Identifying high-impact invasive plants likely to shift into northern New England with climate change

Coville, William; Griffin, Bridget; Bradley, Bethany A.

doi:10.1017/inp.2021.10

Cited by 9 publications

(14 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, we compiled completed risk assessments from invasive plant councils or advisory boards in five northeastern states (reports were unavailable for CT) and created a summary table of risk assessment outcomes for all evaluated species. Lastly, we compiled a list of range‐shifting invasive species with reported ecological impacts on native species or communities from Rockwell‐Postel et al (2020) and Coville et al (2021). We included in the database a summary of how many impact papers were found, whether the species also had socioeconomic impacts, whether the species was reported to impact ecosystems present in the Northeast, and whether the species is readily available for sale (from Beaury, Patrick, et al, 2021).…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breaking down barriers to consistent, climate‐smart regulation of invasive plants: A case study of US Northeast states

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Efforts to prevent the introduction and spread of new invasive plants are most effective when regulated species are consistent across jurisdictional boundaries and proactively prohibit species before they arrive or in the earliest stages of invasion. Consistent and proactive regulation is particularly important in the northeastern United States, which is susceptible to many new invasive plants due to climate change. Unfortunately, recent analyses of state regulated plant lists show that regulated species are neither consistent nor proactive. To understand why, we focus on two steps leading to invasive plant regulation across six northeastern states (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New York, and Vermont): which sets of species are evaluated and how risk is assessed. Our analysis confirms previous findings that invasive plant regulations are inconsistent and reactive. Of the 128 plants regulated by one or more states, 54 were regulated by a single state and only 16 were regulated by all six states; regulated species tended to be widespread across the region (not proactive). These outcomes are largely driven by different sets of evaluated species. For example, neighboring states Vermont and New Hampshire evaluated 92 species in total, but only 26 overlapped. In addition, states rarely evaluated species that were absent from the state. Risk assessment protocols varied considerably across states, but consistently included criteria related to ecological impact, potential to establish, dispersal mechanisms, and life history traits. While none of the assessments explicitly consider climate change, they also did not contain language that would preclude regulating species that have not yet arrived in the state. To increase consistency and proactivity, states would benefit from (1) evaluating species identified as high risk by neighboring states and high‐risk, range‐shifting invasive species, both of which we compiled here, and (2) explicitly considering climate change when assessing “potential distribution” or “potential impact” of target species. Additionally, a mechanism for sharing knowledge and risk assessments regionally would benefit states with fewer resources to address invasive species threats. Presenting a unified defense against current and future threats is critical for reducing impacts from invasive species and is achievable with better state‐to‐state coordination.

show abstract

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Breaking down barriers to consistent, climate‐smart regulation of invasive plants: A case study of US Northeast states

et al. 2022

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Rockwell-Postel et al (2020) also identified competition, poisoning/toxicity, and interaction with other alien species as common impact mechanisms. Similarly, Coville et al (2021) identified competition and physical impacts as the most common mechanisms. The combined results clearly illustrate that competition between invasive plants and native plants is the most commonly studied impact mechanism in invasion science.…”

Section: Alysicarpus Vaginalismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We use this information to identify high-impact species that could be priorities for monitoring and EDRR in the region. This study builds on previous EICAT assessments of range-shifting invasive plants into northern New England (Coville et al 2021) and southern New England (Rockwell-Postel et al 2020) to encompass the entire U.S. Northeast region.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 98%

“…The Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) enables a consistent categorization of the magnitude of ecological impacts (Blackburn et al 2014). This tool is supported by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and has been used to evaluate and prioritize invasive birds (Evans et al 2016; Lapin et al 2021), mammals (Hagen and Kumschick 2018; Volery et al 2021), and amphibians (Measey et al 2020), as well as plants (Blackburn et al 2014; Canavan et al 2019; Coville et al 2021; AC O'Uhuru, personal communication; Rockwell-Postel et al 2020). Importantly, EICAT has been used in two previous studies to assess impacts of range-shifting plants in southern and northern New England (Coville et al 2021; Rockwell-Postel et al 2020).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…This tool is supported by the International Union for Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and has been used to evaluate and prioritize invasive birds (Evans et al 2016; Lapin et al 2021), mammals (Hagen and Kumschick 2018; Volery et al 2021), and amphibians (Measey et al 2020), as well as plants (Blackburn et al 2014; Canavan et al 2019; Coville et al 2021; AC O'Uhuru, personal communication; Rockwell-Postel et al 2020). Importantly, EICAT has been used in two previous studies to assess impacts of range-shifting plants in southern and northern New England (Coville et al 2021; Rockwell-Postel et al 2020). Thus, EICAT provides a consistent and repeatable metric of impact, and using this approach creates a uniform set of invasive plant impact assessments across the Northeast.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

High-impact invasive plants expanding into mid-Atlantic states: identifying priority range-shifting species for monitoring in light of climate change

Salva,

Bradley

2023

Invasive plant sci. manag.

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One way that climate change is projected to affect invasive plant management is by shifting the ranges of invasive plants. In some regions, hundreds of new, potentially invasive species could establish in coming decades. These species are prime candidates for early detection and rapid response. However, with limited resources, it is unlikely that invasive plant managers will be able to monitor and treat this large number of novel species. Determining which species are likely to have the greatest impacts could inform further risk assessment and mitigate the greatest amount of potential damage. Here, we used the Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) protocol to evaluate the potential impacts of 104 invasive plant species that are projected to establish in Delaware, Kentucky, Maryland, New Jersey, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Virginia, and/or West Virginia by mid-century with climate change. These species were identified using the Invasive Range Expanders Listing Tool to predict which invasive species are likely to shift their range into the target state by mid-century. We used Web of Science to search for studies on each species involving impacts to ecological or socio-economic sectors. We scored ecological impacts on a scale of 1 (‘minimal concern’) to 4 (‘major concern’) and socio-economic impacts as present or not present. We evaluated 674 papers and categorized the species into these categories: 32 high-impact species, 20 moderate-impact species, and 13 minor or minimal-impact species. Two of the 32 high-impact species (Ehrharta erecta Lam. and Tamarix aphylla (L.) Karst.) pose a risk to all eight Mid-Atlantic states. There were also 46 species that pose a risk to socio-economic sectors, including agriculture, the economy, and human health. 24 species were listed as data-deficient (no data could be found on them). This study provides a comprehensive review of reported impacts of range-shifting invasive plants in the Mid-Atlantic.

show abstract

Identifying new invasive plants in the face of climate change: a focus on sleeper species

O’Uhuru,

Morelli,

Evans

et al. 2024

Biol Invasions

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Identifying high-impact invasive plants likely to shift into northern New England with climate change

Cited by 9 publications

References 31 publications

Breaking down barriers to consistent, climate‐smart regulation of invasive plants: A case study of US Northeast states

Breaking down barriers to consistent, climate‐smart regulation of invasive plants: A case study of US Northeast states

High-impact invasive plants expanding into mid-Atlantic states: identifying priority range-shifting species for monitoring in light of climate change

Identifying new invasive plants in the face of climate change: a focus on sleeper species

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About