Research from Wageningen University and Research, the Netherlands, reveals invasive lionfish are rapidly expanding their territory in the Mediterranean sea, causing severe ecological damage.
Published in the open-access journal NeoBiota, the study shows the lionfish species Pterois miles – known as the devil firefish – has established presence in the eastern Mediterranean, with observations now extending to colder waters previously thought to be unsuitable for the species.
Map of years of first sighting of Pterois miles by dive centres. Credit: Bottacini et al.
Originating from the Indo-Pacific region, the lionfish species Pterois miles and Pterois volitans are regarded as the most successful and lethal invasive fishes in marine ecosystems, with the capacity to drastically affect local fish communities and biodiversity in invaded areas.
The invasion of Pterois miles in the Mediterranean Sea began around ten years ago. Genetic studies reveal the invasive fish originated from the Red Sea and likely entered through the Suez Canal.
The beautiful but deadly devil firefish. Credit: Kora27 via Wikimedia Commons.
Lionfish are generalist predators and impact ecosystems by preying extensively on local fishes, including endemics of high conservation value. As they are unaccustomed to lionfish, native prey species usually do not flee from this new predator.
“After years studying these predators, I find it amazing how they can easily adjust to so many different environments and be successful in areas so different from where they evolve.”
“It is always impressive to see how such a flamboyant and–to us–conspicuous predator can approach its prey without being noticed”
The study’s lead author, Davide Bottacini.
The fin spines of Pterois miles are highly venomous. A sting can cause extreme pain, sickness, convulsions, minor paralysis, and breathing difficulties in humans. Immediate emergency medical attention is recommended for anyone stung by the species.
By reviewing existing scientific data, researchers identified gaps in current understanding of the lionfish’s interactions with Mediterranean ecosystems.
They suggest that, while they consider the eradication of invasive lionfish impossible, tackling questions such as the community-level impact of them in the Mediterranean, and the evolutionary and learned responses in prey, will add to the body of knowledge on the best documented invasion in marine ecosystems.
Maps of dive centre respondents and lionfish sightings. Credit: Bottacini et al.
Such information provides insights vital for biodiversity conservation, with practical implications for policy makers aiming to devise efficient mitigation plans.
Citizen science initiatives for tracking and reporting lionfish sightings are encouraged to provide valuable data that supports ongoing research efforts. Such community involvement is essential for enhancing understanding of the invasion dynamics and devising effective control measures.
Original source
Bottacini D, Pollux BJA, Nijland R, Jansen PA, Naguib M, Kotrschal A (2024) Lionfish (Pterois miles) in the Mediterranean Sea: a review of the available knowledge with an update on the invasion front. NeoBiota 92: 233–257. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.92.110442
Invasive species spread through human activities are one of the main causes of the ongoing biodiversity crisis.
Even on South Georgia, a remote island located in the very south of the Atlantic Ocean, exotic species are present. Many of which were inadvertently introduced by whalers and sealers in the 19th and early 20th century.
The invasive carabid ground beetle, Merizodus soledadinus, is present on sites that have been recently exposed by melting glaciers.
In a new study published in the open-access journal Neobiota and funded by Darwin Plus, researchers explored how living organisms colonise new ground provided by melting glaciers.
Like other cold regions of the world, South Georgia is losing its glaciers because of climate change, leaving behind large areas of newly uncovered bare ground.
Invasive annual meadow grass colonising ground only a few years after the glacier disappeared.
Researchers surveyed the foreland biodiversity of six glaciers, creating an inventory of the flora and fauna that colonise forelands at different stages of glacial retreat.
A survey site near a former whaling station (Grytviken).
They found that, just a few years after bare ground is exposed by a glacier melting, pioneer plants arrive, progressively covering more ground with time, followed by an increasing number of species.
Rocky terrain by Glacier Col.
Native and exotic plants, as well as invertebrates, take advantage of this opportunity. Surprisingly, two temperate plant species from the Northern Hemisphere, annual meadow grass and mouse-ear chickweed, colonise sites faster than any other species.
The team suggests their results indicate invasive species will likely spread on South Georgia as fast as glaciers are retreating. Whether this has or will have negative consequences on local species needs to be investigated to help protect this unique ecosystem.
