Category: Neobiota

North American turtles establish succcessful populations in Germany, possibly threathening ecosystems

For the first time, self-sustaining populations of three non-native species of turtles were identified in south-western Germany by researchers at the University of Freiburg

For the first time, self-sustaining populations of three non-native species of turtles were identified in south-western Germany by researchers at the University of Freiburg

Original text published by the University of Freiburg

Three species of turtles native to North America have been successfully reproducing in the wild in Germany, report for the first time environmental researcher Benno Tietz and biologist Dr. Johannes Penner of the University of Freiburg, along with Dr. Melita Vamberger of the Senckenberg Natural History Collection in Dresden.

Their results were published in the open-access scientific journal NeoBiota.

The scientists examined a total of nearly 200 animals living in the wild in lakes in Freiburg and Kehl. Their findings suggest that the turtles have established themselves in a new habitat, where they could become a threat to the local ecosystem.

For two species, this is the first evidence of independent reproduction outside of their natural reproductive range. For the third species, this is the northernmost evidence of its presence up to now,

says Penner.
The false map turtle (Graptemys pseudogeographica) enjoys the sun’s warmth. Photo: Johannes Penner.

Turtles released into the wild

Invasive species do a great deal of economic damage world-wide. They also contribute to advancing global species extinctions.

Alien reptiles regularly make their way into the wild in Germany. Most often, this is because they have been released by pet owners.

Large numbers of North American pond sliders (Trachemys scripta) were imported into the European Union (EU) in the 1980s and 1990s as house pets. In 1997, their import into the EU was banned. By 2016, the sale of specimens born here was also made illegal.  Since then, pet shops have replaced them with other freshwater turtles, such as the river cooter (Pseudemys concinna) and the false map turtle (Graptemys pseudogeographica).

Genetic analyses of specimens of all three species in a range of ages have now demonstrated that they are reproducing independently in local waters. 

What’s surprising is that the invasive species have established themselves so far north. In Europe, successful reproduction and self-maintaining populations of Trachemys scripta were only known in the Mediterranean regions and the continental climate zone of Slovenia,

explains Benno Tietz.

Until recently, it had been assumed the turtles being examined couldn’t reproduce in Central Europe due to the colder climate. Especially the false map turtle is actually quite sensitive to the cold,

he says.
A North American pond slider (Trachemys scripta) resting on a lily pad. Photo: Johannes Penner.

Consequences for local species unclear

The invasive turtles could become a problem for indigenous species.

The European pond turtle (Emys orbicularis), for example, is now only present in Germany in parts of Brandenburg.

In an experimental setup, the European pond turtle showed weight loss and an increased death rate when being kept together with Trachemys scripta,

reports Penner.

Penner says that could be caused by the larger, alien species forcing the smaller local turtles from places where they sun themselves, leading the local turtles to have  problems with thermoregulation. Or perhaps the competition led to them having greater challenges when seeking food. 

Beyond that, aquatic turtles could be hosts for viruses and parasites, leading them to play a role in the spread of diseases. This could potentially have a damaging influence on other parts of the ecosystem, including amphibians, fish, or aquatic plants.

On the other hand, in their study, the researchers consider the alien species could assume functions in damaged ecosystems that would otherwise go unreplaced.

Vamberger says these questions urgently need to be explored further.

We need to raise public awareness that people should not release – no matter what kind of species – any animals into the wild in future.”

she insists.
A river cooter (Pseudemys concinna) lets itself drift in the water. Photo: Johannes Penner.
Meet the research team:

Dr. Johannes Penner was the scientific coordinator of the research training group “Conservation of Forest Biodiversity in Multiple-Use Landscapes of Central Europe” (ConFoBi) and a lecturer for the Chair of Wildlife Ecology and Management of the University of Freiburg. Currently, he is a curator at the NGO “Frogs and Friends” and a guest researcher in wild animal ecology.

Benno Tietz has completed a Master’s degree in Environmental Sciences at the University of Freiburg. His thesis – finished in the Winter Semester of 2020/2021 – investigated alien turtles. Currently, he is a research assistant at the Freiburg Institute of Applied Animal Ecology.

Dr. Melita Vamberger is a researcher at the Senckenberg Natural History Collection in Dresden.

***

The study was supported by the Hans Schimenz Fund of the German Society for Herpetology and Terrarium Science (DGHT) as well as the Academic Society of Freiburg.

***

Research paper:

Tietz B, Penner J, Vamberger M (2023) Chelonian challenge: three alien species from North America are moving their reproductive boundaries in Central Europe. NeoBiota 82: 1-21. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.82.87264

Follow NeoBiota on Twitter and Facebook.

