skip to main content
US FlagAn official website of the United States government
dot gov icon
Official websites use .gov
A .gov website belongs to an official government organization in the United States.
https lock icon
Secure .gov websites use HTTPS
A lock ( lock ) or https:// means you've safely connected to the .gov website. Share sensitive information only on official, secure websites.

Explore Research Products in the PAR
It may take a few hours for recently added research products to appear in PAR search results.


Title: A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions
Abstract Managing the impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is a great societal challenge. A wide variety of terms have been used to describe the management of invasive alien species and the sequence in which they might be applied. This variety and lack of consistency creates uncertainty in the presentation and description of management in policy, science and practice. Here we expand on the existing description of the invasion process to develop an IAS management framework. We define the different forms of active management using a novel approach based on changes in species status, avoiding the need for stand-alone descriptions of management types, and provide a complete set of potential management activities. We propose a standardised set of management terminology as an emergent feature of this framework. We identified eight key forms of management: (1) pathway management, (2) interception, (3) limits to keeping, (4) secure keeping, (5) eradication, (6) complete reproductive removal, (7) containment and (8) suppression. We recognise four associated terms: prevention; captive management; rapid eradication; and long-term management, and note the use of impact mitigation and restoration as associated forms of management. We discuss the wider use of this framework and the supporting activities required to ensure management is well-targeted, cost-effective and makes best use of limited resources.  more » « less
Award ID(s):
1556246
PAR ID:
10296912
Author(s) / Creator(s):
; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ;
Date Published:
Journal Name:
Biological Invasions
Volume:
22
Issue:
9
ISSN:
1387-3547
Page Range / eLocation ID:
2633 to 2645
Format(s):
Medium: X
Sponsoring Org:
National Science Foundation
More Like this
  1. ; ; ; ; (, Ecological Applications)
    Abstract The global spread of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems has prompted population control efforts to mitigate negative impacts on native species and ecosystem functions. Removal programs that optimally allocate removal effort across space and time offer promise for improving invader suppression or eradication, especially given the limited resources available to these programs. However, science‐based guidance to inform such programs remains limited. This study leverages two intensive fish removal programs for nonnative green sunfish (Lepomis cyanellus) in intermittent streams of the Bill Williams River basin in Arizona, USA, to explore alternative management strategies involving variable allocation of removal effort in time and space and compare static versus dynamic decision rules. We used Bayesian hierarchical modeling to estimate demographic parameters using existing removal data, with evidence that both removal programs led to at least a 0.39 probability of eradication. Simulated alternative management strategies revealed that population suppression, but not eradication, could be achieved with reduced effort and that dynamic management practices that respond to species abundance in real time can improve the efficiency of removal efforts. High removal frequency and program duration, including continued monitoring after zero fish were captured, contributed to successful population control. With management efforts struggling to keep pace with the rising spread and impacts of invasive species, this research demonstrates the utility of quantitative removal models to help improve invasive removal programs and robustly evaluate the success of population suppression and eradication. 
    more » « less
  2. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; et al (, Ecosphere)
    Abstract Impact assessment is an important and cost‐effective tool for assisting in the identification and prioritization of invasive alien species. With the number of alien and invasive alien species expected to increase, reliance on impact assessment tools for the identification of species that pose the greatest threats will continue to grow. Given the importance of such assessments for management and resource allocation, it is critical to understand the uncertainty involved and what effect this may have on the outcome. Using an uncertainty typology and insects as a model taxon, we identified and classified the causes and types of uncertainty when performing impact assessments on alien species. We assessed 100 alien insect species across two rounds of assessments with each species independently assessed by two assessors. Agreement between assessors was relatively low for all three impact classification components (mechanism, severity, and confidence) after the first round of assessments. For the second round, we revised guidelines and gave assessors access to each other’s assessments which improved agreement by between 20% and 30% for impact mechanism, severity, and confidence. Of the 12 potential reasons for assessment discrepancies identified a priori, 11 were found to occur. The most frequent causes (and types) of uncertainty (i.e., differences between assessment outcomes for the same species) were as follows: incomplete information searches (systematic error), unclear mechanism and/or extent of impact (subjective judgment due to a lack of knowledge), and limitations of the assessment framework (context dependence). In response to these findings, we identify actions that may reduce uncertainty in the impact assessment process, particularly for assessing speciose taxa with diverse life histories such as Insects. Evidence of environmental impact was available for most insect species, and (of the non‐random original subset of species assessed) 14 of those with evidence were identified as high impact species (with either major or massive impact). Although uncertainty in risk assessment, including impact assessments, can never be eliminated, identifying, and communicating its cause and variety is a first step toward its reduction and a more reliable assessment outcome, regardless of the taxa being assessed. 
