Unified system describing factors related to the eradication of an alien plant species

Background

In the field of biological invasions science, a problem of many overlapping terms arose among eradication assessment frameworks. Additionally there is a need to construct a universally applicable eradication evaluation system. To unify the terminology and propose an eradication feasibility assessment scale we created the Unified System for assessing Eradication Feasibility (USEF) as a complex tool of factors for the analysis of eradications of alien (both invasive and candidate) plant species. It compiles 24 factors related to eradication success probability reported earlier in the literature and arranges them in a hierarchical system (context/group/factor/component) with a possibility to score their influence on eradication success.

Methodology

After a literature survey we analyzed, rearranged and defined each factor giving it an intuitive name along with the list of its synonyms and similar and/or related terms from the literature. Each factor influencing eradication feasibility is ascribed into one of four groups depending on the context that best matches the factor: location context (size and location of infestation, ease of access), species context (fitness and fecundity, detectability), human context (knowledge, cognition and resources to act) and reinvasion context (invasion pathways). We also devised a simple ordinal scale to assess each factor's influence on eradication feasibility.

Conclusions

The system may be used to report and analyze eradication campaign data in order to (i) prioritize alien species for eradication, (ii) create the strategy for controlling invasive plants, (iii) compare efficiency of different eradication actions, (iv) find gaps in knowledge disabling a sound eradication campaign assessment. The main advantage of using our system is unification of reporting eradication experience data used by researchers performing different eradication actions in different systems.

The Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD)’s Post-2020 target on invasive alien species – what should it include and how should it be monitored?

The year 2020 and the next few years are critical for the development of the global biodiversity policy agenda until the mid-21st century, with countries agreeing to a Post-2020 Global Biodiversity Framework under the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD). Reducing the substantial and still rising impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) on biodiversity will be essential if we are to meet the 2050 Vision where biodiversity is valued, conserved, and restored. A tentative target has been developed by the IUCN Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG), and formally submitted to the CBD for consideration in the discussion on the Post-2020 targets. Here, we present properties of this proposal that we regard as essential for an effective Post-2020 Framework. The target should explicitly consider the three main components of biological invasions, i.e. (i) pathways, (ii) species, and (iii) sites; the target should also be (iv) quantitative, (v) supplemented by a set of indicators that can be applied to track progress, and (vi) evaluated at medium- (2030) and long-term (2050) time horizons. We also present a proposed set of indicators to track progress. These properties and indicators are based on the increasing scientific understanding of biological invasions and effectiveness of responses. Achieving an ambitious action-oriented target so that the 2050 Vision can be achieved will require substantial effort and resources, and the cooperation of a wide range of stakeholders.

Emerging infectious diseases and biological invasions: a call for a One Health collaboration in science and management

The study and management of emerging infectious diseases (EIDs) and of biological invasions both address the ecology of human-associated biological phenomena in a rapidly changing world. However, the two fields work mostly in parallel rather than in concert. This review explores how the general phenomenon of an organism rapidly increasing in range or abundance is caused, highlights the similarities and differences between research on EIDs and invasions, and discusses shared management insights and approaches. EIDs can arise by: (i) crossing geographical barriers due to human-mediated dispersal, (ii) crossing compatibility barriers due to evolution, and (iii) lifting of environmental barriers due to environmental change. All these processes can be implicated in biological invasions, but only the first defines them. Research on EIDs is embedded within the One Health concept-the notion that human, animal and ecosystem health are interrelated and that holistic approaches encompassing all three components are needed to respond to threats to human well-being. We argue that for sustainable development, biological invasions should be explicitly considered within One Health. Management goals for the fields are the same, and direct collaborations between invasion scientists, disease ecologists and epidemiologists on modelling, risk assessment, monitoring and management would be mutually beneficial.