Interoperable biodiversity data extracted from literature through open-ended queries

OpenBiodiv is a biodiversity database containing knowledge extracted from scientific literature, built as an Open Biodiversity Knowledge Management System. 

The OpenBiodiv contribution to BiCIKL

Apart from coordinating the Horizon 2020-funded project BiCIKL, scholarly publisher and technology provider Pensoft has been the engine behind what is likely to be the first production-stage semantic system to run on top of a reasonably-sized biodiversity knowledge graph.

OpenBiodiv is a biodiversity database containing knowledge extracted from scientific literature, built as an Open Biodiversity Knowledge Management System. 

As of February 2023, OpenBiodiv contains 36,308 processed articles; 69,596 taxon treatments; 1,131 institutions; 460,475 taxon names; 87,876 sequences; 247,023 bibliographic references; 341,594 author names; and 2,770,357 article sections and subsections.

In fact, OpenBiodiv is a whole ecosystem comprising tools and services that enable biodiversity data to be extracted from the text of biodiversity articles published in data-minable XML format, as in the journals published by Pensoft (e.g. ZooKeys, PhytoKeys, MycoKeys, Biodiversity Data Journal), and other taxonomic treatments – available from Plazi and Plazi’s specialised extraction workflow – into Linked Open Data.

“I believe that OpenBiodiv is a good real-life example of how the outputs and efforts of a research project may and should outlive the duration of the project itself. Something that is – of course – central to our mission at BiCIKL.”

explains Prof Lyubomir Penev, BiCIKL’s Project Coordinator and founder and CEO of Pensoft.

“The basics of what was to become the OpenBiodiv database began to come together back in 2015 within the EU-funded BIG4 PhD project of Victor Senderov, later succeeded by another PhD project by Mariya Dimitrova within IGNITE. It was during those two projects that the backend Ontology-O, the first versions of RDF converters and the basic website functionalities were created,”

he adds.

At the time OpenBiodiv became one of the nine research infrastructures within BiCIKL tasked with the provision of virtual access to open FAIR data, tools and services, it had already evolved into a RDF-based biodiversity knowledge graph, equipped with a fully automated extraction and indexing workflow and user apps.

Currently, Pensoft is working at full speed on new user apps in OpenBiodiv, as the team is continuously bringing into play invaluable feedback and recommendation from end-users and partners at BiCIKL. 

As a result, OpenBiodiv is already capable of answering open-ended queries based on the available data. To do this, OpenBiodiv discovers ‘hidden’ links between data classes, i.e. taxon names, taxon treatments, specimens, sequences, persons/authors and collections/institutions. 

Thus, the system generates new knowledge about taxa, scientific articles and their subsections, the examined materials and their metadata, localities and sequences, amongst others. Additionally, it is able to return information with a relevant visual representation about any one or a combination of those major data classes within a certain scope and semantic context.

Users can explore the database by either typing in any term (even if misspelt!) in the search engine available from the OpenBiodiv homepage; or integrating an Application Programming Interface (API); as well as by using SPARQL queries.

On the OpenBiodiv website, there is also a list of predefined SPARQL queries, which is continuously being expanded.

Sample of predefined SPARQL queries at OpenBiodiv.

“OpenBiodiv is an ambitious project of ours, and it’s surely one close to Pensoft’s heart, given our decades-long dedication to biodiversity science and knowledge sharing. Our previous fruitful partnerships with Plazi, BIG4 and IGNITE, as well as the current exciting and inspirational network of BiCIKL are wonderful examples of how far we can go with the right collaborators,”

concludes Prof Lyubomir Penev.

***

Follow BiCIKL on Twitter and Facebook. Join the conversation on Twitter at #BiCIKL_H2020.

You can also follow Pensoft on Twitter, Facebook and Linkedin and use #OpenBiodiv on Twitter.

Where did all those insects come from? Tracking the history of insect invasion in Chile

Going through centuries-old literature, researchers compiled a database of the exotic insects established in the country.

Guest blog post by Daniela N. López, Eduardo Fuentes-Contreras, Cecilia Ruiz, Sandra Ide, Sergio A. Estay

Understanding the history of non-native species arrivals to a country can shed light on the origins, pathways of introduction, and the current and future impacts of these species in a new territory. In this sense, collecting this information is important, and sometimes essential, for researchers and decision makers. However, in most cases, reconstructing this history takes a lot of work. Finding antique references is hard work. To add more complexities, changes in the taxonomy of species or groups could be frustrating as we try to track the moment when a species was referenced in the country for the first time, sometimes centuries ago. Of course, we only learned about these issues when, almost seven years ago, we thought that compiling a database for the exotic insects established in Chile would be interesting to people working on invasive species in the country.

