Defining the Impact of Non‐Native Species

Jeschke, Jonathan M.; Bacher, Sven; Blackburn, Tim M.; Dick, Jaimie T. A.; Essl, Franz; Evans, Thomas; Gaertner, Mirijam; Hulme, Philip E.; Kühn, Ingolf; Mrugała, Agata; Pergl, Jan; Pyšek, Petr; Rabitsch, Wolfgang; Ricciardi, Anthony; Richardson, David M.; Sendek, Agnieszka; Vilà, Montserrat; Winter, Marten; Kumschick, Sabrina

doi:10.1111/cobi.12299

Cited by 348 publications

(259 citation statements)

References 43 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

247

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…These include negative environmental impacts, such as those on threatened species and ecosystems, as well as socioeconomic impacts (Jeschke et al 2014). Invasive species can be enormously costly to manage, so resources must be committed to where they are likely to be most cost-effective ).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing species, pathways, and sites to achieve conservation targets for biological invasion

Genovesi²,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Prioritization is indispensable for the management of biological invasions, as recognized by the Convention on Biological Diversity, its current strategic plan, and specifically Aichi Target 9 that concerns invasive alien species. Here we provide an overview of the process, approaches and the data needs for prioritization for invasion policy and management, with the intention of informing and guiding efforts to address this target. Many prioritization schemes quantify impact and risk, from the pragmatic and action-focused to the data-demanding and science-based. Effective prioritization must consider not only invasive species and pathways (as mentioned in Aichi Target 9), but also which sites are most sensitive and susceptible to invasion (not made explicit in Aichi Target 9). Integrated prioritization across these foci may lead to future efficiencies in resource allocation for invasion management. Many countries face the challenge of prioritizing with little capacity and poor baseline data. We recommend a consultative, science-based process for prioritizing impacts based on species, pathways and sites, and outline the information needed by countries to achieve this. This should be integrated into a national process that incorporates a broad suite of social and economic criteria. Such a process is likely to be feasible for most countries.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Prioritizing species, pathways, and sites to achieve conservation targets for biological invasion

Genovesi²,

et al. 2015

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Additionally, many IAS have severe economic impact (Jeschke et al 2014) either as weeds that reduce agricultural yield (Oerke 2006) or by endangering human health (Reinhardt 2003, Salo et al 2011. Control and eradication of IAS is of increasing importance for diversity conservation and environmental health (Pyšek et al 2007, Shine et al 2009, Smith et al 2013.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The influence of mowing regime on the soil seed bank of the invasive plant Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.

Milakovic¹,

Karrer²

2016

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Citation: Milakovic I, Karrer G (2016) The influence of mowing regime on the soil seed bank of the invasive plant Ambrosia artemisiifolia L. NeoBiota 28: 39-49. doi: 10.3897/neobiota.28.6838 Abstract Ambrosia artemisiifolia is an invasive annual herb infamous for the high allergenicity of its pollen, which is related to increasing medical costs. Additionally, it can cause serious yield losses as agricultural weed. Common ragweed seeds accumulate in the soil and can remain therein viable for decades, which poses a problem for the sustainable management of these populations. A long term management should thus target a reduction of the soil seed bank. We observed the influence of four different mowing regimes on the ragweed soil seed bank at six roadside populations in eastern Austria. The mowing regimes were based on methods from common roadside management practice and specifically adapted to reduce seed production. After three years of application, the soil seed bank was indeed reduced by 45 to 80 percent through three of the four mowing regimes tested. Therefore, we suggest that the best mowing regime for the most effective reduction of the size of the soil seed bank is the one consisting of one cut just after the beginning of female flowering (around the 3 rd week of August in Eastern Central Europe), followed by a second cut 2-3 weeks later.

show abstract

“…At the moment, the application of such an approach is constrained by limited availability of rigorous data on impact (note that for the species scored so far using the GISS, assessments were based on average on 3-4 publications per species) which prevents the fine-scale variation in species impacts from being addressed. However, given the increasing interest in studying and assessing the impacts of biological invasions in the last decade (Pyšek and Richardson 2010), accompanied by a rapid increase in the number of case studies and conceptual papers Jeschke et al 2014;Kumschick et al 2015a), the situation is likely to improve. The GISS is a suitable tool at hand that can contribute to the data being used for powerful predictions of the impact of invasive species.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

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

Defining the Impact of Non‐Native Species

Cited by 348 publications

References 43 publications

Prioritizing species, pathways, and sites to achieve conservation targets for biological invasion

Prioritizing species, pathways, and sites to achieve conservation targets for biological invasion

The influence of mowing regime on the soil seed bank of the invasive plant Ambrosia artemisiifolia L.

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

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About