Misplaced Pages

An invasive species is an introduced species that harms its new environment. Invasive species adversely affect habitats and bioregions, causing ecological, environmental, and/or economic damage. The term can also be used for native species that become harmful to their native environment after human alterations to its food web. Since the 20th century, invasive species have become serious economic, social, and environmental threats worldwide.

Invasion of long-established ecosystems by organisms is a natural phenomenon, but human-facilitated introductions have greatly increased the rate, scale, and geographic range of invasion. For millennia, humans have served as both accidental and deliberate dispersal agents, beginning with their earliest migrations, accelerating in the Age of Discovery, and accelerating again with international trade. Notably invasive plant species include the kudzu vine, giant hogweed, Japanese knotweed, and yellow starthistle. Notably invasive animals include European rabbits, domestic cats, and carp.

Terminology

Invasive species are the subset of established non-native alien or naturalized species that are a threat to native species and biodiversity. The term "invasive" is poorly defined and often very subjective. Invasive species may be plants, animals, fungi, and microbes; some include native species that have invaded human habitats such as farms and landscapes. Some broaden the term to include indigenous or "native" species that have colonized natural areas. Some sources name Homo sapiens as an invasive species, but broad appreciation of human learning capacity and their behavioral potential and plasticity may argue against any such fixed categorization. The definition of "native" can be controversial. For example, the ancestors of Equus ferus (modern horses) evolved in North America and radiated to Eurasia before becoming extinct in North America. Upon being introduced to North America in 1493 by Spanish conquistadors, it is debatable whether the feral horses were native or exotic to the continent of their evolutionary ancestors.

While invasive species can be studied within many subfields of biology, most research on invasive organisms has been in ecology and biogeography. Much of the work has been influenced by Charles Elton's 1958 book The Ecology of Invasion by Animals and Plants which creates a generalized picture of biological invasions. Studies remained sparse until the 1990s. This research, largely field observational studies, has disproportionately been concerned with terrestrial plants. The rapid growth of the field has driven a need to standardize the language used to describe invasive species and events. Despite this, little standard terminology exists; the field lacks any official designation but is commonly referred to as "invasion ecology" or more generally "invasion biology". This lack of standard terminology has arisen due to the interdisciplinary nature of the field which borrows terms from disciplines such as agriculture, zoology, and pathology, as well as due to studies being performed in isolation.

In an attempt to avoid the ambiguous, subjective, and pejorative vocabulary that so often accompanies discussion of invasive species even in scientific papers, Colautti and MacIsaac proposed a new nomenclature system based on biogeography rather than on taxa. By discarding taxonomy, human health, and economic factors, this model focused only on ecological factors. The model evaluated individual populations rather than entire species. It classified each population based on its success in that environment. This model applied equally to indigenous and to introduced species, and did not automatically categorize successful introductions as harmful.

The USDA's National Invasive Species Information Center defines invasive species very narrowly. According to Executive Order 13112, "'Invasive species' means an alien species whose introduction does or is likely to cause economic or environmental harm or harm to human health."

Causes

Typically, an introduced species must survive at low population densities before it becomes invasive in a new location. At low population densities, it can be difficult for the introduced species to reproduce and maintain itself in a new location, so a species might reach a location multiple times before it becomes established. Repeated patterns of human movement, such as ships sailing to and from ports or cars driving up and down highways, offer repeated opportunities for establishment (a high propagule pressure).

Ecosystem-based mechanisms

In ecosystems, the availability of resources determines the impact of additional species on the ecosystem. Stable ecosystems have a resource equilibrium, which can be changed fundamentally by the arrival of invasive species. When changes such as a forest fire occur, normal ecological succession favors native grasses and forbs. An introduced species that can spread faster than natives can outcompete native species for food, squeezing them out. Nitrogen and phosphorus are often the limiting factors in these situations. Every species occupies an ecological niche in its native ecosystem; some species fill large and varied roles, while others are highly specialized. Invading species may occupy unused niches, or create new ones. For example, edge effects describe what happens when part of an ecosystem is disturbed, as in when land is cleared for agriculture. The boundary between the remaining undisturbed habitat and the newly cleared land itself forms a distinct habitat, creating new winners and losers and possibly hosting species that would not thrive outside the boundary habitat.

In 1958, Charles S. Elton claimed that ecosystems with higher species diversity were less subject to invasive species because fewer niches remained unoccupied. Other ecologists later pointed to highly diverse, but heavily invaded ecosystems, arguing that ecosystems with high species diversity were more susceptible to invasion. This debate hinged on the spatial scale of invasion studies. Small-scale studies tended to show a negative relationship between diversity and invasion, while large-scale studies tended to show the reverse, perhaps a side-effect of invasives' ability to capitalize on increased resource availability and weaker species interactions that are more common when larger samples are considered. However, this pattern does not seem to hold true for invasive vertebrates.

Island ecosystems may be more prone to invasion because their species face few strong competitors and predators, and because their distance from colonizing species populations makes them more likely to have "open" niches. For example, native bird populations on Guam have been decimated by the invasive brown tree snake.

In New Zealand the first invasive species were the dogs and rats brought by Polynesian settlers around 1300. These and other introductions devastated endemic New Zealand species. The colonization of Madagascar brought similar harm to its ecosystems. Logging has caused harm directly by destroying habitat, and has allowed non-native species such as prickly pear and silver wattle to invade. The water hyacinth forms dense mats on water surfaces, limiting light penetration and hence harming aquatic organisms, and causing substantial management costs. The shrub lantana (Lantana camara) is now considered invasive in over 60 countries, and has invaded large geographies in several countries prompting aggressive federal efforts at attempting to control it.

Primary geomorphological effects of invasive plants are bioconstruction and bioprotection. For example, kudzu (Pueraria montana), a vine native to Asia, was widely introduced in the southeastern United States in the early 20th century to control soil erosion. The primary geomorphological effects of invasive animals are bioturbation, bioerosion, and bioconstruction. For example, invasions of the Chinese mitten crab (Eriocheir sinensis) have resulted in higher bioturbation and bioerosion rates.

A native species can become harmful and effectively invasive to its native environment after human alterations to its food web. This has been the case with the purple sea urchin (Strongylocentrotus purpuratus), which has decimated kelp forests along the northern California coast due to overharvesting of its natural predator, the California sea otter (Enhydra lutris).

Species-based mechanisms

Invasive species appear to have specific traits or specific combinations of traits that allow them to outcompete native species. In some cases, the competition is about rates of growth and reproduction. In other cases, species interact with each other more directly. One study found that 86% of invasive species could be identified from such traits alone. Another study found that invasive species often had only a few of the traits, and that noninvasive species had these also. Common invasive species traits include fast growth and rapid reproduction, such as vegetative reproduction in plants; association with humans; and prior successful invasions. Domestic cats are effective predators; they have become feral and invasive in places such as the Florida Keys.

An introduced species might become invasive if it can outcompete native species for resources. If these species evolved under great competition or predation, then the new environment may host fewer able competitors, allowing the invader to proliferate. Ecosystems used to their fullest capacity by native species can be modeled as zero-sum systems, in which any gain for the invader is a loss for the native. However, such unilateral competitive superiority (and extinction of native species with increased populations of the invader) is not the rule.

An invasive species might be able to use resources previously unavailable to native species, such as deep water accessed by a long taproot, or to live on previously uninhabited soil types. For example, barbed goatgrass was introduced to California on serpentine soils, which have low water-retention, low nutrient levels, a high magnesium/calcium ratio, and possible heavy metal toxicity. Plant populations on these soils tend to show low density, but goatgrass can form dense stands on these soils and crowd out native species.

Invasive species might alter their environment by releasing chemical compounds, modifying abiotic factors, or affecting the behaviour of herbivores, impacting on other species. Some, like Kalanchoe daigremontana, produce allelopathic compounds that inhibit competitors. Others like Stapelia gigantea facilitate the growth of seedlings of other species in arid environments by providing appropriate microclimates and preventing herbivores from eating seedlings.

Changes in fire regimens are another form of facilitation. Bromus tectorum, originally from Eurasia, is highly fire-adapted. It spreads rapidly after burning, and increases the frequency and intensity of fires by providing large amounts of dry detritus during the fire season in western North America. Where it is widespread, it has altered the local fire regimen so much that native plants cannot survive the frequent fires, allowing it to become dominant in its introduced range.

Ecological facilitation occurs where one species physically modifies a habitat in ways advantageous to other species. For example, zebra mussels increase habitat complexity on lake floors, providing crevices in which invertebrates live. This increase in complexity, together with the nutrition provided by the waste products of mussel filter-feeding, increases the density and diversity of benthic invertebrate communities.

Introduced species may spread rapidly and unpredictably. When bottlenecks and founder effects cause a great decrease in the population size and may constrict genetic variation, the individuals begin to show additive variance as opposed to epistatic variance. This conversion can lead to increased variance in the founding populations, which permits rapid evolution. Selection may then act on the capacity to disperse as well as on physiological tolerance to new stressors in the environment, such as changed temperature and different predators and prey.