Original Source
Tichit P, Brickle P, Newton RJ, Convey P, Dawson W (2024) Introduced species infiltrate recent stages of succession after glacial retreat on sub-Antarctic South Georgia. NeoBiota 92: 85-110. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.92.117226
In a leap towards managing the ecological challenge posed by alien plant species, a recent study outlines a methodology for integrating and harmonising data on plant invasions across Australia.
Published in NeoBiota, the researchers created a standardised and unified database at the Australian national level, known as the Alien Flora of Australia, which will help monitoring and early-warning of alien flora, prevent species introduction, streamline decision-making, and bolster biosecurity efforts.
Harmonised workflow to unify terminology on biological invasions across Australian data sources. Credit: Dr Irene Martín-Forés.
Focusing on Australia, a federally managed country, they identified mismatches in definitions and records of invasion status for vascular plant taxa across different jurisdictions. They then proposed prioritisation procedures to tackle those mismatches and to integrate information from ten data sources into a harmonised workflow at the national scale.
“The importance of harmonising terminology on biological invasions cannot be overstated. It is not merely an academic pursuit but a practical necessity, essential for realising meaningful advancements in invasion ecology.”
Dr Irene Martín-Forés
The authors recognise that the words used to describe alien species profoundly influence how humans perceive, study, and manage biological invasions. In federally managed countries, the problem is worse, as fragmented terminologies across different jurisdictions create confusion and inconsistencies in species classification and invasion statuses, therefore hindering effective communication among researchers, policymakers, and stakeholders.
Prioritisation procedure to assign the most conservative invasion status for a given species in a given Australian state after comparing the records in the corresponding state census and in the Australian Plant Census (APC). Credit: Dr Irene Martín-Forés.
The benefits of harmonising terminology on invasion ecology and combining contrasting data sources into a unified dataset at the Australian national scale extend far beyond semantic clarity. It enhances the accuracy of available datasets, and subsequently the reliability of scientific research focused on plant invasion. It also streamlines communication across jurisdictional borders and disciplines and empowers evidence-based decision-making in biosecurity management.
The workflow developed and its associated R script can be easily adapted to be used in any federally managed country, saving future efforts into trying to deal with inconsistencies in species’ invasion statuses.
Original source:
Martín-Forés I, Guerin GR, Lewis D, Gallagher RV, Vilà M, Catford JA, Pauchard A, Sparrow B (2024) Towards integrating and harmonising information on plant invasions across Australia. NeoBiota 92: 61-83. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.92.113013
The critical role of gardeners in identifying ‘future invaders’ – ornamental plants that could become invasive species – has been revealed by researchers from the University of Reading and the Royal Horticultural Society.
Looking to draw from the experience of Britain’s millions of gardeners, the team created an online survey where gardeners reported ornamentals that showed ‘invasive behaviour’ in their gardens.
Based on reports from 558 gardeners, 251 different plants were identified as potential invaders, reflecting the extensive variety and potential risks in domestic gardens. The team analysed the results, considering both domestic and global invasive status, and prioritised ornamental plants of concern. The result was a shortlist of plants which need their invasive potential in Britain and Ireland assessed.
The shortlisted plants include, for example: Mexican fleabane(Erigeron karvinskianus);cypress spurge (Euphorbia cyparissias);chameleon plant(Houttuynia cordata);Himalayan honeysuckle(Leycesteria formosa);and purple top(Verbena bonariensis).
Mexican fleabane. Credit: KENPEI via Wikimedia CommonsCypress spurge. Credit: Bogdan via Wikimedia CommonsChameleon plant. Credit: Mariko GODA via Wikimedia CommonsPurple top. Credit: Karelj via Wikimedia Commons.Himalayan honeysuckle. Credit: H. Zell via Wikimedia Commons.
The results, published in the open-access journal NeoBiota, highlight the role of gardeners in the early detection of invasive species, a key factor in the global nature crisis. Such proactive identification could prove invaluable for future risk assessments and prevention strategies.
“The simple yet structured scheme we developed was used to prioritise which of the around 70,000 ornamental plants available to buy in the UK could be future invaders. This is crucial for focusing research efforts and resources, such as conducting formal risk assessments to explore the invasive potential of those shortlisted.”
Tomos Jones, lead author
John David, RHS Head of Horticultural Taxonomy, said: “It’s important to remember that these shortlisted plants are not yet officially invasive, and that many non-native plants that occur in the wild present no threat to our native biodiversity.”