Tremex fuscicornis caught in Chile. Photo by Sergio Estay

First, we collected information from physical and electronic books and journals available in our institutional libraries, but soon we noticed that we needed a more significant effort. In Chile, the National Library and The National Congress library allowed us to review and collect information from texts, in many cases, over a hundred years old. We also had to request information from foreign specialized libraries and bookstores. Sometimes, we had to negotiate with private collectors to buy antique books or documents. When we figured the first version of the database was ready, we began a second step for detecting errors, correcting the taxonomy, and completing the information about the reported species.

Ctenarytaina eucalypti individuals and damage in Chile. Photo by Sergio Estay

The analysis began when we finally completed the database. What types of questions could we answer using this data? Was the database complete enough to detect historical, biogeographic, and ecological patterns? Two competing hypotheses were the starting point for the study at this stage. On the one hand, the species that dominated the non-native insect assemblage could have come from original environmental conditions that matched Chile’s. Or, the pool of non-native insects arrived using pathways associated with the country’s economic activities, regardless of their origin.

We found records of almost 600 non-native insect species established in continental Chile. Most species corresponded to Hemiptera (true bugs and scales, among others) from Palaearctic origin and were linked to agriculture and forestry, as we initially hypothesized. These characteristics point to the central role of intercontinental human-mediated transport in structuring non-native insect assemblages in Chile. Non-native insect introductions began immediately after the arrival of Europeans to the central valley of Chile and have shown an enormous acceleration since 1950. Using data on the economic history of Chile, we can preliminary link this acceleration with the strong development in agriculture and forestry in Chile after World War II and the increase in intercontinental air traffic.

Exotic aphids in garden in Chile. Photo by Sergio Estay

The development and analysis of this database gave us some preliminary answers about the ecology of invasive insect species and opened the door to new questions. Also, this is a work in progress. We need the scientific community’s support to improve and correct the records, provide new reports and collect further references to support the database. Our data and analysis may be representative of other countries in South America. Similarities between our countries can facilitate using this information to manage recent introductions and prevent significant economic, social, or environmental damage.

Reference

López DN, Fuentes-Contreras E, Ruiz C, Ide S, Estay SA (2023) A bug’s tale: revealing the history, biogeography and ecological patterns of 500 years of insect invasions. NeoBiota 81: 183-197. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.81.87362

How non-native tree species affect biodiversity

Non-native forest tree species can reduce native species diversity if they are planted in uniform stands, finds an international review study.

Non-native forest tree species can reduce native species diversity if they are planted in uniform stands. In contrast, the effects of introduced species on soil properties are small. This was found by an international review study with the participation of the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL.

Curse or blessing? Opinions are divided on non-native tree species. In addition to native species, many foresters also plant non-native species that can withstand the increasing summer drought. In various parts of Europe, the latter are already important suppliers of timber. However, conservationists fear ecological damage, for example if native species are displaced or tree pathogens and insect pests are introduced.

In Switzerland, Douglas fir is partly used for afforestation. However, large pure stands, such as those found in Germany, are prohibited there. Photo by Thomas Reich

Now a team of European researchers, led by Thomas Wohlgemuth of WSL, has looked at the state of knowledge on the ecological consequences of alien tree species in Europe. They analysed the results of 103 studies on seven such species. All of these studies had investigated how stands dominated by non-native tree species affected biodiversity or soil condition under the trees compared to stands of native tree species. The organisms studied included plants, mosses, microorganisms and insects from the forest floor to the treetops.

Of the seven alien species studied, only the Douglas fir is currently planted in larger numbers in the Swiss forests. While foresters used to value its fast, straight growth and its versatile wood, today they appreciate its higher drought tolerance compared to spruce. Other species are problematic because they can spread uncontrollably. The North American Robinia, for example, is invasive and can displace native species. It was already introduced in Europe 400 years ago and used in Switzerland, among other things, to stabilise soils.

Robinia can spread rapidly and form stands as here in Valais. Photo by Thomas Reich

Negative effects on biodiversity predominate

Across the 103 studies, the consequences of non-native species for biodiversity were negative. Comparisons from 20 studies show, for example, that on average fewer insect species live on and in Douglas fir than in spruce or beech stands. Robinia also reduces the diversity of insects, eucalyptus that of birds. This is hardly surprising, says Wohlgemuth, head of the WSL Forest Dynamics Research Unit. Because: “These results apply to comparisons between pure stands.” In continuous, uniform plantations, many alien species clearly have worse impacts than native species.