Rapid adaptive evolution through intraspecific phenotypic plasticity, pre-adaptation and post-introduction evolution lead to offspring that have higher fitness. Critically, plasticity permits changes to better suit the individual to its environment. Pre-adaptations and evolution after the introduction reinforce the success of the introduced species.

The enemy release hypothesis states that evolution leads to ecological balance in every ecosystem. No single species can occupy a majority of an ecosystem due to the presences of competitors, predators, and diseases. Introduced species moved to a novel habitat can become invasive, with rapid population growth, when these controls do not exist in the new ecosystem.

Vectors

Non-native species have many vectors, but most are associated with human activity. Natural range extensions are common, but humans often carry specimens faster and over greater distances than natural forces. An early human vector occurred when prehistoric humans introduced the Pacific rat (Rattus exulans) to Polynesia.

Vectors include plants or seeds imported for horticulture. The pet trade moves animals across borders, where they can escape and become invasive. Organisms stow away on transport vehicles. Incidental human assisted transfer is the main cause of introductions – other than for polar regions. Diseases may be vectored by invasive insects: the Asian citrus psyllid carries the bacterial disease citrus greening. The arrival of invasive propagules to a new site is a function of the site's invasibility.

Many invasive species, once they are dominant in the area, become essential to the ecosystem of that area, and their removal could be harmful. Economics plays a major role in exotic species introduction. High demand for the valuable Chinese mitten crab is one explanation for the possible intentional release of the species in foreign waters.

Within the aquatic environment

Maritime trade has rapidly affected the way marine organisms are transported within the ocean; new means of species transport include hull fouling and ballast water transport. In fact, Molnar et al. 2008 documented the pathways of hundreds of marine invasive species and found that shipping was the dominant mechanism for the transfer of invasive species.

Many marine organisms can attach themselves to vessel hulls. Such organisms are easily transported from one body of water to another, and are a significant risk factor for a biological invasion event. Controlling for vessel hull fouling is voluntary and there are no regulations currently in place to manage hull fouling. However, the governments of California and New Zealand have announced more stringent control for vessel hull fouling within their respective jurisdictions.

Another vector of non-native aquatic species is ballast water taken up at sea and released in port by transoceanic vessels. Some 10,000 species are transported via ballast water each day. Many of these are harmful. For example, freshwater zebra mussels from Eurasia most likely reached the Great Lakes via ballast water. These outcompete native organisms for oxygen and food, and can be transported in the small puddle left in a supposedly empty ballast tank. Regulations attempt to mitigate such risks, not always successfully.

Climate change is causing an increase in ocean temperature. This in turn will cause range shifts in organisms, which could harm the environment as new species interactions occur. For example, organisms in a ballast tank of a ship traveling from the temperate zone through tropical waters may experience temperature fluctuations as much as 20 °C. Heat challenges during transport may enhance the stress tolerance of species in their non-native range, by selecting for genotypes that will survive a second applied heat stress, such as increased ocean temperature in the founder population.

Effects of wildfire and firefighting

Invasive species often exploit disturbances to an ecosystem (wildfires, roads, foot trails) to colonize an area. Large wildfires can sterilize soils, while adding nutrients. Invasive plants that can regenerate from their roots then have an advantage over natives that rely on seeds for propagation.

Adverse effects

Invasive species can affect the invaded habitats and bioregions adversely, causing ecological, environmental, or economic damage.

Ecological

The European Union defines "Invasive Alien Species" as those that are outside their natural distribution area, and that threaten biological diversity. Biotic invasion is one of the five top drivers for global biodiversity loss, and is increasing because of tourism and globalization. This may be particularly true in inadequately regulated fresh water systems, though quarantines and ballast water rules have improved the situation.

Invasive species may drive local native species to extinction via competitive exclusion, niche displacement, or hybridisation with related native species. Therefore, besides their economic ramifications, alien invasions may result in extensive changes in the structure, composition and global distribution of the biota at sites of introduction, leading ultimately to the homogenisation of the world's fauna and flora and the loss of biodiversity. It is difficult to unequivocally attribute extinctions to a species invasion, though there is for example strong evidence that the extinction of about 90 amphibian species was caused by the chytrid fungus spread by international trade.

Multiple successive introductions of different non-native species can worsen the total effect, as with the introductions of the amethyst gem clam and the European green crab. The gem clam was introduced into California's Bodega Harbor from the US East Coast a century ago. On its own, it never displaced native clams (Nutricola spp.). In the mid-1990s, the introduction of the European green crab resulted in an increase of the amethyst gem at the expense of the native clams. In India, multiple invasive plants have invaded 66% of natural areas, reducing the densities of native forage plants, declining the habitat-use by wild herbivores and threatening the long-term sustenance of dependent carnivores, including the tiger.

Invasive species can change the functions of ecosystems. For example, invasive plants can alter the fire regime (cheatgrass, Bromus tectorum), nutrient cycling (smooth cordgrass Spartina alterniflora), and hydrology (Tamarix) in native ecosystems. Invasive species that are closely related to rare native species have the potential to hybridize with the native species. Harmful effects of hybridization have led to a decline and even extinction of native species. For example, hybridization with introduced cordgrass, Spartina alterniflora, threatens the existence of California cordgrass (Spartina foliosa) in San Francisco Bay. Invasive species cause competition for native species and because of this 400 of the 958 endangered species under the Endangered Species Act are at risk.

The unintentional introduction of forest pest species and plant pathogens can change forest ecology and damage the timber industry. Overall, forest ecosystems in the U.S. are widely invaded by exotic pests, plants, and pathogens.

The Asian long-horned beetle (Anoplophora glabripennis) was first introduced into the U.S. in 1996, and was expected to infect and damage millions of acres of hardwood trees. As of 2005 thirty million dollars had been spent in attempts to eradicate this pest and protect millions of trees in the affected regions. The woolly adelgid has inflicted damage on old-growth spruce, fir and hemlock forests and damages the Christmas tree industry. Chestnut blight and Dutch elm disease are plant pathogens with serious impacts. Garlic mustard, Alliaria petiolata, is one of the most problematic invasive plant species in eastern North American forests, where it is highly invasive of the understory, reducing the growth rate of tree seedlings and threatening to modify the forest's tree composition.

Native species can be threatened with extinction through the process of genetic pollution. Genetic pollution is unintentional hybridization and introgression, which leads to homogenization or replacement of local genotypes as a result of either a numerical or fitness advantage of the introduced species. Genetic pollution occurs either through introduction or through habitat modification, where previously isolated species are brought into contact with the new genotypes. Invading species have been shown to adapt to their new environments in a remarkably short amount of time. The population size of invading species may remain small for a number of years and then experience an explosion in population, a phenomenon known as "the lag effect".

Hybrids resulting from invasive species interbreeding with native species can incorporate their genotypes into the gene pool over time through introgression. Similarly, in some instances a small invading population can threaten much larger native populations. For example, Spartina alterniflora was introduced in the San Francisco Bay and hybridized with native Spartina foliosa. The higher pollen count and male fitness of the invading species resulted in introgression that threatened the native populations due to lower pollen counts and lower viability of the native species. Reduction in fitness is not always apparent from morphological observations alone. Some degree of gene flow is normal, and preserves constellations of genes and genotypes. An example of this is the interbreeding of migrating coyotes with the red wolf, in areas of eastern North Carolina where the red wolf was reintroduced, reducing red wolf numbers.

Environmental

In South Africa's Cape Town region, analysis demonstrated that the restoration of priority source water sub-catchments through the removal of thirsty alien plant invasions (such as Australian acacias, pines and eucalyptus, and Australian black wattle) would generate expected annual water gains of 50 billion liters within 5 years compared to the business-as-usual scenario (which is important as Cape Town experiences significant water scarcity). This is the equivalent to one-sixth of the city's current supply needs. These annual gains will double within 30 years. The catchment restoration is significantly more cost-effective then other water augmentation solutions (1/10 the unit cost of alternative options). A water fund has been established, and these exotic species are being eradicated.

Human health

Invasive species can affect human health. With the alteration in ecosystem functionality (due to homogenization of biota communities), invasive species have resulted in negative effects on human well-being, which includes reduced resource availability, unrestrained spread of human diseases, recreational and educational activities, and tourism. Alien species have caused diseases including human immunodeficiency virus (HIV), monkey pox, and severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS).

Invasive species and accompanying control efforts can have long term public health implications. For instance, pesticides applied to treat a particular pest species could pollute soil and surface water. Encroachment of humans into previously remote ecosystems has exposed exotic diseases such as HIV to the wider population. Introduced birds (e.g. pigeons), rodents and insects (e.g. mosquito, flea, louse and tsetse fly pests) can serve as vectors and reservoirs of human afflictions. Throughout recorded history, epidemics of human diseases, such as malaria, yellow fever, typhus, and bubonic plague, spread via these vectors. A recent example of an introduced disease is the spread of the West Nile virus, which killed humans, birds, mammals, and reptiles. The introduced Chinese mitten crabs are carriers of Asian lung fluke. Waterborne disease agents, such as cholera bacteria (Vibrio cholerae), and causative agents of harmful algal blooms are often transported via ballast water.