This happens more than you might think, with pet releases deemed responsible for 53% of invasive vertebrate species and one third of all aquatic invasive species. It has been shown that the more readily available a species is in the pet trade, the greater the risk of it being released, or escaping, into the wild.
Somewhat fascinatingly, this also puts the trade at the mercy of pop culture influences. 1970s animated series “Rascal the Raccoon” is commonly blamed for Japan’s invasive racoon population, and demand for Trachemys scripta pets is said to have boomed in the 1990s due to “Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.” Side note: the influence of movies highlighting the challenges of pet ownership, such as “Gremlins” or “Little Shop of Horrors”, warrants further study.
Hitchhikers
While invasion ecology has typically focused on these released species and the impacts that they cause, many species are sold with commensal organisms attached. These incidentally carried fauna are commonly known as “hitchhikers”.
Recent studies have found the protozoan Vorticella sp. and a species of bdelloid rotifer associated with two species of atyid shrimps, digenean larvae with the carnivorous snail Anentome helena, and an epibiont, Diceratocephala boschmai, on New Guinean ornamental Cherax crayfish.
Temnocephalid eggs located on thorax carapace (white arrow) of adult Cherax monticola. From Ložek F, Patoka J, Bláha M. 2021. Another hitchhiker exposed: Diceratocephala boschmai (Platyhelminthes: Temnocephalida) found associated with ornamental crayfish Cherax spp. Knowl. Manag. Aquat. Ecosyst., 422, 25.
A high-profile example emerged in 2021 when zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) were detected in 21 US states on aquarium moss balls that had been imported from Ukraine, and subsequent searches revealed the species in 600 locations in Canada. Similar findings have since emerged from Europe. Having colonised both European and North American waters, the ease with which this Ponto-Caspian bivalve is being spread by the pet trade on both sides of the Atlantic is a major concern. Zebra mussels have been listed as one of the IUCN’s “100 of the Worst Invasive Species”, and their myriad ecological and economic impacts range from habitat alteration, to competition with native unionids, to disruption of food-web structure, to blocking industrial water intake pipes. They are also able to attach to boat hulls and other organisms, facilitating further spread.
The discovery
Zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, found amongst ordered European pond snail, Viviparus viviparus
I remember the moment clearly. I had ordered seventy-five Viviparus viviparus – a common European pond snail species – for behavioural studies at GEOMAR Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel where I was based for lab work in the group of Elizabeta Briski. After some stress over posting delays and an increasingly fraught relationship developing with the GEOMAR receptionist, the snails arrived. Over the next day, watching them go about their lives in our climate chamber in their new tanks became a favourite way to spend working breaks. With obvious dimorphism you could clearly tell males from females, which added to the developing snail soap operas. However, just before packing up to leave the lab, I noticed a huge lump on one snail. What on earth is that? Soon I noticed a second. I called Elizabeta with my suspicions, which she confirmed the next day. Photos were taken, measurements made, and our go-to ecological geneticist Reid Brennan was begged to work his DNA sequencing magic. Before long, it was all confirmed: we had zebra mussels.
Potential implications
The biggest takeaway message here is that even native species in the pet trade can facilitate the spread of non-native hitchhikers. In a parallel universe, those snails did not go to an invasion ecology lab but rather to someone keen to stock their garden pond. Escape from ponds is a major pathway for freshwater species introductions, and even if the impact of a native species escaping might be limited, its potential for the zoochorous dispersal of a non-native should not be ignored.
Zebra mussels, Dreissena polymorpha, found amongst ordered European pond snail, Viviparus viviparus.
Of course, questions surround the conditions under which the pond snails were held before selling. Were they stocked in zebra mussel infested outdoor ponds? Which other species are held in a similar way? How prevalent are these practices within the trade? One way of combating this risk of non-native species spread is via legislation. Calls have been made for white lists of low-risk species that can be sold in the trade in place of risky species, but in our study, the issue stems from the selling of a native species within its native range, which would surely be deemed low-risk.
We propose that should a white-list system be adopted, the potential for a “low-risk” species to transport invasive species must be accounted for. We also call for stricter biosecurity practices to be enforced, including regular checking and disinfecting of outdoor stock ponds where appropriate. Tools such as environmental DNA surveillance could be used to effectively detect the presence of targeted invasive species, as part of biosecurity “audits”. However, for the time being, a desperate, final line of defence is to raise awareness amongst consumers and for them to be wary of unwanted hitchhikers.