Proportion of cases with increasing (green), decreasing (red) or non-significant (grey) effects of tree species non-native to Europe on diversity attributes (abundance, species richness or diversity) of different taxonomic groups in comparison to native vegetation. Numbers of cases are shown next to the NNTs names, below the diversity attributes and above the bars.

But alien species do not only have negative impacts. Most of them do not affect soil properties. The easily degradable needles of Douglas firs can even make more nutrients available than the poorly degradable spruce needles. “When it comes only to soil properties, the Douglas fir has no negative impact,” Wohlgemuth says. In general, an equal number of studies found positive and negative effects of the seven non-native species on the soil.

Douglas firs are attractive for forestry because of their fast growth, good wood properties and – in regard to climate change – their drought resistance. Photo by Thomas Reich

Furthermore, it makes a difference whether the alien species are more closely or more distantly related to European tree species. “Tree species without closer relatives, such as eucalyptus and acacia from Australia, reduce species diversity more strongly across all studies than closely related species, such as Douglas fir and wild black cherry from North America,” adds Martin Gossner, head of the WSL Forest Entomology Group and second author of the study.

A Douglas fir. Photo by Neptuul under a CC BY-SA 4.0 license

It all depends on the management

Management has a significant influence on whether Douglas fir or other tree species are good or bad for a forest overall. Uniform and dense Douglas fir stands are unsuitable habitats for many organisms. However, the same is true for spruces, which have been planted extensively for timber production in lowland areas of Central Europe over the last 100 years. On the other hand, Douglas firs in stands of native forest trees, individually or in small groups, would hardly disturb the ecosystem, Wohlgemuth says: “We conclude that the impact on native biodiversity is low with mixed-in Douglas firs.”

Should foresters plant non-native tree species or not? Despite certain negative aspects, Wohlgemuth does not recommend total renunciation. “Particularly in the case of Douglas fir, the facts show that moderate admixture in stands has little impact on native biodiversity, while at the same time preserving ecosystem services such as the production of construction timber. This is especially true when other, less drought-resistant conifers are increasingly lacking with regard to unchecked climate change.”

Research article:

Wohlgemuth T, Gossner MM, Campagnaro T, Marchante H, van Loo M, Vacchiano G, Castro-Díez P, Dobrowolska D, Gazda A, Keren S, Keserű Z, Koprowski M, La Porta N, Marozas V, Nygaard PH, Podrázský V, Puchałka R, Reisman-Berman O, Straigytė L, Ylioja T, Pötzelsberger E, Silva JS (2022) Impact of non-native tree species in Europe on soil properties and biodiversity: a review. NeoBiota 78: 45-69. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.78.87022

Web news piece originally published by the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL. Republished with permission.

Follow NeoBiota on Twitter and Facebook.

Alien land snail species are increasing exponentially

A new study compiles an overview of the exponential increase and dynamic spread of land snail species introduced to Europe and the Mediterranean.

Invasive land snail species can displace native species and harm human health. A recent study by the Leibniz Institute for Biodiversity Change Analysis (LIB) compiles an overview of the exponential increase and dynamic spread of land snail species introduced to Europe and the Mediterranean from other continents.

Laevicaulis alte, an invasive species from tropical Africa that was introduced into Egypt in 2018. © Reham F. Ali

To date, there is a lack of information for the spread of alien species, especially invertebrates such as snails. “Despite efforts to compile lists of alien species, there is not even a well-documented inventory of alien invertebrate species for Europe,” emphasizes Prof. Dr. Bernhard Hausdorf, section leader Mollusca at LIB. His study, just published in the journal NeoBiota, provides a basis for decisions on further measures to control or eradicate introduced populations.

Alien land snail species in the Western Palaearctic Region: Zonitoides arboreus, Hawaiia minuscula, Guppya gundlachii, Polygyra cereolus

Land snails play a supporting role in ecosystems. They decompose decaying plants and thus play an important role in nutrient cycling and soil formation. However, more and more species are being spread beyond their native range, usually by humans, sometimes intentionally, but often unintentionally by goods or travellers.

The study examines 22 land snail species introduced to Europe and the Mediterranean from other continents. Most of them are small, live on decaying plant parts and apparently cause few problems. In contrast, carnivorous species can threaten native species; and species that feed on living plants can cause damage to agriculture. Some even serve as hosts and vectors of parasites that can cause brain encephalitis, for example, and thus can indirectly harm human health.

Alien land snail species in the Western Palaearctic Region: Paralaoma servilis and Helicodiscus parallelus.