Economic

Globally, invasive species management and control are substantial economic burdens, with expenditures reaching approximately $1.4 trillion annually. The economic impact of invasive alien species alone was estimated to exceed $423 billion annually as of 2019. This cost has exhibited a significant increase, quadrupling every decade since 1970, underscoring the escalating financial implications of these biological invasions.

Invasive species contribute to ecological degradation, altering ecosystem functionality and reducing the services ecosystems provide. This necessitates additional expenditures to control the spread of biological invasions, mitigate further impacts, and restore affected ecosystems. For example, the damage caused by 79 invasive species between 1906 and 1991 in the United States has been estimated at US$120 billion. Similarly, in China, invasive species have been reported to reduce the country's gross domestic product (GDP) by 1.36% per year.

The management of biological invasions can be costly. In Australia, for instance, the expense to monitor, control, manage, and research invasive weed species is approximately AU$116.4 million per year, with costs directed solely to central and local government.

While in some cases, invasive species may offer economic benefits, such as the potential for commercial forestry from invasive trees, these benefits are generally overshadowed by the substantial costs associated with biological invasions. In most cases, the economic returns from invasive species are far less than the costs they impose.

United States

In the Great Lakes region the sea lamprey is an invasive species. In its original habitat, it had co-evolved as a parasite that did not kill its host. However, in the Great Lakes Region, it acts as a predator and can consume up to 40 pounds of fish in its 12–18 month feeding period. Sea lampreys prey on all types of large fish such as lake trout and salmon. The sea lampreys' destructive effects on large fish negatively affect the fishing industry and have helped cause the collapse of the population of some species.

Economic costs from invasive species can be separated into direct costs through production loss in agriculture and forestry, and management costs. Estimated damage and control costs of invasive species in the U.S. amount to more than $138 billion annually. Economic losses can occur through loss of recreational and tourism revenues. When economic costs of invasions are calculated as production loss and management costs, they are low because they do not consider environmental damage; if monetary values were assigned to the extinction of species, loss in biodiversity, and loss of ecosystem services, costs from impacts of invasive species would drastically increase. It is often argued that the key to invasive species management is early detection and rapid response. However, early response only helps when the invasive species is not frequently reintroduced into the managed area, and the cost of response is affordable.

Weeds reduce yield in agriculture. Many weeds are accidental introductions that accompany imports of commercial seeds and plants. Introduced weeds in pastures compete with native forage plants, threaten young cattle (e.g., leafy spurge, Euphorbia virgata) or are unpalatable because of thorns and spines (e.g., yellow starthistle). Forage loss from invasive weeds on pastures amounts to nearly US$1 billion in the U.S. A decline in pollinator services and loss of fruit production has been caused by honey bees infected by the invasive varroa mite. Introduced rats (Rattus rattus and R. norvegicus) have become serious pests on farms, destroying stored grains. The introduction of leaf miner flies (Agromyzidae), including the American serpentine leaf miner (Liriomyza trifolii), to California has caused losses in California's floriculture industry, as the larvae of these invasive species feed on ornamental plants.

Invasive plant pathogens and insect vectors for plant diseases can suppress agricultural yields and harm nursery stock. Citrus greening is a bacterial disease vectored by the invasive Asian citrus psyllid. As a result, citrus is under quarantine and highly regulated in areas where the psyllid has been found.

Invasive species can impact outdoor recreation, such as fishing, hunting, hiking, wildlife viewing, and water-based activities. They can damage environmental services including water quality, plant and animal diversity, and species abundance, though the extent of this is under-researched. Eurasian watermilfoil (Myriophyllum spicatum) in parts of the US, fills lakes with plants, complicating fishing and boating. The loud call of the introduced common coqui depresses real estate values in affected neighborhoods of Hawaii. The large webs of the orb-weaving spider Zygiella x-notata, invasive in California, disrupts garden work.

Europe

The overall economic cost of invasive alien species in Europe between 1960 and 2020 has been estimated at around US$140 billion (including potential costs that may or may not have actually materialised) or US$78 billion (only including observed costs known to have materialised). These estimates are very conservative. Models based on these data suggest a true annual cost of around US$140 billion in 2020.

Italy is one of the most invaded countries in Europe, with an estimate of more than 3,000 alien species. The impacts of invasive alien species on the economy has been wide-ranging, from management costs, to loss of crops, to infrastructure damage. The overall economic cost of invasions to Italy between 1990 and 2020 was estimated at US$819.76 million (EUR€704.78 million). However, only 15 recorded species have more reliably estimated costs, hence the actual cost may be much larger than the aforementioned sum.

France has an estimated minimum of 2,750 introduced and invasive alien species. Renault et al. (2021) obtained 1,583 cost records for 98 invasive alien species and found that they caused a conservative total cost between US$1.2 billion and 11.5 billion over the period 1993–2018. This study extrapolated costs for species invading France, but for which costs were reported only in other countries but not in France, which yielded an additional cost ranging from US$151 million to $3.03 billion. Damage costs were nearly eight times higher than management expenditure. Insects, and in particular the Asian tiger mosquito Aedes albopictus and the yellow fever mosquito Ae. aegypti, totalled very high economic costs, followed by non-graminoid terrestrial flowering and aquatic plants (Ambrosia artemisiifolia, Ludwigia sp. and Lagarosiphon major). Over 90% of alien species currently recorded in France had no costs reported in the literature, resulting in high biases in taxonomic, regional and activity sector coverages. However, no reports does not mean that there are no negative consequences and thus no costs.

Favorable effects

The entomologist Chris D. Thomas argues that most introduced species are neutral or beneficial with respect to other species but this is a minority opinion. The scientific community ubiquitously considers their effects on biodiversity to be negative.

Some invasive species can provide a suitable habitat or food source for other organisms. In areas where a native has become extinct or reached a point that it cannot be restored, non-native species can fill their role. For instance, in the US, the endangered southwestern willow flycatcher mainly nests in the non-native tamarisk. The introduced mesquite is an aggressive invasive species in India, but is the preferred nesting site of native waterbirds in small cities like Udaipur in Rajasthan. Similarly, Ridgway's rail has adapted to the invasive hybrid of Spartina alterniflora and Spartina foliosa, which offers better cover and nesting habitat. In Australia, saltwater crocodiles, which had become endangered, have recovered by feeding on introduced feral pigs.

Non-native species can act as catalysts for restoration, increasing the heterogeneity and biodiversity in an ecosystem. This can create microclimates in sparse and eroded ecosystems, promoting the growth and reestablishment of native species. For example, in Kenya, guava trees in farmland are attractive to many fruit-eating birds, which drop seeds from rainforest trees as much as 2 km (1.2 mi) away beneath the guavas, encouraging forest regeneration.

Non-native species can provide ecosystem services, functioning as biocontrol agents to limit the effects of invasive agricultural pests. Asian oysters, for example, filter water pollutants better than native oysters in Chesapeake Bay. Some species have invaded an area so long ago that they are considered to have naturalised there. For example, the bee Lasioglossum leucozonium, shown by population genetic analysis to be an invasive species in North America, has become an important pollinator of caneberry (Rubus spp.) as well as cucurbit, apple trees, and blueberry bushes. In the US, the endangered Taylor's checkerspot butterfly has come to rely on invasive ribwort plantain as the food plant for its caterpillars.

Some invasions offer potential commercial benefits. For instance, silver carp and common carp can be harvested for human food and exported to markets already familiar with the product, or processed into pet foods, or mink feed. Water hyacinth can be turned into fuel by methane digesters, and other invasive plants can be harvested and utilized as a source of bioenergy.

Control, eradication, and study

Humans are versatile enough to remediate adverse effects of species invasions. The public is motivated by invasive species that impact their local area. The control of alien species populations is important in the conservation of biodiversity in natural ecosystem. One of the most promising methods for controlling alien species is genetic.

Cargo inspection and quarantine

The original motivation was to protect against agricultural pests while still allowing the export of agricultural products. In 1994 the first set of global standards were agreed to, including the Agreement on the Application of Sanitary and Phytosanitary Measures (SPS Agreement). These are overseen by the World Trade Organization. The International Maritime Organization oversees the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments (the Ballast Water Management Convention). Although primarily targeted at other, more general environmental concerns, the Convention on Biological Diversity does specify some steps that its members should take to control invasive species. The CBD is the most significant international agreement on the environmental consequences of invasive species; most such measures are voluntary and unspecific.

Slowing spread

Firefighters are becoming responsible for decontamination of their own equipment, public water equipment, and private water equipment, due to the risk of aquatic invasive species transfer. In the United States this is especially a concern for wildland firefighters because quagga and zebra mussel invasion and wildfires co-occur in the American West.

Reestablishing species

Island restoration deals with the eradication of invasive species. A 2019 study suggests that if eradications of invasive animals were conducted on just 169 islands, the survival prospects of 9.4% of the Earth's most highly threatened terrestrial insular vertebrates would be improved.

Invasive vertebrate eradication on islands aligns with United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 15 and associated targets.

Rodents were carried to South Georgia, an island in the southern Atlantic Ocean with no permanent inhabitants, in the 18th century by sealing and whaling ships. They soon wrought havoc on the island's bird population, eating eggs and attacking chicks. In 2018, the South Georgia Island was declared free of invasive rodents after a multi-year extermination effort. Bird populations have rebounded, including the South Georgia pipit and South Georgia pintail, both endemic to the island.