References:
Dickey JWE, Brennan RS, Chung SS, Jeschke JM, Steffen GT, Briski E (2023) More than we bargained for: Zebra mussels transported amongst European native freshwater snails. NeoBiota 10: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.83.97647
DeRoy EM, Scott R, Hussey NE, MacIsaac HJ (2020) Density dependence mediates the ecological impact of an invasive fish. Diversity and Distributions 26: 867–880. https://doi.org/10.1111/ddi.13063
Gippet JMW, Bertelsmeier C (2021) Invasiveness is linked to greater commercial success in the global pet trade. Proceedings of the National Academy of Science USA 118. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2016337118
Lozek F, Patoka J, Bláha M (2021) Another hitchhiker exposed: Diceratocephala boschmai (Platyhelminthes: Temnocephalida) found associated with ornamental crayfish Cherax spp. Knowledge and Management of Aquatic Ecosystems 2020-Janua. https://doi.org/10.1051/kmae/2021023
Militz TA, Foale S (2017) The “Nemo Effect”: Perception and reality of Finding Nemo’s impact on marine aquarium fisheries. Fish and Fisheries 18: 596–606. https://doi.org/10.1111/faf.12202
Padilla DK, Williams SL (2004) Beyond ballast water: Aquarium and ornamental trades as sources of invasive species in aquatic ecosystems. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 2: 131–138. https://doi.org/10.1890/1540-9295(2004)002[0131:BBWAAO]2.0.CO;2
Patoka J, Patoková B (2021) Hitchhiking Exotic Clam: Dreissena polymorpha (Pallas, 1771) Transported via the Ornamental Plant Trade. Diversity 13: 1–5.
Patoka J, Magalhães ALB, Kouba A, Faulkes Z, Jerikho R, Vitule JRS (2018) Invasive aquatic pets: Failed policies increase risks of harmful invasions. Biodiversity and Conservation 27: 3037–3046. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10531-018-1581-3
Richardson MJ, Whoriskey FG, Roy LH (1995) Turbidity generation and biological impacts of an exotic fish Carassius auratus, introduced into shallow seasonally anoxic ponds. Journal of Fish Biology: 576–585.
Saul WC, Roy HE, Booy O, Carnevali L, Chen HJ, Genovesi P, Harrower CA, Hulme PE, Pagad S, Pergl J, Jeschke JM (2017) Assessing patterns in introduction pathways of alien species by linking major invasion data bases. Journal of Applied Ecology 54: 657–669. https://doi.org/10.1111/1365-2664.12819
Simberloff D (2006) Risk assessments, blacklists, and white lists for introduced species: Are predictions good enough to be useful? Agricultural and Resource Economics Review 35: 1–10. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1068280500010005
Stanicka A, Maciaszek R, Cichy A, Templin J, Świderek W, Żbikowska E, Labecka AM (2022) Unwanted ‘hitchhikers’ of ornamental snails: A case report of digeneans transported via the international pet trade. The European Zoological Journal 89: 601–607. https://doi.org/10.1080/24750263.2022.2065039
Zeng Y, Shakir KK, Yeo DCJ (2019) Competition between a native freshwater crab and an invasive crayfish in tropical Southeast Asia. Biological Invasions 21: 2653–2663. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-019-02009-6
Even when there is agreement on the impacts of invasive species on ecosystems, some stakeholders nevertheless deny the need for, or benefit of managing invasive species.
Guest blog post by Noelle G. Stratton, Nicholas E. Mandrak, and Nicole Klenk
Invasive species denialism (ISD) is a hot topic in recent invasion ecology discourse. Many of us are familiar with the concept of science denialism, particularly during recent discussions about climate change and the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Essentially, a person who exhibits science denialism is skeptical of, or refuses to believe, the scientific facts about a topic. Much of the discussion about ISD has focused on characterising it as a form of science denialism. However, while science denialism may be one form of ISD, it is not the only one.
Understanding the different forms of ISD is an important step in learning more about what drives ISD positions, and how those positions can be overcome to improve invasive species management. Recently, researchers at the University of Toronto outlined these ISD forms in a new paper in NeoBiota. While these framings are not the only ways to characterize invasive species denialism, they demonstrate that there are multiple framings to the ways that people deny the imperative to manage all invasive species as prescribed by early detection and rapid response.
