandings'; 'name confusion'; 'pseudocide' (for elucidation categories, see article). Do any false/premature help wishes science? Several discarded; difficult publication', victim', 'hoax', 'impostor', action' could elucidate necrologies field. 'Brush death' role, detractors seem think seriously ill only before abandoned Thompson, More compelling, however, remaining causes: body', 'misunderstandings' confusion'. As us argued previously, what write about biology/ecology/science understood practised almost biogeographers, biologists ecologists definitions al. (2011) framework detailed Blackburn 2011), rather caricature parody Contrary calls euthanizing), rapidly evolving interdisciplinary draws perspectives numerous epidemiology, immunology, palaeontology, macroeconomics, geography (Kueffer Hirsch Hadorn, Its (Fig. 1), example, reflects thriving becoming relevant, moribund. more, incorporating sophisticated technologies molecular genetics methods, remote sensing numerical modelling. response change, evaluating consideration Gaertner, managed relocation (Ricciardi 2009), risk assessment emerging threats (Leung Dick press). accepted pragmatic approaches dealing needed ensure problems. Indeed, principal goals predict which introduced will increasing importance, given rates driven globalization (Ricciardi, 2007), synergistic another multiple climate change (Schweiger 2010) potential flood future GMOs, cells, products nanotechnology) natural environment (Jeschke To suggest unequivocally concern ignore peer-reviewed science. Rather epitaphs engage arcane ideological debates, we move forward build knowledge gained. Although objective welcomed, received wisdom misleading. We would caution next author who feels convincingly killed off check just remurdered straw man. DMR acknowledges financial support DST-NRF Centre Excellence Biology National Research Foundation, South Africa (grant 85417). Funding AR Canadian Aquatic Invasive Species Network NSERC Canada gratefully acknowledged. Stimulus contribution provided discussions July 2013 workshop supported sDiv (the Synthesis Biodiversity Sciences) within German Integrative (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, funded Science Foundation (FZT 118).

Language: Английский

Citations

166

When does invasive species removal lead to ecological recovery? Implications for management success DOI
Kirsten M. Prior, Damian C. Adams, Kier D. Klepzig

et al.

Biological Invasions, Journal Year: 2017, Volume and Issue: 20(2), P. 267 - 283

Published: Sept. 4, 2017

Language: Английский

Citations

157