Taxon substitution

Non-native species can be introduced to fill an ecological engineering role that previously was performed by a native species now extinct. The procedure is known as taxon substitution. On many islands, tortoise extinction has resulted in dysfunctional ecosystems with respect to seed dispersal and herbivory. On the offshore islets of Mauritius, tortoises now extinct had served as the keystone herbivores. Introduction of the non-native Aldabra giant tortoises on two islets in 2000 and 2007 has begun to restore ecological equilibrium. The introduced tortoises are dispersing seeds of several native plants and are selectively grazing invasive plant species. Grazing and browsing are expected to replace ongoing intensive manual weeding, and the introduced tortoises are already breeding.

By using them as food

The practice of eating invasive species to reduce their populations has been explored. In 2005 Chef Bun Lai of Miya's Sushi in New Haven, Connecticut created the first menu dedicated to invasive species. At that time, half the items on the menu were conceptual because those invasive species were not yet commercially available. By 2013, Miya's offered invasive aquatic species such as Chesapeake blue catfish, Florida lionfish, Kentucky silver carp, Georgia cannonball jellyfish, and invasive plants such as Japanese knotweed and autumn olive. Joe Roman, a Harvard and University of Vermont conservation biologist and recipient of the Rachel Carson Environmental award, runs a website named "Eat The Invaders". In the 21st century, organizations including Reef Environmental Educational Foundation and the Institute for Applied Ecology have published cookbooks and recipes using invasive species as ingredients. Invasive plant species have been explored as a sustainable source of beneficial phytochemicals and edible protein.

Proponents of eating invasive organisms argue that humans have the ability to eat away any species that it has an appetite for, pointing to the many animals which humans have been able to hunt to extinction—such as the Caribbean monk seal, and the passenger pigeon. They further point to the success that Jamaica has had in significantly decreasing the population of lionfish by encouraging the consumption of the fish. Skeptics point out that once a foreign species has entrenched itself in a new place—such as the Indo-Pacific lionfish that has now virtually taken over the waters of the Western Atlantic, Caribbean and Gulf of Mexico—eradication is almost impossible. Critics argue that encouraging consumption might have the unintended effect of spreading harmful species even more widely.

Pesticides and herbicides

Pesticides are commonly used to control invasives. Herbicides used against invasive plants include fungal herbicides. Although the effective population size of an introduced population is bottlenecked, some genetic variation has been known to provide invasive plants with resistance against these fungal bioherbicides. Invasive populations of Bromus tectorum exist with resistance to Ustilago bullata used as a biocontrol, and a similar problem has been reported in Microstegium vimineum subject to Bipolaris microstegii and B. drechsleri. This is not solely a character of invasive plant genetics but is normal for wild plants such as the weed Linum marginale and its fungal pathogen Melampsora lini. Crops have another disadvantage over any uncontrolled plant – wild native or invasive – namely their greater uptake of nutrients, as they are deliberately bred to increase nutrient intake to enable increased product output.

Gene drive

A gene drive could be used to eliminate invasive species and has, for example, been proposed as a way to eliminate invasive mammal species in New Zealand. Briefly put, an individual of a species may have two versions of a gene, one with a desired coding outcome and one not, with offspring having a 50:50 chance of inheriting one or the other. Genetic engineering can be used to inhibit inheritance of the non-desired gene, resulting in faster propagation of the desired gene in subsequent generations. Gene drives for biodiversity conservation purposes are being explored as part of The Genetic Biocontrol of Invasive Rodents program because they offer the potential for reduced risk to non-target species and reduced costs when compared to traditional invasive species removal techniques. A wider outreach network for gene drive research exists to raise awareness of the value of gene drive research for the public good. Some scientists are concerned that the technique could wipe out species in their original native habitats. The gene could mutate, causing unforeseen problems, or hybridize with native species.

Predicting invasive plants

Accurately predicting the impacts of non-native plants can be an especially effective management option because most introductions of non-native plant species are intentional. Weed risk assessments attempt to predict the chances that a specific plant will have negative effects in a new environment, often using a standardized questionnaire. The resulting total score is associated with a management action such as "prevent introduction". Assessments commonly use information about the physiology, life history, native ranges, and phylogenetic relationships of the species evaluated. The effectiveness of the approach is debated.

See also

• Archaeophyte
• Climate change and invasive species
• Colonisation (biology)
• Ecologically based invasive plant management
• Escaped plant
• Hemerochory
• Invasion genetics
• Lists of invasive species
• Naturalisation (biology)
• Neophyte (botany)
• Seed dispersal

