Recent advances in availability and synthesis of the economic costs of biological invasions

Biological invasions are a global challenge that has received insufficient attention. Recently available cost syntheses have provided policy- and decision makers with reliable and up-to-date information on the economic impacts of biological invasions, aiming to motivate effective management. The resultant InvaCost database is now publicly and freely accessible and enables rapid extraction of monetary cost information. This has facilitated knowledge sharing, developed a more integrated and multidisciplinary network of researchers, and forged multidisciplinary collaborations among diverse organizations and stakeholders. Over 50 scientific publications so far have used the database and have provided detailed assessments of invasion costs across geographic, taxonomic, and spatiotemporal scales. These studies have provided important information that can guide future policy and legislative decisions on the management of biological invasions while simultaneously attracting public and media attention. We provide an overview of the improved availability, reliability, standardization, and defragmentation of monetary costs; discuss how this has enhanced invasion science as a discipline; and outline directions for future development

Variability in the summer movements, habitat use and thermal biology of two fish species in a temperate river

The ability of fish to cope with warm water temperatures in summer depends on factors including their thermal traits and the ability of individuals to access cool-water refugia. Knowledge is highly limited on the in situ responses of many fishes to elevated summer temperatures, including whether they express behavioural thermoregulation. The responses of two riverine species to summer water temperatures were tested here using the movement metrics, spatial habitat use and body temperatures of individual European barbel Barbus barbus (‘barbel’) and common bream Abramis brama (‘bream’) versus river temperatures. Acoustic biotelemetry was applied in the lower River Severn basin, western Britain, in summer 2021 (barbel) and 2022 (bream), where individuals could move across > 150 km of river, including a tributary of cooler water. Across all individuals, bream occupied 37 km of river length (mainstem only), with low inter-individual variability in their spatial habitat use, movements and body temperatures. In contrast, barbel occupied 62 km of river (main river/tributary), with relatively high inter-individual variability in spatial habitat use, movements and body temperatures, with higher variation in body temperatures as river temperatures increased (maximum mean daily temperature difference between individuals on the same day: 4.2 °C). Although warmer individuals generally moved more, their activity was greatest at relatively low temperatures and higher flows, and neither species revealed any evidence of behavioural thermoregulation during elevated temperatures. Enabling phenotypically diverse fish populations to express their natural behaviours and thermal preferences in summer water temperatures thus requires maintaining their free-ranging in thermally heterogenous habitats

A global assessment of freshwater fish introductions in Mediterranean-climate regions

Mediterranean-climate regions (med-regions) are global hotspots of endemism 40 facing mounting environmental threats associated with human-related activities, including the ecological impacts associated with non-native species introductions. We review freshwater fish introductions across med-regions to evaluate the influences of non-native fishes on the biogeography of taxonomic and functional diversity. Our synthesis revealed that 136 freshwater fish species (26 families, 13 orders) have been introduced into med-regions globally. These introductions, and local extirpations, have increased taxonomic and functional faunal similarity among regions by an average of 7.5% (4.6-11.4%; Jaccard) and 7.2% (1.4-14.0%; Bray-Curtis), respectively. Faunal homogenization was highest in Chile and the western Med Basin, whereas sw Cape and the Aegean Sea drainages showed slight differentiation (decrease in faunal similarity) over time. At present, fish faunas of different med-regions have widespread species in common (e.g. Gambusia holbrooki, Cyprinus carpio, Oncorhynchus mykiss, Carassius auratus, and Micropterus salmoides) which are typically large-bodied, non migratory, have higher physiological tolerance, and display fast population growth rates. Our findings suggest that intentional and accidental introductions of freshwater fish have dissolved dispersal barriers and significantly changed the present-day biogeography of med-regions across the globe. Conservation challenges in med-regions include understanding the ecosystem consequences of non-native species at macro-ecological scales.This is an author's peer-reviewed final manuscript, as accepted by the publisher. The published article is copyrighted by Springer and can be found at: http://link.springer.com/journal/10750.Keywords: Conservation biogeography, Introduced species, Non-native species, Taxonomic homogenization, Functional homogenizatio

Native drivers of fish life history traits are lost during the invasion process

Rapid adaptation to global change can counter vulnerability of species to population declines and extinction. Theoretically, under such circumstances both genetic variation and phenotypic plasticity can maintain population fitness, but empirical support for this is currently limited. Here, we aim to characterize the role of environmental and genetic diversity, and their prior evolutionary history (via haplogroup profiles) in shaping patterns of life history traits during biological invasion. Data were derived from both genetic and life history traits including a morphological analysis of 29 native and invasive populations of topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva coupled with climatic variables from each location. General additive models were constructed to explain distribution of somatic growth rate (SGR) data across native and invasive ranges, with model selection performed using Akaike's information criteria. Genetic and environmental drivers that structured the life history of populations in their native range were less influential in their invasive populations. For some vertebrates at least, fitness-related trait shifts do not seem to be dependent on the level of genetic diversity or haplogroup makeup of the initial introduced propagule, nor of the availability of local environmental conditions being similar to those experienced in their native range. As long as local conditions are not beyond the species physiological threshold, its local establishment and invasive potential are likely to be determined by local drivers, such as density-dependent effects linked to resource availability or to local biotic resistance