So, what are the forms of ISD?
Venn diagram of the three forms of invasive species based on interviews and focus groups with invasive species community members in the Great Lakes region, including interested publics and decision-makers: 1) Invasive species denialism; 2) invasive species cynicism; and 3) invasive species nihilism. Each has different motivations and ways of talking about invasive species. Notably, all forms include an opposition to invasive species engagement or management efforts.
Invasive species denialism is the form that will typically come to mind when you picture a “science denialist”. Someone who does not believe in invasive species, or says that the existing scientific literature is all wrong, would fall within this framing. However, it is more complex than that. Invasive species practitioners also identified some of those who believed in invasive species and supported their management under this framing.
For example, folks who wanted management to happen immediately, be 100% effective, or have no risks to them or the environment whatsoever, were considered another form of denialist. This is because while these people supported invasive species management, they were still opposed to certain management efforts due to a lack of understanding of the science behind that management. Similarly, people who agree invasive species are a problem but say “this isn’t my problem, and I shouldn’t have to do anything about it” when shown evidence otherwise were also framed as denialists, as it again indicated a denial, or at least a lack of understanding of the scientific facts.
Invasive species cynicism is the form where someone may well understand what invasive species are and the science behind their management. However, they may still oppose management because they believe it will harm them in some way.
For example, someone who does not want to have to check and clean their boat to prevent an invasive species spread because it takes too much time would be categorized as an invasive species cynic. As well, someone who does not want to cooperate with management efforts because they personally like a particular invasive species and would like it to persist, despite knowing its potential for harms to the ecosystem or economy, is also an invasive species cynic. From these examples, it should be clear that this form of ISD is quite different from what we would think of as a “science denialist”. They understand the science, but it just does not motivate their beliefs or behaviour on this topic.
This research was also recently presented at the International Conference on Aquatic Invasive Species by co-author Noelle G. Stratton. Invasive species nihilism, in particular, prompted discussion both in-person and on social media.
Invasive species nihilism is the form that does not appear to take into account the science behind invasive species or their management at all. Rather, it revolves around the idea that invasive species research, management, or engagement are essentially a waste of time. The efforts were pointless and the results useless. This framing also differed from the other two forms in that the folks who expressed these beliefs often directly approached invasive species practitioners during the course of their work to inform them that their job was meaningless and to ask them why they bothered. This type of framing has the greatest potential to impact invasive species researchers and practitioners personally, and it is potentially the most difficult form of denialism to surmount during engagement and management efforts.
How can invasive species denialism impact management efforts?
ISD has the potential to hinder management efforts in a few different ways. Invasive species denialists may slow down decision-making by stalling or halting discussions with other stakeholders. In some cases, invasive species cynics have taken direct action to interfere with the implementation of policies that would aid with management efforts. Invasive species nihilism could make some stakeholders less likely to engage with managers because they have come to believe that management is pointless, and managers themselves may endure the stress of hearing that their work is not of value to people with this perspective. The effects that ISD may have on management are varied and depend largely on the type of framing of ISD being used. Similarly, the way that we respond to someone that we believe to be an invasive species denialist should be informed by the framing of ISD they are using.
“An understanding of these framings is also vital to respond to instances of ISD appropriately. Whether we are being confronted with anti-science contrarianism, environmental cynicism, or outbursts of nihilism, should inform our responses and our strategies to counter these positions.” (Stratton et al. 2022)
The framings of ISD explored in this research suggest that a diversity of interpretations of species movements, and value judgments about their impacts and the need for management, exist. This has the potential to problematize reductionist claims that all critiques of invasive species management are simply a denial of scientific facts. These results provide evidence that even when there is agreement on the impacts of invasive species on ecosystems, some stakeholders nevertheless deny the need for, or benefit of managing invasive species. This study further contributes to ongoing scholarly and practitioner conversations about the normative assumptions of invasive species biology and their implications for invasive species management and governance.