References

Attribution

This article incorporates CC-BY-3.0 text from the reference

Citations

1. "Global Compendium of Weeds: Vinca major". Hawaiian Ecosystems at Risk project (HEAR). Archived from the original on March 4, 2016. Retrieved February 13, 2020.
2. Davis, Mark A.; Thompson, Ken (2000). "Eight Ways to be a Colonizer; Two Ways to be an Invader: A Proposed Nomenclature Scheme for Invasion Ecology". Bulletin of the Ecological Society of America. 81 (3): 226–230. JSTOR 20168448.
3. Odd Terje Sandlund; Peter Johan Schei; Åslaug Viken (June 30, 2001). Invasive Species and Biodiversity Management. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 2–. ISBN 978-0-7923-6876-2. Archived from the original on December 18, 2021. Retrieved November 1, 2020.
4. ^ Colautti, Robert I.; MacIsaac, Hugh J. (February 24, 2004). "A neutral terminology to define 'invasive' species: Defining invasive species". Diversity and Distributions. 10 (2): 135–141. doi:10.1111/j.1366-9516.2004.00061.x. S2CID 18971654.
5. S. Inderjit (January 16, 2006). Invasive Plants: Ecological and Agricultural Aspects. Springer Science & Business Media. pp. 252–. ISBN 978-3-7643-7380-1. Archived from the original on December 18, 2021. Retrieved November 1, 2020.
6. Marean, Curtis W. (2015). "The Most Invasive Species of All". Scientific American. 313 (2): 32–39. Bibcode:2015SciAm.313b..32M. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0815-32. JSTOR 26046104. PMID 26349141.
7. Rafferty, John P. (2015). "Invasive species". Encyclopedia Britannica. Archived from the original on August 2, 2020. Retrieved August 18, 2020. ...odern humans are among the most successful invasive species.
8. ^ Root-Bernstein, Meredith; Ladle, Richard (2019). "Ecology of a widespread large omnivore, Homo sapiens, and its impacts on ecosystem processes". Ecology and Evolution. 9 (19): 10874–94. Bibcode:2019EcoEv...910874R. doi:10.1002/ece3.5049. PMC 6802023. PMID 31641442. S2CID 203370925.
9. Leidy, Joseph (March 5, 2012). "Ancient American Horses". Academy of Natural Sciences, Drexel University. Archived from the original on March 5, 2012. Retrieved January 10, 2019.
10. ^ Lockwood, Julie L.; Hoopes, Martha F.; Marchetti, Michael P. (2007). Invasion Ecology (PDF). Blackwell Publishing. p. 7. Archived from the original (PDF) on September 24, 2015. Retrieved January 21, 2014.
11. ^ Lowry, E; Rollinson, EJ; Laybourn, AJ; Scott, TE; Aiello-Lammens, ME; Gray, SM; Mickley, J; Gurevitch, J (2012). "Biological invasions: A field synopsis, systematic review, and database of the literature". Ecology and Evolution. 3 (1): 182–96. doi:10.1002/ece3.431. PMC 3568853. PMID 23404636.
12. "Invasive Species". National Geographic Society. Retrieved November 28, 2022.
13. "Executive Order 13112 - 1. Definitions". Ars.usda.gov. Archived from the original on June 25, 2021. Retrieved May 27, 2021.
14. Tilman, D. (2004). "Niche tradeoffs, neutrality, and community structure: A stochastic theory of resource competition, invasion, and community assembly". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 101 (30): 10854–10861. Bibcode:2004PNAS..10110854T. doi:10.1073/pnas.0403458101. PMC 503710. PMID 15243158.
15. Verling, E. (2005). "Supply-side invasion ecology: characterizing propagule pressure in coastal ecosystems". Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 272 (1569): 1249–1256. doi:10.1098/rspb.2005.3090. PMC 1564104. PMID 16024389.
16. Byers, James E. (June 2002). "Impact of non-indigenous species on natives enhanced by anthropogenic alteration of selection regimes". Oikos. 97 (3): 449–458. Bibcode:2002Oikos..97..449B. doi:10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.970316.x.
17. ^ Davis, M.A.; Grime, J.P.; Thompson, K. (2000). "Fluctuating resources in plant communities: A general theory of invisibility". Journal of Ecology. 88 (3): 528–534. Bibcode:2000JEcol..88..528D. doi:10.1046/j.1365-2745.2000.00473.x. S2CID 14573817.
18. Fath, Brian D. (2008). Encyclopedia of Ecology (1st ed.). Amsterdam, the Netherlands: Elsevier Science. p. 1089. ISBN 978-0444520333.
19. Alverson, William S.; Waller, Donald M.; Solheim, Stephen L. (1988). "Forests Too Deer: Edge Effects in Northern Wisconsin". Conservation Biology. 2 (4): 348–358. Bibcode:1988ConBi...2..348A. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.1988.tb00199.x. JSTOR 2386294.
20. ^ Elton, C.S. (2000) . The Ecology of Invasions by Animals and Plants. Foreword by Daniel Simberloff. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. p. 196. ISBN 978-0-226-20638-7.
21. ^ Stohlgren, Thomas J.; Binkley, Dan; Chong, Geneva W.; Kalkhan, Mohammed A.; Schell, Lisa D.; Bull, Kelly A.; et al. (February 1999). "Exotic Plant Species Invade Hot Spots of Native Plant Diversity". Ecological Monographs. 69 (1): 25–46. doi:10.1890/0012-9615(1999)069[0025:EPSIHS]2.0.CO;2.
22. Byers, James E.; Noonburg, Erik G. (June 2003). "Scale Dependent Effects of Biotic Resistance to Biological Invasion". Ecology. 84 (6): 1428–1433. Bibcode:2003Ecol...84.1428B. doi:10.1890/02-3131.
23. Levine, Jonathan M. (May 5, 2000). "Species Diversity and Biological Invasions: Relating Local Process to Community Pattern". Science. 288 (5467): 852–854. Bibcode:2000Sci...288..852L. doi:10.1126/science.288.5467.852. PMID 10797006.
24. Ivey, Matthew R.; Colvin, Michael; Strickland, Bronson K.; Lashley, Marcus A. (June 14, 2019). "Reduced vertebrate diversity independent of spatial scale following feral swine invasions". Ecology and Evolution. 9 (13): 7761–7767. Bibcode:2019EcoEv...9.7761I. doi:10.1002/ece3.5360. PMC 6635915. PMID 31346438.
25. Stachowicz, J.J. (2005). "Species invasions and the relationships between species diversity, community saturation, and ecosystem functioning". In D.F. Sax; J.J. Stachowicz; S.D. Gaines (eds.). Species Invasions: Insights into Ecology, Evolution, and Biogeography. Sunderland, Massachusetts: Sinauer Associates. ISBN 978-0-87893-811-7.
26. "Brown Tree Snake". USDA National Invasive Species Information Center. Archived from the original on August 24, 2019.
27. Howe, K. R. (2003). The Quest for Origins. Penguin Books. p. 179. ISBN 0-14-301857-4.
28. "Rat remains help date New Zealand's colonisation". New Scientist. June 4, 2008. Archived from the original on June 11, 2022. Retrieved June 23, 2008.
29. Goodman, Steven M. (1997). "The birds of southeastern Madagascar". Fieldiana (87). doi:10.5962/bhl.title.3415.
30. Brown, Kerry A.; Gurevitch, Jessica (April 20, 2004). "Long-term impacts of logging on forest diversity in Madagascar". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 101 (16): 6045–6049. Bibcode:2004PNAS..101.6045B. doi:10.1073/pnas.0401456101. PMC 395920. PMID 15067121.
31. Kull, Ca; Tassin, J; Carriere, Sm (February 26, 2015). "Approaching invasive species in Madagascar". Madagascar Conservation & Development. 9 (2): 60. doi:10.4314/mcd.v9i2.2.
32. Villamagna, A. M.; Murphy, B. R. (February 2010). "Ecological and socio-economic impacts of invasive water hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes): a review". Freshwater Biology. 55 (2): 282–298. Bibcode:2010FrBio..55..282V. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2427.2009.02294.x.
33. Rakotoarisoa, T. F.; Richter, T.; Rakotondramanana, H.; Mantilla-Contreras, J. (December 2016). "Turning a Problem Into Profit: Using Water Hyacinth (Eichhornia crassipes) for Making Handicrafts at Lake Alaotra, Madagascar". Economic Botany. 70 (4): 365–379. Bibcode:2016EcBot..70..365R. doi:10.1007/s12231-016-9362-y. S2CID 255557151. S2CID 18820290.
34. Bhagwat, Shonil A.; Breman, Elinor; Thekaekara, Tarsh; Thornton, Thomas F.; Willis, Katherine J. (2012). "A Battle Lost? Report on Two Centuries of Invasion and Management of Lantana camara L. in Australia, India and South Africa". PLOS ONE. 7 (3): e32407. Bibcode:2012PLoSO...732407B. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0032407. PMC 3293794. PMID 22403653.
35. Mungi, Ninad Avinash; Qureshi, Qamar; Jhala, Yadvendradev V. (2020). "Expanding niche and degrading forests: Key to the successful global invasion of Lantana camara (sensu lato)". Global Ecology and Conservation. 23: e01080. Bibcode:2020GEcoC..2301080M. doi:10.1016/j.gecco.2020.e01080.
36. Fei, Songlin; Phillips, Jonathan; Shouse, Michael (November 23, 2014). "Biogeomorphic Impacts of Invasive Species". Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 45 (1): 69–87. doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-120213-091928.
37. "Plague of purple sea urchins ravages California's offshore ecosystem, heads to Oregon". Los Angeles Times. October 24, 2019. Archived from the original on July 14, 2021. Retrieved July 14, 2021.
38. ^ Kolar, C.S. (2001). "Progress in invasion biology: predicting invaders". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 16 (4): 199–204. doi:10.1016/S0169-5347(01)02101-2. PMID 11245943. S2CID 5796978.
39. Thebaud, C. (1996). "Assessing why two introduced Conyza differ in their ability to invade Mediterranean old fields". Ecology. 77 (3): 791–804. Bibcode:1996Ecol...77..791T. doi:10.2307/2265502. JSTOR 2265502.