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

\ua9 2024 The Authors. Biological Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cambridge Philosophical Society. Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science – a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline – the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. ‘non-native’, ‘alien’, ‘invasive’ or ‘invader’, ‘exotic’, ‘non-indigenous’, ‘naturalised’, ‘pest’) to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) ‘non-native’, denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) ‘established non-native’, i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) ‘invasive non-native’ – populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising ‘spread’ for classifying invasiveness and ‘impact’ for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species

Consistency of impact assessment protocols for non-native species

Standardized tools are needed to identify and prioritize the most harmful non-native species (NNS). A plethora of assessment protocols have been developed to evaluate the current and potential impacts of non-native species, but consistency among them has received limited attention. To estimate the consistency across impact assessment protocols, 89 specialists in biological invasions used 11 protocols to screen 57 NNS (2614 assessments). We tested if the consistency in the impact scoring across assessors, quantified as the coefficient of variation (CV), was dependent on the characteristics of the protocol, the taxonomic group and the expertise of the assessor. Mean CV across assessors was 40%, with a maximum of 223%. CV was lower for protocols with a low number of score levels, which demanded high levels of expertise, and when the assessors had greater expertise on the assessed species. The similarity among protocols with respect to the final scores was higher when the protocols considered the same impact types. We conclude that all protocols led to considerable inconsistency among assessors. In order to improve consistency, we highlight the importance of selecting assessors with high expertise, providing clear guidelines and adequate training but also deriving final decisions collaboratively by consensus

A global review and meta-analysis of applications of the freshwater Fish Invasiveness Screening Kit

The freshwater Fish Invasiveness Screening Kit (FISK) has been applied in 35 risk assessment areas in 45 countries across the six inhabited continents (11 applications using FISK v1; 25 using FISK v2). The present study aimed: to assess the breadth of FISK applications and the confidence (certainty) levels associated with the decision-support tool’s 49 questions and its ability to distinguish between taxa of low-to-medium and high risk of becoming invasive, and thus provide climate-specific, generalised, calibrated thresholds for risk level categorisation; and to identify the most potentially invasive freshwater fish species on a global level. The 1973 risk assessments were carried out by 70 + experts on 372 taxa (47 of the 51 species listed as invasive in the Global Invasive Species Database www.iucngisd.org/gisd/), which in decreasing order of importance belonged to the taxonomic Orders Cypriniformes, Perciformes, Siluriformes, Characiformes, Salmoniformes, Cyprinodontiformes, with the remaining ≈ 8% of taxa distributed across an additional 13 orders. The most widely-screened species (in decreasing importance) were: grass carp Ctenopharyngodon idella, common carp Cyprinus carpio, rainbow trout Oncorhynchus mykiss, silver carp Hypophthalmichthys molitrix and topmouth gudgeon Pseudorasbora parva. Nine ‘globally’ high risk species were identified: common carp, black bullhead Ameiurus melas, round goby Neogobius melanostomus, Chinese (Amur) sleeper Perccottus glenii, brown bullhead Ameiurus nebulosus, eastern mosquitofish Gambusia holbrooki, largemouth (black) bass Micropterus salmoides, pumpkinseed Lepomis gibbosus and pikeperch Sander lucioperca. The relevance of this global review to policy, legislation, and risk assessment and management procedures is discussed

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Standardized terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science — a dynamic and quickly evolving discipline — the rapid proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardized framework for its language development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damages and interventions. A standardized framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardizing terminology across stakeholders remains a prevailing challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. 'non-native', 'alien', 'invasive' or 'invader', 'exotic', 'non-indigenous', 'naturalized, 'pest') to propose a more simplified and standardized terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) 'non-native', denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) 'established non-native', i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) 'invasive non-native' — populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualizing 'spread' for classifying invasiveness and 'impact' for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (1) dispersal mechanism, (2) species origin, (3) population status, and (4) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science – a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline – the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. ‘non-native’, ‘alien’, ‘invasive’ or ‘invader’, ‘exotic’, ‘non-indigenous’, ‘naturalised’, ‘pest’) to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) ‘non-native’, denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) ‘established non-native’, i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) ‘invasive non-native’ – populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising ‘spread’ for classifying invasiveness and ‘impact’ for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species

Fish length and otolith size of in Nemipterus randalli Russel, 1986 (Actinopterygii: Perciformes: Nemipteridae) collected from Gökova Bay, Turkey

Otoliths have been proved an appropriate tool to identify fish species, and they have been in use in studies of prey-predator relationships, population dynamics and ichthyo-archaeology. In addition, the fish otoliths are frequently used to decide age and size of the teleost fishes. The relationships between otolith measurements (length, width, and weight) and fish length and weight were calculated for Randall's threadfin bream, Nemipterus randalli collected from Gökova Bay, Turkey. Otolith length, width and weight were shown to be good indicators of the length of fish, but the best indicator was the otolith length. Sizes of the left and right otoliths were found not be significantly different