1
|
McGaughran A, Dhami MK, Parvizi E, Vaughan AL, Gleeson DM, Hodgins KA, Rollins LA, Tepolt CK, Turner KG, Atsawawaranunt K, Battlay P, Congrains C, Crottini A, Dennis TPW, Lange C, Liu XP, Matheson P, North HL, Popovic I, Rius M, Santure AW, Stuart KC, Tan HZ, Wang C, Wilson J. Genomic Tools in Biological Invasions: Current State and Future Frontiers. Genome Biol Evol 2024; 16:evad230. [PMID: 38109935 PMCID: PMC10776249 DOI: 10.1093/gbe/evad230] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/15/2023] [Revised: 11/16/2023] [Accepted: 12/12/2023] [Indexed: 12/20/2023] Open
Abstract
Human activities are accelerating rates of biological invasions and climate-driven range expansions globally, yet we understand little of how genomic processes facilitate the invasion process. Although most of the literature has focused on underlying phenotypic correlates of invasiveness, advances in genomic technologies are showing a strong link between genomic variation and invasion success. Here, we consider the ability of genomic tools and technologies to (i) inform mechanistic understanding of biological invasions and (ii) solve real-world issues in predicting and managing biological invasions. For both, we examine the current state of the field and discuss how genomics can be leveraged in the future. In addition, we make recommendations pertinent to broader research issues, such as data sovereignty, metadata standards, collaboration, and science communication best practices that will require concerted efforts from the global invasion genomics community.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Angela McGaughran
- Te Aka Mātuatua/School of Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
| | - Manpreet K Dhami
- Biocontrol and Molecular Ecology, Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand
- School of Biological Sciences, Waipapa Taumata Rau/University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Elahe Parvizi
- Te Aka Mātuatua/School of Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
| | - Amy L Vaughan
- Biocontrol and Molecular Ecology, Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand
| | - Dianne M Gleeson
- Centre for Conservation Ecology and Genomics, Faculty of Science and Technology, University of Canberra, Canberra, ACT, Australia
| | - Kathryn A Hodgins
- School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Lee A Rollins
- Evolution and Ecology Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW, Australia
| | - Carolyn K Tepolt
- Department of Biology, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, MA, USA
| | - Kathryn G Turner
- Department of Biological Sciences, Idaho State University, Pocatello, ID, USA
| | - Kamolphat Atsawawaranunt
- School of Biological Sciences, Waipapa Taumata Rau/University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Paul Battlay
- School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| | - Carlos Congrains
- Entomology Section, Department of Plant and Environmental Protection Sciences, University of Hawaiʻi at Mānoa, Honolulu, HI 96822, USA
- US Department of Agriculture-Agricultural Research Service, Daniel K. Inouye US Pacific Basin Agricultural Research Center, Hilo, HI 96720, USA
| | - Angelica Crottini
- CIBIO, Centro de Investigação em Biodiversidade e Recursos Genéticos, InBIO Laboratório Associado, Campus de Vairão, Universidade do Porto, Vairão 4485-661, Portugal
- Departamento de Biologia, Faculdade de Ciências, Universidade do Porto, Porto 4169–007, Portugal
- BIOPOLIS Program in Genomics, Biodiversity and Land Planning, CIBIO, Vairão 4485-661, Portugal
| | - Tristan P W Dennis
- Department of Vector Biology, Liverpool School of Tropical Medicine, Liverpool, UK
| | - Claudia Lange
- Biocontrol and Molecular Ecology, Manaaki Whenua Landcare Research, Lincoln, New Zealand
| | - Xiaoyue P Liu
- Department of Marine Science, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
| | - Paige Matheson
- Te Aka Mātuatua/School of Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand
| | - Henry L North
- Department of Zoology, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK
| | - Iva Popovic
- School of the Environment, University of Queensland, Brisbane, QLD, Australia
| | - Marc Rius
- Centre for Advanced Studies of Blanes (CEAB, CSIC), Accés a la Cala Sant Francesc, Blanes, Spain
- Department of Zoology, Centre for Ecological Genomics and Wildlife Conservation, University of Johannesburg, Johannesburg 2006, South Africa
| | - Anna W Santure
- School of Biological Sciences, Waipapa Taumata Rau/University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Katarina C Stuart
- School of Biological Sciences, Waipapa Taumata Rau/University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Hui Zhen Tan
- School of Biological Sciences, Waipapa Taumata Rau/University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
| | - Cui Wang
- The Organismal and Evolutionary Biology Research Programme, University of Helsinki, Helsinki, Finland
| | - Jonathan Wilson
- School of Biological Sciences, Monash University, Melbourne, VIC, Australia
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Mason NWH, Kirk NA, Price RJ, Law R, Bowman R, Sprague RI. Science for social licence to arrest an ecosystem-transforming invasion. Biol Invasions 2023; 25:873-888. [PMID: 36439632 PMCID: PMC9676737 DOI: 10.1007/s10530-022-02953-w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Figures] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 11/14/2021] [Accepted: 10/25/2022] [Indexed: 11/20/2022]
Abstract
The primary role for scientific information in addressing complex environmental problems, such as biological invasions, is generally assumed to be as a guide for management decisions. However, scientific information often plays a minor role in decision-making, with practitioners instead relying on professional experience and local knowledge. We explore alternative pathways by which scientific information could help reduce the spread and impacts of invasive species. Our study centred on attempts to understand the main motivations and constraints of three local governance bodies responsible for the management of invasive (wilding) conifer species in the southern South Island of New Zealand in achieving strategic and operational goals. We used a combination of workshop discussions, questionnaire responses and visits to field sites to elicit feedback from study participants. We applied a mixed inductive-deductive thematic analysis approach to derive themes from the feedback received. The three main themes identified were: (1) impacts of wilding conifers and goals for wilding conifer control, (2) barriers to achieving medium- and long-term goals, and (3) science needed to support wilding conifer control. Participants identified reversal and prevention of both instrumental (e.g. reduced water availability for agriculture) and intrinsic (e.g. loss of biodiversity and landscape values) impacts of wilding conifer invasions as primary motivators behind wilding conifer control. Barriers to achieving goals were overwhelmingly social, relating either to unwillingness of landowners to participate or poorly designed regulatory frameworks. Consequently, science needs related primarily to gaining social licence to remove wilding conifers from private land and for more appropriate regulations. Scientific information provided via spread and impacts forecasting models was viewed as a key source of scientific information in gaining social licence. International experience suggests that invasive species control programmes often face significant external social barriers. Thus, for many biological invasions, the primary role of science might be to achieve social licence and regulatory support for the long-term goals of invasive species control programmes and the management interventions required to achieve those goals.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
| | | | | | - Richard Law
- Manaaki Whenua – Landcare Research, Palmerston North, New Zealand
| | - Richard Bowman
- New Zealand Wilding Conifer Group, 200 Tuam St, Christchurch Central City, Christchurch, 8011 New Zealand
| | - Rowan I. Sprague
- New Zealand Wilding Conifer Group, 200 Tuam St, Christchurch Central City, Christchurch, 8011 New Zealand
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Tataridas A, Jabran K, Kanatas P, Oliveira RS, Freitas H, Travlos I. Early detection, herbicide resistance screening, and integrated management of invasive plant species: a review. PEST MANAGEMENT SCIENCE 2022; 78:3957-3972. [PMID: 35510308 DOI: 10.1002/ps.6963] [Citation(s) in RCA: 9] [Impact Index Per Article: 4.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 01/05/2022] [Revised: 04/27/2022] [Accepted: 05/04/2022] [Indexed: 06/14/2023]
Abstract
Invasive plant species (IPS) are often considered weeds that cause high yield losses in crops, negatively affect the environment, and disrupt certain ecosystem services. The negative impact of IPS on biodiversity is increasing and disturbing native vegetation. The management of plant invasions can be divided in two phases (before and after invasion). Prior to introduction it is crucial to develop the knowledge base (biology, ecology, distribution, impact, management) on IPS, prevention measures and risk assessment. After introduction if eradication fails, the monitoring and the integrated management of IPS are imperative to prevent the naturalization and further dispersal. This review uses two major invasive weed species (Amaranthus palmeri S. Wats. and Solanum elaeagnifolium Cav.) as case studies to propose a framework for early detection, rapid herbicide resistance screening, and integrated management. The holistic framework that is presented exploits recent: (i) novel detection tools, (ii) rapid tests and assays for herbicide resistance, and (iii) biology, ecology, distribution traits, and management tools for the IPS. Farmers, advisors, researchers, and policymakers need briefing on IPS growth dynamics, adaptability rates, and response to conventional and novel treatments to prevent new invasions, eradicate isolated stands, and mitigate the impact of invasive weed species in the long term. © 2022 Society of Chemical Industry.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Alexandros Tataridas
- Laboratory of Agronomy, Department of Crop Science, Agricultural University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| | - Khawar Jabran
- Department of Plant Production and Technologies, Faculty of Agricultural Sciences and Technologies, Nigde Omer Halisdemir University, Nigde, Turkey
| | | | - Rui S Oliveira
- Center for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Helena Freitas
- Center for Functional Ecology, Department of Life Sciences, University of Coimbra, Coimbra, Portugal
| | - Ilias Travlos
- Laboratory of Agronomy, Department of Crop Science, Agricultural University of Athens, Athens, Greece
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Bellingham PJ, Arnst EA, Clarkson BD, Etherington TR, Forester LJ, Shaw WB, Sprague R, Wiser SK, Peltzer DA. The right tree in the right place? A major economic tree species poses major ecological threats. Biol Invasions 2022. [DOI: 10.1007/s10530-022-02892-6] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.5] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 11/29/2022]
Abstract
AbstractTree species in the Pinaceae are some of the most widely introduced non-native tree species globally, especially in the southern hemisphere. In New Zealand, plantations of radiata pine (Pinus radiata D. Don) occupy c. 1.6 million ha and form 90% of planted forests. Although radiata pine has naturalized since 1904, there is a general view in New Zealand that this species has not invaded widely. We comprehensively review where radiata pine has invaded throughout New Zealand. We used a combination of observational data and climate niche modelling to reveal that invasion has occurred nationally. Climate niche modelling demonstrates that while current occurrences are patchy, up to 76% of the land area (i.e. 211,388 km2) is climatically capable of supporting populations. Radiata pine has mainly invaded grasslands and shrublands, but also some forests. Notably, it has invaded lower-statured vegetation, including three classes of naturally uncommon ecosystems, primary successions and secondary successions. Overall, our findings demonstrate pervasive and ongoing invasion of radiata pine outside plantations. The relatively high growth rates and per individual effects of radiata pine may result in strong effects on naturally uncommon ecosystems and may alter successional trajectories. Local and central government currently manage radiata pine invasions while propagule pressure from existing and new plantations grows, hence greater emphasis is warranted both on managing current invasions and proactively preventing future radiata pine invasions. We therefore recommend a levy on new non-native conifer plantations to offset costs of managing invasions, and stricter regulations to protect vulnerable ecosystems. A levy on economic uses of invasive species to offset costs of managing invasions alongside stricter regulations to protect vulnerable ecosystems could be a widely adopted measure to avert future negative impacts.
Collapse
|