40. Reichard, S.H. (1997). "Predicting invasions of woody plants introduced into North America". Conservation Biology. 11 (1): 193–203. doi:10.1046/j.1523-1739.1997.95473.x. PMC 7162396. S2CID 29816498.
41. Williams, J. D. (1998). "Non-indigenous Species". Status and Trends of the Nation's Biological Resources. Reston, Virginia: United States Geological Survey. pp. 117–29. ISBN 978-0-16-053285-6. DTIC ADA368849.
42. Ewell, J.J. (1999). "Deliberate introductions of species: Research needs – Benefits can be reaped, but risks are high". BioScience. 49 (8): 619–630. Bibcode:1999BiSci..49..619E. doi:10.2307/1313438. JSTOR 1313438.
43. Cove, Michael V.; Gardner, Beth; Simons, Theodore R.; Kays, Roland; O'Connell, Allan F. (February 1, 2018). "Free-ranging domestic cats (Felis catus) on public lands: estimating density, activity, and diet in the Florida Keys". Biological Invasions. 20 (2): 333–344. Bibcode:2018BiInv..20..333C. doi:10.1007/s10530-017-1534-x. S2CID 3536174.
44. Sax, Dov F.; Gaines, Steven D.; Brown, James H. (December 2002). "Species Invasions Exceed Extinctions on Islands Worldwide: A Comparative Study of Plants and Birds". The American Naturalist. 160 (6): 766–783. doi:10.1086/343877. PMID 18707464. S2CID 8628360.
45. Huenneke, Laura Foster; Hamburg, Steven P.; Koide, Roger; Mooney, Harold A.; Vitousek, Peter M. (1990). "Effects of Soil Resources on Plant Invasion and Community Structure in Californian Serpentine Grassland". Ecology. 71 (2): 478–491. Bibcode:1990Ecol...71..478H. doi:10.2307/1940302. JSTOR 1940302.
46. Herrera, Ileana; Ferrer-Paris, José R.; Benzo, Diana; Flores, Saúl; García, Belkis; Nassar, Jafet M. (2018). "An Invasive Succulent Plant (Kalanchoe daigremontiana) Influences Soil Carbon and Nitrogen Mineralization in a Neotropical Semiarid Zone". Pedosphere. 28 (4): 632–643. Bibcode:2018Pedos..28..632H. doi:10.1016/S1002-0160(18)60029-3. hdl:1959.4/unsworks_64013. S2CID 104843296.
47. Herrera, Ileana; Ferrer-Paris, José R.; Hernández-Rosas, José I.; Nassar, Jafet M. (2016). "Impact of two invasive succulents on native-seedling recruitment in Neotropical arid environments". Journal of Arid Environments. 132: 15–25. Bibcode:2016JArEn.132...15H. doi:10.1016/j.jaridenv.2016.04.007.
48. ^ Brooks, Matthew L.; D'Antonio, Carla M.; Richardson, David M.; Grace, James B.; Keeley, Jon E.; DiTOMASO, Joseph M.; Hobbs, Richard J.; Pellant, Mike; Pyke, David (2004). "Effects of Invasive Alien Plants on Fire Regimes". BioScience. 54 (7): 677. doi:10.1641/0006-3568(2004)054[0677:EOIAPO]2.0.CO;2. S2CID 13769125.
49. Silver Botts, P.; Patterson, B.A.; Schlosser, D. (1996). "Zebra mussel effects on benthic invertebrates: Physical or biotic?". Journal of the North American Benthological Society. 15 (2): 179–184. doi:10.2307/1467947. JSTOR 1467947. S2CID 84660670.
50. Keddy, Paul A. (2017). Plant Ecology. Cambridge University Press. p. 343. ISBN 978-1-107-11423-4. Archived from the original on August 16, 2021. Retrieved October 6, 2020.
51. Xu, Cheng-Yuan; Tang, Shaoqing; Fatemi, Mohammad; Gross, Caroline L.; Julien, Mic H.; Curtis, Caitlin; van Klinken, Rieks D. (September 1, 2015). "Population structure and genetic diversity of invasive Phyla canescens: implications for the evolutionary potential". Ecosphere. 6 (9): art162. doi:10.1890/ES14-00374.1.
52. Prentis, Peter (2008). "Adaptive evolution in invasive species". Trends in Plant Science. 13 (6): 288–294. Bibcode:2008TPS....13..288P. doi:10.1016/j.tplants.2008.03.004. hdl:10019.1/112332. PMID 18467157.
53. Lee, Carol Eunmi (2002). "Evolutionary genetics of invasive species". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 17 (8): 386–391. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(02)02554-5.
54. Zenni, R.D. (2013). "Adaptive Evolution and Phenotypic Plasticity During Naturalization and Spread of Invasive Species: Implications for Tree Invasion Biology". Biological Invasions. 16 (3): 635–644. doi:10.1007/s10530-013-0607-8. S2CID 82590.
55. ^ Amstutz, Lisa J (2018). Invasive Species. Minneapolis, MN: Abdo Publishing. pp. 8–10. ISBN 9781532110245.
56. Cassey, P (2005). "Concerning Invasive Species: Reply to Brown and Sax". Austral Ecology. 30 (4): 475–480. Bibcode:2005AusEc..30..475C. doi:10.1111/j.1442-9993.2005.01505.x. hdl:10019.1/119884.
57. Matisoo-Smith, E. (1998). "Patterns of prehistoric human mobility in Polynesia indicated by mtDNA from the Pacific rat". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 95 (25): 15145–15150. Bibcode:1998PNAS...9515145M. doi:10.1073/pnas.95.25.15145. PMC 24590. PMID 9844030.
58. Essl, Franz; Lenzner, Bernd; Bacher, Sven; Bailey, Sarah; Capinha, Cesar; Daehler, Curtis; et al. (September 2020). "Drivers of future alien species impacts: An expert-based assessment". Global Change Biology. 26 (9): 4880–4893. Bibcode:2020GCBio..26.4880E. doi:10.1111/gcb.15199. PMC 7496498. PMID 32663906.
59. ^ "Citrus Greening". Clemson Public Service Activities - The Department of Plant Industry. Archived from the original on June 16, 2013.
60. Leung, B. (2007). "The risk of establishment of aquatic invasive species: joining invasibility and propagule pressure". Proceedings of the Royal Society B. 274 (1625): 2733–2739. doi:10.1098/rspb.2007.0841. PMC 2275890. PMID 17711834.
61. Zavaleta, Erika S.; Hobbs, Richard J.; Mooney, Harold A. (August 2001). "Viewing invasive species removal in a whole-ecosystem context". Trends in Ecology & Evolution. 16 (8): 454–459. doi:10.1016/s0169-5347(01)02194-2.
62. Seinfeld, John H. (2016). Arias, Andres Hugo; Marcovecchio, Jorge Eduardo (eds.). Marine Pollution and Climate Change. John Wiley & Sons. ISBN 9781482299441.
63. Molnar, Jennifer L.; Gamboa, Rebecca L.; Revenga, Carmen; Spalding, Mark D. (November 2008). "Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity". Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 6 (9): 485–492. Bibcode:2008FrEE....6..485M. doi:10.1890/070064.
64. Drake, John (2007). "Hull fouling is a risk factor for intercontinental species exchange in aquatic ecosystems". Aquatic Invasions. 2 (2): 121–131. doi:10.3391/ai.2007.2.2.7.
65. "Biofouling moves up the regulatory agenda – GARD". www.gard.no. Archived from the original on January 13, 2020. Retrieved September 19, 2018.
66. ^ Egan, Dan (October 31, 2005). "Noxious cargo". Journal Sentinel. Archived from the original on October 21, 2011. Retrieved April 22, 2017.
67. Xu, Jian; Wickramarathne, Thanuka L.; Chawla, Nitesh V.; Grey, Erin K.; Steinhaeuser, Karsten; Keller, Reuben P.; Drake, John M.; Lodge, David M. (2014). "Improving management of aquatic invasions by integrating shipping network, ecological, and environmental data". Proceedings of the 20th ACM SIGKDD international conference on Knowledge discovery and data mining. pp. 1699–1708. doi:10.1145/2623330.2623364. ISBN 978-1-4503-2956-9. S2CID 2371978.
68. Streftaris, N; Zenetos, Argyro; Papathanassiou, Enangelos (2005). "Globalisation in marine ecosystems: The story of non-indigenous marine species across European seas". Oceanography and Marine Biology. 43: 419–453. Archived from the original on September 20, 2018. Retrieved September 19, 2018.
69. ^ Aquatic invasive species. A Guide to Least-Wanted Aquatic Organisms of the Pacific Northwest. 2001. University of Washington
70. Great Lake Commission. "Status of Ballast Water Discharge Regulations in the Great Lakes Region" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on February 12, 2020. Retrieved September 19, 2018.
71. USCG. "Ballast Water Management for Control of Non-Indigenous Species in Waters of the United States" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on May 11, 2020. Retrieved September 19, 2018.
72. Trainer, Vera L.; Bates, Stephen S.; Lundholm, Nina; Thessen, Anne E.; Cochlan, William P.; Adams, Nicolaus G.; Trick, Charles G. (2012). "Pseudo-nitzschia physiological ecology, phylogeny, toxicity, monitoring and impacts on ecosystem health". Harmful Algae. 14: 271–300. Bibcode:2012HAlga..14..271T. doi:10.1016/j.hal.2011.10.025. hdl:1912/5118.
73. Occhipinti-Ambrogi, Anna (2007). "Global change and marine communities: Alien species and climate change". Marine Pollution Bulletin. 55 (7–9): 342–352. Bibcode:2007MarPB..55..342O. doi:10.1016/j.marpolbul.2006.11.014. PMID 17239404.
74. Rahel, Frank J.; Olden, Julian D. (June 2008). "Assessing the Effects of Climate Change on Aquatic Invasive Species". Conservation Biology. 22 (3): 521–533. Bibcode:2008ConBi..22..521R. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2008.00950.x. PMID 18577081. S2CID 313824.
75. Hua, J.; Hwang, W.H. (2012). "Effects of voyage routing on the survival of microbes in ballast water". Ocean Engineering. 42: 165–175. Bibcode:2012OcEng..42..165H. doi:10.1016/j.oceaneng.2012.01.013.
76. Lenz, Mark; Ahmed, Yasser; Canning-Clode, João; Díaz, Eliecer; Eichhorn, Sandra; Fabritzek, Armin G.; da Gama, Bernardo A. P.; Garcia, Marie; von Juterzenka, Karen (May 24, 2018). "Heat challenges can enhance population tolerance to thermal stress in mussels: a potential mechanism by which ship transport can increase species invasiveness". Biological Invasions. 20 (11): 3107–3122. Bibcode:2018BiInv..20.3107L. doi:10.1007/s10530-018-1762-8. S2CID 53082967.
77. Ehrenfeld, Joan G. (December 1, 2010). "Ecosystem Consequences of Biological Invasions". Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics. 41 (1): 59–80. doi:10.1146/annurev-ecolsys-102209-144650.
78. "Communication From The Commission To The Council, The European Parliament, The European Economic And Social Committee And The Committee Of The Regions Towards An EU Strategy On Invasive Species" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on March 5, 2016. Retrieved May 17, 2011.
79. Lakicevic, Milena; Mladenovic, Emina (2018). "Non-native and invasive tree species - their impact on biodiversity loss". Zbornik Matice Srpske za Prirodne Nauke (134): 19–26. doi:10.2298/ZMSPN1834019L.
80. National Research Council (US) Committee on the Scientific Basis for Predicting the Invasive Potential of Nonindigenous Plants Plant Pests in the United States (2002). Predicting Invasions of Nonindigenous Plants and Plant Pests. doi:10.17226/10259. ISBN 978-0-309-08264-8. PMID 25032288. Archived from the original on November 17, 2019. Retrieved November 17, 2019.
81. Lewis, Simon L.; Maslin, Mark A. (2015). "Defining the Anthropocene". Nature. 519 (7542): 171–180. Bibcode:2015Natur.519..171L. doi:10.1038/nature14258. PMID 25762280. S2CID 205242896.
82. Millennium Ecosystem Assessment (2005). "Ecosystems and Human Well-being: Biodiversity Synthesis" (PDF). World Resources Institute. Archived (PDF) from the original on October 14, 2019. Retrieved September 18, 2007.
83. Baiser, Benjamin; Olden, Julian D.; Record, Sydne; Lockwood, Julie L.; McKinney, Michael L. (2012). "Pattern and process of biotic homogenization in the New Pangaea". Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 279 (1748): 4772–4777. doi:10.1098/rspb.2012.1651. PMC 3497087. PMID 23055062.
84. ^ Odendaal, L. J.; Haupt, T. M.; Griffiths, C. L. (2008). "The alien invasive land snail Theba pisana in the West Coast National Park: Is there cause for concern?". Koedoe. 50 (1): 93–98. doi:10.4102/koedoe.v50i1.153.
85. Fisher, Matthew C.; Garner, Trenton W. J. (2020). "Chytrid fungi and global amphibian declines" (PDF). Nature Reviews Microbiology. 18 (6): 332–343. doi:10.1038/s41579-020-0335-x. hdl:10044/1/78596. PMID 32099078. S2CID 211266075. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 7, 2020. Retrieved September 28, 2020.
86. Grosholz, E.D. (2005). "Recent biological invasion may hasten invasional meltdown by accelerating historical introductions". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. 102 (4): 1088–1091. Bibcode:2005PNAS..102.1088G. doi:10.1073/pnas.0308547102. PMC 545825. PMID 15657121.
87. Mungi, Ninad Avinash (2023). "Distribution, drivers and restoration priorities of plant invasions in India". Journal of Applied Ecology. 60 (11): 2400–2412. Bibcode:2023JApEc..60.2400M. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.14506.
88. Rastogi, Rajat (2023). "Multiple invasions exert combined magnified effects on native plants, soil nutrients and alters the plant-herbivore interaction in dry tropical forest". Forest Ecology and Management. 531: 120781. Bibcode:2023ForEM.53120781R. doi:10.1016/j.foreco.2023.120781.
89. ^ Mack, Richard N.; Simberloff, Daniel; Mark Lonsdale, W.; Evans, Harry; Clout, Michael; Bazzaz, Fakhri A. (June 2000). "Biotic Invasions: Causes, Epidemiology, Global Consequences, and Control". Ecological Applications. 10 (3): 689–710. doi:10.1890/1051-0761(2000)010[0689:BICEGC]2.0.CO;2. S2CID 711038.
90. Hawkes, C.V. (2005). "Plant invasion alters nitrogen cycling by modifying the soil nitrifying community". Ecology Letters. 8 (9): 976–985. Bibcode:2005EcolL...8..976H. doi:10.1111/j.1461-0248.2005.00802.x. PMID 34517683.
91. ^ Rhymer, J. M.; Simberloff, D. (1996). "Extinction by hybridization and introgression". Annual Review of Ecology and Systematics. 27 (1): 83–109. Bibcode:1996AnRES..27...83R. doi:10.1146/annurev.ecolsys.27.1.83.
92. Ayres, D.; et al. (2004). "Spread of exotic cordgrasses and hybrids (Spartina sp.) in the tidal marshes of San Francisco Bay, California, USA". Biological Invasions. 6 (2): 221–231. Bibcode:2004BiInv...6..221A. doi:10.1023/B:BINV.0000022140.07404.b7. S2CID 24732543.
93. Primtel, David (2005). "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States". Ecological Economics. 52 (3): 273–288. Bibcode:2005EcoEc..52..273P. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002.
94. Liebhold, S.; et al. (2013). "A highly aggregated geographical distribution of forest pest invasions in the USA". Diversity and Distributions. 19 (9): 1208–1216. Bibcode:2013DivDi..19.1208L. doi:10.1111/ddi.12112. S2CID 85799394.
95. Oswalt, C.; et al. (2015). "A subcontinental view of forest plant invasions". NeoBiota. 24: 49–54. doi:10.3897/neobiota.24.8378.
96. ^ Pimentel, D.; R., Zuniga; Morrison, D (2005). "Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States". Ecological Economics. 52 (3): 273–288. Bibcode:2005EcoEc..52..273P. doi:10.1016/j.ecolecon.2004.10.002.
97. "South/Adelges piceae - Bugwoodwiki". wiki.bugwood.org. Archived from the original on July 22, 2011. Retrieved June 26, 2022.
98. Schlarbaum, Scott E., Frederick Hebard, Pauline C. Spaine, and Joseph C. Kamalay. (1998) "Three American Tragedies: Chestnut Blight, Butternut Canker, and Dutch Elm Disease' Archived January 13, 2020, at the Wayback Machine. In: Britton, Kerry O., Ed. Exotic Pests of Eastern Forests Conference Proceedings; 1997 April 8–10; Nashville, TN. U.S. Forest Service and Tennessee Exotic Pest Plant Council., pp. 45–54.
99. Schlarbaum, Scott E.; Hebard, Frederick; Spaine, Pauline C.; Kamalay, Joseph C. (1997). "Three American Tragedies: Chestnut Blight, Butternut Canker and Dutch Elm Disease". (originally published via: Proceedings: Exotic Pests of Eastern Forests; (1997 April 8–10); Nashville, TN. Tennessee Exotic Pest Plant Council: 45–54.). Southern Research Station, Forest Service, United States Department of Agriculture. Archived from the original on April 24, 2012. Retrieved June 22, 2012.
    Alternative link and additional publication citation information: Tree Search, US Forest Service, USDA. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/745 Archived November 23, 2012, at the Wayback Machine
100. Rodger, Vikki; Stinson, Kristin; Finzi, Adrian (2008). "Ready or Not, Garlic Mustard Is Moving In: Alliaria petiolata as a Member of Eastern North American Forests". BioScience. 58 (5): 5. doi:10.1641/b580510.
101. ^ Mooney, HA; Cleland, EE (2001). "The evolutionary impact of invasive species". Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America. 98 (10): 5446–51. Bibcode:2001PNAS...98.5446M. doi:10.1073/pnas.091093398. PMC 33232. PMID 11344292.
102. "Glossary: definitions from the following publication: Aubry, C., R. Shoal and V. Erickson. 2005. Grass cultivars: their origins, development, and use on national forests and grasslands in the Pacific Northwest. USDA Forest Service. 44 pages, plus appendices.; Native Seed Network (NSN), Institute for Applied Ecology, 563 SW Jefferson Ave, Corvallis, OR 97333, USA". Nativeseednetwork.org. Archived from the original on February 22, 2006. Retrieved May 17, 2011.
103. Anttila, C. K.; King, R. A.; Ferris, C.; Ayres, D. R.; Strong, D. R. (2000). "Reciprocal hybrid formation of Spartina in San Francisco Bay". Molecular Ecology. 9 (6): 765–770. Bibcode:2000MolEc...9..765A. doi:10.1046/j.1365-294x.2000.00935.x. PMID 10849292. S2CID 32865913.
104. Genetic Pollution from Farm Forestry using eucalypt species and hybrids; A report for the RIRDC/L&WA/FWPRDC]; Joint Venture Agroforestry Program; by Brad M. Potts, Robert C. Barbour, Andrew B. Hingston; September 2001; RIRDC Publication No 01/114; RIRDC Project No CPF – 3A; (PDF). Australian Government, Rural Industrial Research and Development Corporation. 2001. ISBN 978-0-642-58336-9. Archived from the original (PDF) on January 2, 2004. Retrieved April 22, 2017.
105. Bohling, Justin H.; Waits, Lisette P. (2015). "Factors influencing red wolf–coyote hybridization in eastern North Carolina, USA". Biological Conservation. 184: 108–116. Bibcode:2015BCons.184..108B. doi:10.1016/j.biocon.2015.01.013.
106. "Cape Town is Facing Day Zero". The Nature Conservancy. Retrieved November 6, 2023.
107. "Greater cape town water fund" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on February 28, 2021. Retrieved November 16, 2020.
108. Mazza, G.; Tricarico, E.; Genovesi, P.; Gherardi, F. (December 19, 2013). "Biological invaders are threats to human health: an overview". Ethology Ecology & Evolution. 26 (2–3): 112–129. doi:10.1080/03949370.2013.863225. S2CID 58888740.
109. ^ Pyšek, P.; Richardson, D.M. (2010). "Invasive Species, Environmental Change and Management, and Health". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 35 (1): 25–55. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-033009-095548.
