Translational invasion ecology: bridging research and practice to address one of the greatest threats to biodiversity

Effective natural resource management and policy is contingent on information generated by research. Conversely, the applicability of research depends on whether it is responsive to the needs and constraints of resource managers and policy makers. However, many scientific fields including invasion ecology suffer from a disconnect between research and practice. Despite strong socio-political imperatives, evidenced by extensive funding dedicated to addressing invasive species, the pairing of invasion ecology with stakeholder needs to support effective management and policy is lacking. As a potential solution, we propose translational invasion ecology (TIE). As an extension of translational ecology, as a framework to increase collaboration among scientists, practitioners, and policy makers to reduce negative impacts of invasive species. As an extension of translational ecology, TIE is an approach that embodies an intentional and inclusive process in which researchers, stakeholders, and decision makers collaborate to develop and implement ecological research via joint consideration of the ecological, sociological, economic, and/or political contexts in order to improve invasive species management. TIE ideally results in improved outcomes as well as shared benefits between researchers and managers. We delineate the steps of our proposed TIE approach and describe successful examples of ongoing TIE projects from the US and internationally. We suggest practical ways to begin incorporating TIE into research and management practices, including supporting boundary-spanning organizations and activities, expanding networks, sharing translational experiences, and measuring outcomes. We find that there is a need for strengthened boundary spanning, as well as funding and recognition for advancing translational approaches. As climate change and globalization exacerbate invasive species impacts, TIE provides a promising approach to generate actionable ecological research while improving outcomes of invasive species management and policy decisions

Experimental evaluation of four protocols for assessing white-tailed deer browse intensity

Native and introduced deer populations have expanded on many continents and are now considered primary drivers of ecosystem degradation. Large herbivore management can be controversial, requiring appropriate tools to gauge impacts and guide management decisions. While many different protocols have been proposed to measure deer impacts to vegetation, few have been experimentally validated to assess whether they respond reliably to changes in deer browse intensity.Here we used a network of large (2 ha) long-term deer exclosures in New York State to assess utility and reliability of AVID (Assessing Vegetation Impacts of Deer), the Ten-Tallest, and Twig-Age protocols to capture changes in white-tailed deer (Odocoileus virginianus) browse intensity. We also assessed whether three herbaceous species: blue-stemmed goldenrod (Solidago caesia), white wood aster (Eurybia divaricata), and zigzag goldenrod (Solidago flexicaulis) could expand upon a red oak (Quercus rubra) Sentinel protocol. Finally, we evaluated whether these four protocols adhered to criteria defined for ecological indicator selection.AVID, Ten-Tallest, and Twig-Age protocols rely on existing vegetation to measure deer browse intensity, which limited their ability to adhere to basic sampling principles and be standardized across different forest types, especially in areas with little vegetation remaining in browse height. The Ten-Tallest protocol did not consistently detect differences in deer browse intensity, calling into question its scientific validity. The Sentinel protocol utilizes propagated and planted species, which standardizes impact assessments across sites and captures annual changes in deer browse intensity. Sentinel met nearly all criteria required to function as a reliable deer browse indicator. Validation and selection of additional sentinel species is necessary to build out a portfolio of regionally relevant species that can gauge deer browse intensity across vegetation and habitat types. Of the herbaceous species evaluated, S. caesia showed promise as a new sentinel species, but further evaluations are necessary. Evidence-based deer management will require scientifically rigorous and validated impact monitoring approaches and metrics. We caution against adopting protocols that have not been thoroughly vetted to avoid misguided deer management and policy