Harmful species include the Laevicaulis species recently introduced to the Mediterranean from tropical Africa and the African giant snail Lissachatina fulica. They can cause economic damage on irrigated farmland or in greenhouses by destroying or contaminating crops, making them unsaleable.

Hausdorf’s study compiles records of land snail species introduced to the Western Palearctic region, Europe and the Mediterranean, from other regions after 1492 and established in the wild. In doing so, he observes that the number of alien species has increased steadily since the 19th century, even exponentially from the 1970s onward, and that the introduced species have become more widespread.

Within Europe, alien species generally spread from south to north and from west to east. Thirteen of the 22 species studied were from North America, three from sub-Saharan Africa, two from the Australian region, three probably from the Oriental region, and one from South America.

Alien land snail species in the Western Palaearctic Region: llopeas clavulinum, Allopeas gracile, Lissachatina fulica, Paropeas achatinaceum, and Discocharopa aperta.

Even if trade relations and the spread of species can be correlated, Hausdorf believes that the prevailing climate is primarily decisive: “The spread of many of the introduced species, especially the tropical species dispersing in Mediterranean, is probably favored by climate change.”

Bernhard Hausdorf, “Distribution patterns of established alien land snail species in the Western Palaearctic Region”, NeoBiota, Pensoft
https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.81.96360

Press release originally published by Leibniz Institute for the Analysis of Biodiversity Change. Republished with permission.

Follow NeoBiota on Facebook and Twitter.

Pensoft among the first 27 publishers to share prices & services via the Journal Comparison Service by Plan S

All journals published by Pensoft – each using the publisher’s self-developed ARPHA Platform – provide extensive and transparent information about their costs and services in line with the Plan S principles.

In support of transparency and openness in scholarly publishing and academia, the scientific publisher and technology provider Pensoft joined the Journal Comparison Service (JCS) initiative by cOAlition S, an alliance of national funders and charitable bodies working to increase the volume of free-to-read research. 

As a result, all journals published by Pensoft – each using the publisher’s self-developed ARPHA Platform – provide extensive and transparent information about their costs and services in line with the Plan S principles.

The JCS was launched to aid libraries and library consortia – the ones negotiating and participating in Open Access agreements with publishers – by providing them with everything they need to know in order to determine whether the prices charged by a certain journal are fair and corresponding to the quality of the service. 

According to cOAlition S, an increasing number of libraries and library consortia from Europe, Africa, North America, and Australia have registered with the JCS over the past year since the launch of the portal in September 2021.

While access to the JCS is only open to librarians, individual researchers may also make use of the data provided by the participating publishers and their journals. 

This is possible through an integration with the Journal Checker Tool, where researchers can simply enter the name of the journal of interest, their funder and affiliation (if applicable) to check whether the scholarly outlet complies with the Open Access policy of the author’s funder. A full list of all academic titles that provide data to the JCS is also publicly available. By being on the list means a journal and its publisher do not only support cOAlition S, but they also demonstrate that they stand for openness and transparency in scholarly publishing.

“We are delighted that Pensoft, along with a number of other publishers, have shared their price and service data through the Journal Comparison Service. Not only are such publishers demonstrating their commitment to open business models and cultures but are also helping to build understanding and trust within the research community.”

said Robert Kiley, Head of Strategy at cOAlition S. 

***

About cOAlition S:

On 4 September 2018, a group of national research funding organisations, with the support of the European Commission and the European Research Council (ERC), announced the launch of cOAlition S, an initiative to make full and immediate Open Access to research publications a reality. It is built around Plan S, which consists of one target and 10 principles. Read more on the cOAlition S website.

About Plan S:

Plan S is an initiative for Open Access publishing that was launched in September 2018. The plan is supported by cOAlition S, an international consortium of research funding and performing organisations. Plan S requires that, from 2021, scientific publications that result from research funded by public grants must be published in compliant Open Access journals or platforms. Read more on the cOAlition S website.

Invasive fruit fly may pose threat to forest ecosystems

The decay of fruits attacked by the spotted wing drosophila leads to a loss of resources, which can cause considerable ecological damage.

The invasive spotted wing drosophila (SWD), introduced from South-East Asia, is a well-known fruit crop pest. It lays its eggs by destroying the mechanical protection of the fruit’s skin, providing an entry point for further infestation. Egg deposition and inoculated microbes then accelerate decay, and as a result the fruit rots and becomes inedible. While this small fly is known to cause massive economic damage in agriculture, little is known about its ecological impact on more natural ecosystems such as forests.

The larvae of the invasive spotted wing drosophila develops in fruits of many forest species such as brambles. Its occurrence result in a fast decay of the fruits.

A recent study by Swiss scientists from the Swiss Federal Institute for Forest, Snow and Landscape Research WSL and the Ökobüro Biotopia, published in the scientific journal NeoBiota, concluded that the SWD competes strongly with other fruit-eating species and that its presence could have far-reaching consequences for ecosystems.

The research team assessed the use of potential host plants at 64 sites in forests from mid-June to mid-October 2020 by checking a total of 12,000 fruits for SWD egg deposits. To determine if SWD attacks trigger fruit decay, they also recorded symptoms of fruit decay after egg deposition. In addition, they monitored the fruit fly (drosophilid) fauna in the area, assuming that the SWD would outnumber and possibly outcompete other fruit-eating insects.

The male of the invasive spotted wing drosophila can be easily identified by the dark spots on the wings.

The authors found egg deposits on the fruits of 31 of the 39 fruit-bearing forest plant species they studied, with 18 species showing an attack rate of more than 50%. Furthermore, more than 50% of the affected plant species showed severe symptoms of decay after egg deposition. The egg depositions may alter the attractiveness of fruits, because they change their chemical composition and visual cues, such as colour, shape and reflective patterns, which in turn might lead seed dispersers such as birds to consume less fruits.

Given the large number of infested fruits, significant ecological impacts can be expected. “Rapid decay of fruits attacked by the spotted wing drosophila results in a loss of fruit available for other species competing for this resource, and may disrupt seed-dispersal mutualisms due to reduced consumption of fruit by dispersers such as birds,” says Prof. Martin M. Gossner, entomologist at the WSL. “If the fly reproduces in large numbers, both seed dispersers and plants could suffer.”

The females of the invasive spotted wing drosophila has an enlarged, serrated ovipositor to attack undamaged fruits, which gives it a competitive advantage over native fruit flies.

The authors further found that SWD were strongly represented and dominant in trap catches, and showed that the more abundant SWD were, the less abundant native drosophilids were. This suggests additional negative impacts of the invasive species on native communities.

With ongoing climate change, these potentially severe ecological impacts might be amplified in temperate forests, as higher average and winter temperatures will most likely lead to shorter generation times and lower winter mortality, which will eventually further increase the pressure on forest fruits and the competitiveness of the SWD over native drosophilids, the authors note.

Research article:
Bühlmann I, Gossner MM (2022) Invasive Drosophila suzukii outnumbers native controphics and causes substantial damage to fruits of forest plants. NeoBiota 77: 39-77. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.77.87319

Photos by Prof. Martin M. Gossner.

Follow NeoBiota on Facebook and Twitter.

Dr Giovanni Vimercati gave the Best Talk at NEOBIOTA 2022

The invasion scientist and NEOBIOTA 2022 awardee shares more about his research on the impact assessment of biological invasions.

Giovanni Vimercati is a postdoctoral researcher at the University of Fribourg, Switzerland, and most recently recipient of the Best Talk award (Early Career Researcher) at the 2022 NEOBIOTA conference held in mid-September in Tartu, Estonia. 

As a sponsor of the event and publisher of the NeoBiota journal, Pensoft granted a complimentary publication in it to the awardee. 

NeoBiota readers might already be familiar with Vimercati, whose name first appeared on its pages in a 2017 paper that used alien amphibians as a case study to identify the differences and potential difficulties with two impact assessment scoring tools: the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT) and the Generic Impact Scoring System (GISS). 

Then, in 2020 and 2021, the researcher had two research articles published in NeoBiota as lead author. The 2020 paper provided a summary of the frameworks assessing beneficial impacts of alien species, while in the 2021 study his team used a spatially-explicit stage-structured model to assess efficacy of past, present and alternative control strategies for invasive guttural toads (Sclerophrys gutturalis) in Cape Town.

Giovanni Vimercati being awarded at NEOBIOTA 2022. Photo by Ana Novoa.

In anticipation of Vimercati claiming the Best Talk award with a forthcoming submission to the journal, we asked him to join us for an interview and share his thoughts on his research.  

Going back to the beginning, what sparked your interest in the study of invasive species in particular? What are the unique aspects of your research?

Like the episodic nature of many biological invasions, my first contact with the study of alien species was quite “unexpected”. Having a strong interest in herpetology, I had the luck to pursue my doctoral research at the Center of Excellence for Invasion Biology (CIB) in Stellenbosch, South Africa, where I studied the invasion of an alien amphibian species. My PhD study, and the highly stimulating community of researchers that characterized the CIB, made me realize not only that invasive species provide an invaluable opportunity to address ecological and evolutionary questions, but also how important it is to study their impact on biodiversity and human communities. 