110. Lanciotti, R. S.; Roehrig, J. T.; Deubel, V.; Smith, J.; Parker, M.; Steele, K.; et al. (December 17, 1999). "Origin of the West Nile Virus Responsible for an Outbreak of Encephalitis in the Northeastern United States". Science. 286 (5448): 2333–2337. doi:10.1126/science.286.5448.2333. PMID 10600742.
111. Hallegraeff, G.M. (1998). "Transport of toxic dinoflagellates via ships' ballast water: Bioeconomic risk assessment and efficacy of possible ballast water management strategies". Marine Ecology Progress Series. 168: 297–309. Bibcode:1998MEPS..168..297H. doi:10.3354/meps168297.
112. Dela Cruz, Raymond Carl (October 7, 2020). "Water hyacinths ground Pasig River Ferry ops". Philippine News Agency. Archived from the original on October 28, 2023. Retrieved August 10, 2024.
113. Environment, U. N. (September 4, 2023). "Invasive Alien Species Report". www.unep.org. Retrieved May 29, 2024.
114. Xu, Haigen; Ding, Hui; Li, Mingyan; Qiang, Sheng; Guo, Jianying; Han, Zhengmin; Huang, Zongguo; Sun, Hongying; He, Shunping; Wu, Hairong; Wan, Fanghao (2006). "The distribution and economic losses of alien species invasion to China". Biological Invasions. 8 (7): 1495–1500. Bibcode:2006BiInv...8.1495X. doi:10.1007/s10530-005-5841-2. S2CID 25890246.
115. Molnar, Jennifer L; Gamboa, Rebecca L; Revenga, Carmen; Spalding, Mark D (2008). "Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity". Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment. 6 (9): 485–492. Bibcode:2008FrEE....6..485M. doi:10.1890/070064.
116. ^ "Great Lakes Fishery Commission – Sea Lamprey". www.glfc.org. Archived from the original on October 25, 2017. Retrieved October 24, 2017.
117. Simberloff, D. (2001). "Biological invasions – How are they affecting us, and what can we do about them?". Western North American Naturalist. 61 (3): 308–315. JSTOR 41717176.
118. 2008–2012 National Invasive Species Management Plan (PDF). Washington, DC.: National Invasive Species Council, Department of the Interior. 2008. Archived (PDF) from the original on September 29, 2015.
119. Holden, Matthew H.; Nyrop, Jan P.; Ellner, Stephen P. (June 1, 2016). "The economic benefit of time-varying surveillance effort for invasive species management". Journal of Applied Ecology. 53 (3): 712–721. Bibcode:2016JApEc..53..712H. doi:10.1111/1365-2664.12617.
120. Gougherty, Andrew V.; Davies, T. Jonathan (November 8, 2021). "Towards a phylogenetic ecology of plant pests and pathogens". Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences. 376 (1837): 20200359. doi:10.1098/rstb.2020.0359. PMC 8450633. PMID 34538142.
121. "American serpentine leafminer – Liriomyza trifolii (Burgess)". entnemdept.ufl.edu. Archived from the original on November 25, 2019. Retrieved November 20, 2019.
122. Eiswerth, M.E.; Darden, Tim D.; Johnson, Wayne S.; Agapoff, Jeanmarie; Harris, Thomas R. (2005). "Input-output modeling, outdoor recreation, and the economic impacts of weeds". Weed Science. 53: 130–137. doi:10.1614/WS-04-022R. S2CID 85608607.
123. "Eurasian Watermilfoil in the Great Lakes Region". Great Lakes Information Network. November 1, 2006. Archived from the original on July 25, 2008.
124. Sin, Hans; Radford, Adam (2007). "Coqui frog research and management efforts in Hawaii". Managing Vertebrate Invasive Species: Proceedings of an International Symposium (G. W. Witmer, W. C. Pitt, K. A. Fagerstone, Eds) (PDF). Fort Collins, Colorado: USDA/APHIS/WS, National Wildlife Research Center. Archived from the original (PDF) on May 25, 2017. Retrieved June 26, 2013.
125. "Spider Invaders". KQED. October 18, 2010. Archived from the original on November 5, 2020. Retrieved December 13, 2020.
126. Haubrock, Phillip J.; Turbelin, Anna J.; Cuthbert, Ross N.; Novoa, Ana; Taylor, Nigel G.; Angulo, Elena; et al. (2021). "Economic costs of invasive alien species across Europe". Neobiota. 67: 153–190. doi:10.3897/neobiota.67.58196. hdl:10138/333320. S2CID 237460752.
127. Haubrock, Phillip J.; Cuthbert, Ross N.; Tricarico, Elena; Diagne, Christophe; Courchamp, Franck; Gozlan, Rodolphe E. (July 29, 2021). "The recorded economic costs of alien invasive species in Italy" (PDF). NeoBiota. 67: 247–266. doi:10.3897/neobiota.67.57747. hdl:2158/1262519. S2CID 238819772.
128. Renault, David; Manfrini, Eléna; Leroy, Boris; Diagne, Christophe; Ballesteros-Mejia, Liliana; Angulo, Elena; Courchamp, Franck (July 29, 2021). "Biological invasions in France: Alarming costs and even more alarming knowledge gaps". NeoBiota. 67: 191–224. doi:10.3897/neobiota.67.59134. S2CID 237462170.
129. Thomas, Chris (2017). Inheritors of the Earth: How Nature Is Thriving in an Age of Extinction. PublicAffairs. ISBN 978-1610397278.
130. Halley, John (2019). "Doubting Thomas and the Love of Invasive Species". Book Review. Conservation Biology. 33 (6): 1451–1453. Bibcode:2019ConBi..33.1451H. doi:10.1111/cobi.13413.
131. ^ Schlaepfer, Martin A.; Sax, Dov F.; Olden, Julian D. (June 2011). "The Potential Conservation Value of Non-Native Species: Conservation Value of Non-Native Species". Conservation Biology. 25 (3): 428–437. doi:10.1111/j.1523-1739.2010.01646.x. PMID 21342267. S2CID 2947682.
132. Mehta, Kanishka; Koli, Vijay K.; Kittur, Swati; Sundar, K. S. Gopi (February 21, 2024). "Can you nest where you roost? Waterbirds use different sites but similar cues to locate roosting and breeding sites in a small Indian city". Urban Ecosystems. 27 (4): 1279–1290. Bibcode:2024UrbEc..27.1279M. doi:10.1007/s11252-023-01454-5. S2CID 267973120.
133. McBroom, Jen (December 2012). Clapper Rail Surveys for the San Francisco Estuary Invasive Spartina Project (PDF) (Report). Oakland, California: State Coastal Conservancy. Archived (PDF) from the original on March 5, 2017. Retrieved November 30, 2020.
134. Ham, Anthony (August 15, 2022). "Pigs to the Rescue: An Invasive Species Helped Save Australia's Crocodiles". The New York Times.
135. Thompson, Ken. Where Do Camels Belong? (p. 154). Greystone Books. Kindle Edition.
136. Pelton, Tom (May 26, 2006) The Baltimore Sun.
137. Zayed, Amro; Constantin, Șerban A.; Packer, Laurence (September 12, 2007). "Successful Biological Invasion despite a Severe Genetic Load". PLOS ONE. 2 (9): e868. Bibcode:2007PLoSO...2..868Z. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0000868. PMC 1964518. PMID 17848999.
138. Adamson, Nancy Lee (February 3, 2011). An Assessment of Non-Apis Bees as Fruit and Vegetable Crop Pollinators in Southwest Virginia (PDF) (Doctor of Philosophy in Entomology thesis). Blacksburg, Virginia: Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Archived from the original (PDF) on November 20, 2015. Retrieved November 5, 2015.
139. Thomas, Chris D.. Inheritors of the Earth (p. 148). PublicAffairs. Kindle Edition.
140. Wolverton, B. C.; McDonald, Rebecca C. (1981). "Energy from vascular plant wastewater treatment systems". Economic Botany. 35 (2): 224–232. Bibcode:1981EcBot..35..224W. doi:10.1007/BF02858689. S2CID 24217507.. Cited in Duke, J. (1983) Handbook of Energy Crops Archived February 12, 2013, at the Wayback Machine. Purdue University, Center for New Crops & Plants Products
141. Van Meerbeek, Koenraad; Appels, Lise; Dewil, Raf; Calmeyn, Annelies; Lemmens, Pieter; Muys, Bart; Hermy, Martin (May 1, 2015). "Biomass of invasive plant species as a potential feedstock for bioenergy production". Biofuels, Bioproducts and Biorefining. 9 (3): 273–282. doi:10.1002/bbb.1539. S2CID 83918875.
142. Roelvink, Gerda; Martin, Kevin St; Gibson-Graham, J. K. (2015). Making Other Worlds Possible: Performing Diverse Economies. University of Minnesota Press. ISBN 978-0-8166-9329-0.
143. Garrido-Pérez, Edgardo I.; Tella Ruiz, David (2016). "Homo sapiens (Primates: Hominidae): ¿una especie invasora o aún peor? Un reto para potenciar la Ecología y la Biología de la conservación". Puente Biológico. 8: 43–55.
     Translated as Garrido-Pérez, Edgardo I.; Tella Ruiz, David (2016). "Homo sapiens (Primates: Hominidae): an invasive species or even worse? A challenge for strengthening ecology and conservation biology". Archived from the original on June 11, 2022. Retrieved August 19, 2020 – via ResearchGate.
144. Hakam, Lara (February 2013). "Invasive Species: Public Awareness and Education" (PDF). University of Washington. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 5, 2021. Retrieved September 30, 2020.
145. Makhrov, A. A.; Karabanov, D. P.; Koduhova, Yu. V. (July 2014). "Genetic methods for the control of alien species". Russian Journal of Biological Invasions. 5 (3): 194–202. Bibcode:2014RuJBI...5..194M. doi:10.1134/S2075111714030096. S2CID 256073288.
146. Lodge, David M.; Simonin, Paul W.; Burgiel, Stanley W.; Keller, Reuben P.; Bossenbroek, Jonathan M.; Jerde, Christopher L.; et al. (November 1, 2016). "Risk Analysis and Bioeconomics of Invasive Species to Inform Policy and Management". Annual Review of Environment and Resources. 41 (1): 453–488. doi:10.1146/annurev-environ-110615-085532.
147. O'Neill, Jr., