A multiregional assessment of transnational pathways of introduction

The Genus Kalanchoe (Crassulaceae) in Ecuador: From Gardens to the Wild

The genus Kalanchoe, mostly indigenous from Madagascar and Tropical Africa, is widely traded for ornamental value. In this study, we provided an updated list of wild and cultivated Kalanchoe taxa in Ecuador; we analyzed the temporal–spatial pattern of their records, and we categorized the invasion status for each taxon and its environment preferences. The records of any taxa belonging to this genus were compiled from an extensive search using various information sources. Our results confirmed the presence of 16 taxa of Kalanchoe in the country. Seven species and a hybrid were detected in the wild. Kalanchoe densiflora, K. laxiflora, K. pinnata, K. tubiflora, and K. ×houghtonii were categorized as invasive. We detected invasive records of some of these plants in protected areas. Almost all taxa had at least one record as cultivated, suggesting that the invasion pathway is ornamental trade. Kalanchoe pinnata individuals in the wild were recorded in the four biogeographic regions of Ecuador, which could be associated with the wide range of precipitations and temperatures in which the species may dwell. Our study highlights the importance of reducing the ornamental value and limiting the use of Kalanchoe taxa with invasive potential in horticulture and promoting, instead, the use of indigenous species.

Introduction pathways of economically costly invasive alien species

Introduction pathways play a pivotal role in the success of Invasive Alien Species (IAS)—the subset of alien species that have a negative environmental and/or socio-economic impact. Pathways refer to the fundamental processes that leads to the introduction of a species from one geographical location to another—marking the beginning of all alien species invasions. Increased knowledge of pathways is essential to help reduce the number of introductions and impacts of IAS and ultimately improve their management. Here we use the InvaCost database, a comprehensive repository on the global monetary impacts of IAS, combined with pathway data classified using the Convention on Biological Diversity (CBD) hierarchical classification and compiled from CABI Invasive Species Compendium, the Global Invasive Species Database (GISD) and the published literature to address five key points. Data were available for 478 individual IAS. For these, we found that both the total and annual average cost per species introduced through the ‘Stowaway’ (US$144.9bn; US$89.4m) and ‘Contaminant’ pathways (US$99.3bn; US$158.0m) were higher than species introduced primarily through the ‘Escape’ (US$87.4bn; US$25.4m) and ‘Release’ pathways (US$64.2bn; US$16.4m). Second, the recorded costs (both total and average) of species introduced unintentionally was higher than that from species introduced intentionally. Third, insects and mammals, respectively, accounted for the greatest proportion of the total cost of species introduced unintentionally and intentionally respectively, at least of the available records; ‘Stowaway’ had the highest recorded costs in Asia, Central America, North America and Diverse/Unspecified regions. Fourthly, the total cost of a species in a given location is not related to the year of first record of introduction, but time gaps might blur the true pattern. Finally, the total and average cost of IAS were not related to their number of introduction pathways. Although our findings are directly limited by the available data, they provide important material which can contribute to pathway priority measures, notably by complementing studies on pathways associated with ecologically harmful IAS. They also highlight the crucial need to fill the remaining data gaps—something that will be critical in prioritising limited management budgets to combat the current acceleration of species invasions.