One unique aspect of my research since then has been its multidisciplinary character, as I have studied biological invasions from multiple angles simultaneously, by using mathematical models, physiological experiments, field surveys, remote sensing, literature reviews, meta analysis, and questionnaires. It seems a paradox, but the uniqueness of my research on biological invasions is that it has never really been unique! 

Are there recent developments in the field that you find particularly interesting to explore?

As many other scientific disciplines, the field of invasion science is highly dynamic, and novel developments emerge every year. However, I find of particular interest the development of new approaches and tools to explore the links between biological invasions and the various socio-economic contexts. The use of online structured and semi-structured interviews, or the development of standardized socio-economic indicators are, for example, particularly promising for future studies. 

In addition, the emergence of novel technological tools, for instance, linked to remote sensing, eDNA, stable isotopes and camera trapping, or the rapid increase in the computational power of modern CPUs, are allowing invasion scientists to collect and analyze data that used to be unaffordable, or simply unavailable. It is certainly an exciting moment to be an invasion scientist. 

What do you find to be the biggest challenges as a researcher in your field?

I find that the proliferation of hypotheses and frameworks that characterize the field of invasion biology are particularly intriguing and challenging. Many of them work extremely well in certain conditions or across specific taxonomic groups, but they often lack generality or are marred by context dependence, which may limit their predictive power. 

Addressing such a context dependence and finding ways to integrate various hypotheses and frameworks in invasion biology will be highly beneficial for understanding and forecasting biological invasions in the next decades. 

Another challenge is to communicate the implications of our research to non-experts. I often wonder how stakeholders and policymakers from different cultural backgrounds or geographic regions perceive alien species and their impacts.  

The theme of this year’s NEOBIOTA conference was “Biological Invasions in a Changing World”. To what extent can changes be anticipated and forecasted in order to make the work of assessing their impacts and mitigating damage easier?

I think that a key point would be to focus on specific indicators or proxies to measure these changes, so that different impacts and species can be quantified, both transparently and consistently. 

In recent years, the field has produced a huge body of literature regarding impacts caused by alien species, but the results of these studies have not always been comparable. I feel that the development of the EICAT framework and its recent adoption by the IUCN as a global standard for measuring the magnitude of environmental impacts of alien species were two very important steps in this direction. 

Your talk at the NEOBIOTA conference focused on the positive socio-economic impacts of invasive species. Why is this important for different stakeholders, including policy makers, but also local communities and individuals?

In my opinion, invasive species, and more generally alien species, can have various positive socio-economic impacts that should be identified and assessed rigorously. These impacts are often anecdotally reported or vaguely stated in the literature, a tendency that hampers our capacity to identify (and forecast) conflicts of interest among different stakeholders or understand their perceptions toward alien species. 

In my talk, I presented the preliminary version of a framework that assesses positive socio-economic impacts. The framework is based on the capability approach, and aims to quantify the degree to which the well-being of certain human communities increases after the introduction of alien species. Of course, the scheme won’t be used in isolation, but rather in combination with other frameworks that assess the negative socio-economic and environmental impacts of alien species, so that their effects can be understood in their full complexity.

***

Follow the NeoBiota journal on Twitter and Facebook, and the NeoBiota group on Twitter.

Assessments of alien species impacts are reliable to prioritize resources

Experts are consistent when assessing the economic, health and ecological impacts of alien species, find the scientists.

Original post by EBD-CSIC

An international collaboration led by the Doñana Biological Station (EBD-CSIC) has shown that experts are consistent when assessing the economic, health and ecological impacts of alien species. These assessments are therefore reliable to guide the prioritization of resources invested against biological invasions.

You can find the scientific article published in the open-access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal NeoBiota.

These results have a great impact on the management by national and international institutions, which have limited resources to fight against the growing and worrying increase of alien species invasions and the damage they caused to society and environment. 

Biological invasions annually cause huge food losses, disease transmissions, species extinctions and ecosystem perturbations. For these reasons, it is one of the biggest problems that humankind currently faces, and its relevance will alarmingly increase due to the extreme situations that climate change will expose society to.

The seriousness of this problem lies in the limited human resources available to fight against it, that force to prioritize its management. Here is where tools such as impact assessments play a key role. Assessments report the impact of invasive species in different areas, including economy, health and environment, and allow us to rank the most harmful species.

For instance, in aquatic ecosystems like the Ebro Delta in Spain, there are dozens of invasive alien co-occurring species that cause millions of economic losses and irreparable ecological damage.

Such is the case of the Zebra mussel, which affects irrigation; the apple snail that devours rice fields; and the blue crab causing the local extinction and declines of many native species.

“That’s why it is crucial to ensure that the results are not dependent on the assessors and to understand what factors affect discrepancies among experts,”

explains Rubén Bernardo-Madrid, lead author and researcher at Doñana Biological Station – CSIC.

One of the relevant aspects of this study is the quantification of the consistency of responses across assessors for a large number of invasive species of vertebrates, invertebrates and plants. In addition, the researchers have studied multiple protocols focused on different aspects, providing a global view of this problem.

“The study has shown that the great majority of assessments are consistent and therefore valid to aid in decision-making. These results are encouraging as they suggest that these protocols may be useful when facing the worrying forecasts of increasing biological invasions and their damages,” 

explains Rubén.

On the other hand, the researchers have observed that discrepancies across assessments might be due to multiple factors, such as the type of impact asked or the linguistic formulation used in the protocols.

The results suggest that there is room for improvement in assessments, but it will require more funding for research, and more multidisciplinary collaborations between ecologists and linguists to develop less ambiguous protocols.

As always, the most effective measure against biological invasions turns out to be prevention.

However, given the incapacity to control every voluntary and involuntary introduction, other tools such as impact assessments are essential to reduce as far as possible the damage caused by these species on human welfare and environment. Its continuous improvement and evaluation, such as the one made in this study, are decisive.

***

Research article:

Bernardo-Madrid R, González-Moreno P, Gallardo B, Bacher S, Vilà M (2022) Consistency in impact assessments of invasive species is generally high and depends on protocols and impact types. In: Giannetto D, Piria M, Tarkan AS, Zięba G (Eds) Recent advancements in the risk screening of freshwater and terrestrial non-native species. NeoBiota 76: 163-190. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.76.83028

***

Follow NeoBiota on Twitter and Facebook.

Pensoft’s ARPHA Publishing Platform integrates with OA Switchboard to streamline reporting to funders of open research

By the time authors open their inboxes to the message their work is online, a similar notification will have also reached their research funder.

Image credit: OA Switchboard.

By the time authors – who have acknowledged third-party financial support in their research papers submitted to a journal using the Pensoft-developed publishing platform: ARPHA – open their inboxes to the congratulatory message that their work has just been published and made available to the wide world, a similar notification will have also reached their research funder.

This automated workflow is already in effect at all journals (co-)published by Pensoft and those published under their own imprint on the ARPHA Platform, as a result of the new partnership with the OA Switchboard: a community-driven initiative with the mission to serve as a central information exchange hub between stakeholders about open access publications, while making things simpler for everyone involved.

All the submitting author needs to do to ensure that their research funder receives a notification about the publication is to select the supporting agency or the scientific project (e.g. a project supported by Horizon Europe) in the manuscript submission form, using a handy drop-down menu. In either case, the message will be sent to the funding body as soon as the paper is published in the respective journal.

“At Pensoft, we are delighted to announce our integration with the OA Switchboard, as this workflow is yet another excellent practice in scholarly publishing that supports transparency in research. Needless to say, funding and financing are cornerstones in scientific work and scholarship, so it is equally important to ensure funding bodies are provided with full, prompt and convenient reports about their own input.”

comments Prof Lyubomir Penev, CEO and founder of Pensoft and ARPHA.

 

“Research funders are one of the three key stakeholder groups in OA Switchboard and are represented in our founding partners. They seek support in demonstrating the extent and impact of their research funding and delivering on their commitment to OA. It is great to see Pensoft has started their integration with OA Switchboard with a focus on this specific group, fulfilling an important need,”

adds Yvonne Campfens, Executive Director of the OA Switchboard.

***

About the OA Switchboard:

A global not-for-profit and independent intermediary established in 2020, the OA Switchboard provides a central hub for research funders, institutions and publishers to exchange OA-related publication-level information. Connecting parties and systems, and streamlining communication and the neutral exchange of metadata, the OA Switchboard provides direct, indirect and community benefits: simplicity and transparency, collaboration and interoperability, and efficiency and cost-effectiveness.

About Pensoft:

Pensoft is an independent academic publishing company, well known worldwide for its novel cutting-edge publishing tools, workflows and methods for text and data publishing of journals, books and conference materials.

All journals (co-)published by Pensoft are hosted on Pensoft’s full-featured ARPHA Publishing Platform and published in a way that ensures their content is as FAIR as possible, meaning that it is effortlessly readable, discoverable, harvestable, citable and reusable by both humans and machines.

***

Follow Pensoft on Twitter, Facebook and Linkedin.
Follow OA Switchboard on Twitter and Linkedin.