Research article:
Stratton NG, Mandrak NE, Klenk N (2022) From anti-science to environmental nihilism: the Fata Morgana of invasive species denialism. NeoBiota 75: 39-56. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.75.90631
Image credits: diagram by NG Stratton; comic panels by NG Stratton, via material from Flickr (ChrisA1995, CC BY 2.0; Mike, CC BY-NC-SA 2.0; the-difference CC BY-NC-SA 2.0) and Studio Alternativi (Esetefania Quevedo).
Coralita overgrowing vegetation. Photo from https://www.wur.nl/en/show/invasive-plants-in-caribbean-netherlands.htm
A recent study in One Ecosystem has estimated the severe loss of ecosystem service value as a result of the widespread invasion by the plant species Coralita (Antigonon leptopus) on the Caribbean island of St. Eustatius. The results illustrate the drastic impact that a single invader can have on the economy of a small island and inform policy makers about priority areas for invasive species management.
See for full article: Huisman, S., Jesse, W., Ellers, J., & van Beukering, P. (2021). Mapping the economic loss of ecosystem services caused by the invasive plant species Antigonon leptopus on the Dutch Caribbean Island of St. Eustatius. One Ecosystem, 6, e72881. https://doi.org/10.3897/oneeco.6.e72881
The invader: Coralita
Flowering coralita, creeping vertically over fences and horizontally across the ground.
Coralita intertwined with electricity box and cables. Photo by Adam Mitchell
Coralita is a fast-growing, climbing vine with beautiful pink or white flowers. Originally from Mexico, it was introduced as a popular garden plant to many Caribbean islands and around the world. Its fast-growing nature means that it can outcompete most native species for terrain, quickly becoming the dominant species and reducing overall diversity (Jesse et al. 2020, Nature Today 2020, Eppinga et al. 2021a). This is especially the case on St. Eustatius, where published ground surveys indicate that the plant already appears on 33 percent of the island.
Losses of ecosystem services
Coralita overgrowing cars. Photo by Rotem Zilber
We estimated the total terrestrial ecosystem service (ES) value on St. Eustatius to be $2.7 million per year by mapping five important terrestrial ecosystem services: Tourism, Carbon sequestration, Non-use (i.e., intrinsic biodiversity) value, Local recreational value, and Archeological value. Subsequently, we calculated Coralita-induced loss of ecosystem services under two realistic distributional scenarios of Coralita cover on the island: 3% of island dominantly covered (based on Haber et al. 2021, Nature Today 2021) and 36% dominant cover (if entire range would reach dominant coverage), causing an annual ES value loss of $39,804 and $576,704 respectively. The highest ES value (17,584 $/ha/year) as well as the most severe losses (3% scenario: 184 $/ha/year; 36% scenario: 1,257 $/ha/year) were located on the dormant Quill volcano; a highly biodiverse location with popular hiking trails for locals and tourists alike.
Consequences for policy makers and practitioners
Coralita blocking water a drainage channel. Photo by Wendy Jesse.
There is an urgent need for studies such as this one that help to bridge the gap between academia and policy planning, as these translate abstract numbers into intuitive information. Instead of invasive species being just a biological term, direct impacts on people’s value systems and sources of income immediately strike a chord. I experience this on a daily basis, because in addition to being a coauthor on this paper, I currently work as a policy employee in nature protection and management.
Coralita overgrowing archeological heritage on St. Eustatius. Photo from St. Eustatius Center for Archeological Research (SECAR)
This study helps to prioritize locations for invasive species prevention, management, eradication, and restoration. It is imperative that invasive species do not reach locations of high ecosystem service value. Management of isolated satellite patches of Coralita close to locations of high ES value will likely be most effective in halting the plant’s invasive spread (Eppinga et al. 2021b). Setting up a targeted monitoring and rapid response strategy, as well as legislation for biosecurity measures to prevent other invasive species from entering the island, would likely help to reduce impacts on the important ecosystem services on St. Eustatius.
References
Academic literature:
Eppinga, M. B., Haber, E. A., Sweeney, L., Santos, M. J., Rietkerk, M., & Wassen, M. J. (2021a). Antigonon leptopus invasion is associated with plant community disassembly in a Caribbean island ecosystem. Biological Invasions, 1-19.
Eppinga M, Baudena M, Haber E, Rietkerk M, Wassen M, Santos M (2021b) Spatially explicit removal strategies increase the efficiency of invasive plant species control.
Ecological Applications 31 (3): 1‑13. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2257Haber E, Santos M, Leitão P, Schwieder M, Ketner P, Ernst J, Rietkerk M, Wassen M, Eppinga M (2021) High spatial resolution mapping identifies habitat characteristics of the invasive vine Antigonon leptopuson St. Eustatius (Lesser Antilles). Biotropica 53 (3): 941‑953. https://doi.org/10.1111/btp.12939
Jesse, W. A., Molleman, J., Franken, O., Lammers, M., Berg, M. P., Behm, J. E., … & Ellers, J. (2020). Disentangling the effects of plant species invasion and urban development on arthropod community composition. Global change biology, 26(6), 3294-3306.
The “Recent advancements in the risk screening of freshwater and terrestrial non-native species” Special Issue in the open-access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal NeoBiota is now open for submissions. The deadline for submission is 30 April 2022, with the issue scheduled for publication in August 2022.
The “Recent advancements in the risk screening of freshwater and terrestrial non-native species” Special Issue in the open-access, peer-reviewed scholarly journal NeoBiotais now open for submissions.
Update: The deadline for submission has been extended to 30 April 2022, with the issue expected to be published in August 2022.
The new special issue is expected to collate prominent contributors from the field of invasive ecology, thereby addressing existing gaps in the knowledge about both freshwater and terrestrial non-native species and their management.
The editors note that despite the current efforts and measures to monitor and tackle the spread of non-native species, and especially those posing imminent threat to local biodiversity and ecosystems, further expansion of such populations has increasingly been recorded in recent years. Of special concern are developing countries, where legislation for controlling non-native species is still lacking.
A major problem is that – as of today – we are still missing on risk screening studies needed to provide evidence for the invasiveness potential of many non-native species across several taxonomic groups, which would then be used to support specific conservation efforts. Unfortunately, this is particularly true for species inhabiting the world’s biodiversity hotspots, point out the editors.
Risk-based identification of non-native species is an essential process to inform policy and actions for conservation and management of biodiversity. Previously published papers on risk screening of aquatic non-native species, and especially those using the most widely-employed ‘-ISK’ decision-support toolkits, have attracted mounting interest from the wider scientific community.
A worryingly high number of Asian bamboo longhorn beetles turn out to have been emerging across Europe for about a century already, finds an international research team. Curiously, the records of the invasive, non-native to the Old Continent species are mostly sourced from citizen scientists and online platforms, which proves the power of involving the public in species monitoring. The study is published in the open-access, peer-reviewed scientific journal BioRisk.
A worryingly high number of Asian bamboo longhorn beetles (Chlorophorus annularis) turn out to have been emerging across Europe for about a century already, finds an international research team, headed by researchers from the Center of Natural History, University of Hamburg, Germany. Curiously, the recent records of the invasive, non-native to the Old Continent species are mostly sourced from citizen scientists and online platforms, which proves the power of involving the public in species monitoring. The study is published in the open-access, peer-reviewed scientific journal BioRisk.
In our globalised world, which has already become victim to climate change and biodiversity loss, non-native species present a further threat to our ecosystems. Thus, the rising accounts of newly recorded alien species are of serious concern to both scientists and (inter)national institutions. However, surveying non-native species remains limited to a small fraction of species: those known to be particularly invasive and harmful.
One of the multitude of non-native species that are currently lacking efficient and coordinated surveying efforts is the Asian bamboo longhorn beetle (Chlorophorus annularis). Naturally occurring in temperate and tropical Southeast Asia, the insect feeds on a variety of plants, but prefers bamboo. Thus, due to the international trade of bamboo and the insects ‘travelling’ with the wood, the species has continuously been expanding its distribution around the world. Its first appearance in Europe was recorded back in 1924, when it was identified in England.
Bamboo longhorn beetle captured in Braintree, United Kingdom Photo by Stephen Rolls
Back to our days, during a fieldwork practice for students at the University of Hamburg, held within the city because of the COVID-19 travelling restrictions, the team stumbled across a longhorn beetle, later identified by scientists as the Asian bamboo borer. Furthermore, it became clear that there were even more recent records published across different citizen science platforms, such as iNaturalist, iRecord and Waarneming.nl. Having taken the contacts of the citizen scientists from there, the researchers approached them to ask for additional collection details and images, which were readily provided. As a result, the researchers formally confirmed the presence of the Asian bamboo borer in Belgium and the Netherlands. In total, they reported thirteen new introductions of the species in Europe, which translates to a 42% increase of the records of the species for the continent.
“In light of the warming climate and a growing abundance of ornamental bamboo plants in Europe, the beetle might get permanently established. Not only could it become a garden pest, but it could also incur significant costs to the bamboo-processing industry,”
comments Dr Matthias Seidel, lead author of the study.
Having realised the potential of citizen science for bridging the gaps in invasive species monitoring, the researchers now propose for specialised platforms to be established with the aim to familiarise non-professional scientists with non-native species of interest and provide them with more sophisticated reporting tools. The aim is to speed up the identification of important alien species by collating records of specific species of interest, which are flagged and regularly exported from other citizen science databases and platforms.
Bamboo longhorn beetle captured in Lincoln, United Kingdom Photo by Sheena Cotter
Original source:
Seidel M, Lüttke M, Cocquempot C, Potts K, Heeney WJ, Husemann M (2021) Citizen scientists significantly improve our knowledge on the non-native longhorn beetle Chlorophorus annularis (Fabricius, 1787) (Coleoptera, Cerambycidae) in Europe. BioRisk 16: 1–13. https://doi.org/10.3897/biorisk.16.61099
In a new study, published in the peer-reviewed open-access scholarly journal Neobiota, scientists estimated the desire of Australians to own non-native and/or illegal alien pets and the major trends in this practice. In addition, the team suggests ways to improve biosecurity awareness in the country.
Juvenile green iguanas for sale at Repticon Trading Convention 2018 in Palm Springs, Florida Photo by Adam Toomes
Unsustainable trade of species is a major pathway for the introduction of invasive alien species at distant localities and at higher frequencies. It is also a major driver of over-exploitation of wild native populations. In a new study, published in the peer-reviewed open-access scholarly journal Neobiota, scientists estimated the desire of Australians to own non-native and/or illegal alien pets and the major trends in this practice. In addition, the team suggests ways to improve biosecurity awareness in the country.
Over the last two decades, Australia has been experiencing an increased amount of non-native incursions from species prominent in the international pet trade, such as rose-ringed parakeets, corn snakes and red-eared sliders. On many occasions, these animals are smuggled into the country only to escape or be released in the wild.
In general, the Australian regulations on international pet trade are highly stringent, in order to minimise biosecurity and conservation risks. Some highly-desirable species represent an ongoing conservation threat and biosecurity risk via the pet-release invasion pathway. However, lack of consistent surveillance of alien pets held, legally or otherwise, in Australia remains the main challenge. While there are species which are not allowed to be imported, they are legal for domestic trade within the country. Pet keepers have the capacity to legally or illegally acquire desired pets if they are not accessible through importation, and the number of such traders is unquantified.
Since keeping most of the alien pets in Australia is either illegal or not properly regulated, it is really difficult to quantify and assess the public demand for alien wildlife.
A juvenile ball python for sale at Repticon Trading Convention 2018 in Palm Springs, Florida Photo by Adam Toomes
“We obtained records of anonymous public enquiries to the Australian Commonwealth Department of Agriculture, Water and the Environment relating to the legality of importation of various alien taxa. We aimed to investigate whether species desired in Australia were biased towards being threatened by extinction, as indicated by broader research on pet demand or towards being invasive species elsewhere, which would indicate trade-related biosecurity risks”,
According to the research team’s analysis, pets desired by Australians are significantly biased towards threatened species, invasive species and species prominent in the U.S. pet trade.
“This novel finding is of great concern for biosecurity agencies because it suggests that a filtering process is occurring where illegally smuggled animals may already be “pre-selected” to have the characteristics that are correlated with invasive species,”
warns Mr. Adam Toomes.
However, the bias towards species already traded within the U.S. suggests that there is potential to use this as a means of predicting future Australian desire, as well as the acquisition of pets driven by desire. Future research from the Invasion Science & Wildlife Ecology Group at The University of Adelaide will investigate whether Australian seizures of illegal pets can be predicted using U.S. trade data.
###
Original source:
Toomes A, Stringham OC, Mitchell L, Ross JV, Cassey P (2020) Australia’s wish list of exotic pets: biosecurity and conservation implications of desired alien and illegal pet species. NeoBiota 60: 43-59. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.60.51431