    more » « less
  3. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Biological Invasions)
    Abstract Roadsides can be vectors for tree invasion within rangelands by bisecting landscapes and facilitating propagule spread to interior habitat. Current invasive tree management in North America’s Great Plains focuses on reducing on-site (i.e., interior habitat) vulnerability through on-site prevention and eradication, but invasive tree management of surrounding areas known to serve as invasion vectors, such as roadsides and public rights-of-ways, is sporadic. We surveyed roadsides for invasive tree propagule sources in a central Great Plains grassland landscape to determine how much of the surrounding landscape is potentially vulnerable to roadside invasion, and by which species, and thereby provide insights into the locations and forms of future landcover change. Invasive tree species were widespread in roadsides. Given modest seed dispersal distances of 100–200 m, our results show that roadsides have potential to serve as major sources of rangeland exposure to tree invasion, compromising up to 44% of rangelands in the study area. Under these dispersal distances, funds spent removing trees on rangeland properties may have little impact on the landscape’s overall vulnerability, due to exposure driven by roadside propagule sources. A key implication from this study is that roadsides, while often neglected from management, represent an important component of integrated management strategies for reducing rangeland vulnerability to tree invasion. 
    more » « less
  4. ; ; ; ; ; ; ; (, Biological Invasions)
    Established non-native species can have significant impacts on native biodiversity without any possibility of complete eradication. In such cases, one management approach is functional eradication, the reduction of introduced species density below levels that cause unacceptable effects on the native community. Functional eradication may be particularly effective for species with reduced dispersal ability, which may limit rates of reinvasion from distant populations. Here, we evaluate the potential for functional eradication of introduced predatory oyster drills (Urosalpinx cinerea) using a community science approach in San Francisco Bay. We combined observational surveys, targeted removals, and a caging experiment to evaluate the effectiveness of this approach in mitigating the mortality of prey Olympia oysters (Ostrea lurida), a conservation and restoration priority species. Despite the efforts of over 300 volunteers that removed over 30,000 oyster drills, we report limited success. We also found a strong negative relationship between oyster drills and oysters, showing virtually no coexistence across eight sites. At experimental sites, there was no effect of oyster drill removal on oyster survival in a caging experiment, but strong effects of caging treatment on oyster survival (0 and 1.6% survival in open and partial cage treatments, as compared to 89.1% in predator exclusion treatments). We conclude that functional eradication of this species requires significantly greater effort and may not be a viable management strategy in this system. We discuss several possible mechanisms for this result with relevance to management for this and other introduced species. Oyster restoration efforts should not be undertaken where Urosalpinx is established or is likely to invade. 
    more » « less
  5. ; ; (, Invasive Plant Science and Management)
    null (Ed.)
    Abstract Invasive plants are expanding their ranges due to climate change, creating new challenges for invasive species management. Early detection and rapid response could address some nascent invasions, but limited resources make it impossible to monitor for every range-shifting species. Here, we aimed to create a more focused watch list by evaluating the impacts of 87 plant species projected to shift into northern New England (the states of Maine, New Hampshire, and/or Vermont). We used the Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) protocol to evaluate all ecological impacts reported in the scientific literature, scoring ecological impacts from 1 (minimal concern) to 4 (major) depending on the level of reported impact. For each species, we also recorded any reported impacts on socioeconomic systems (agriculture, human health, or economics) as “present.” We found 24 range-shifting species with impacts on ecological communities, of which 22 have reported impacts in ecosystems common to northern New England. Almost all of these species also had impacts on socioeconomic systems and were available for purchase at ornamental plant retailers or online. Thus, these species can be considered high risk to northern New England with climate change based on their large negative impacts and potential to arrive quickly with deliberate human introduction. Our study demonstrates the use of impact assessments for creating targeted priority lists for invasive species monitoring and management. 
    more » « less
  • Citation Formats
  • MLA
  • APA
  • Chicago
  • BibTeX
  • Save / Share this Record
  • Send to Email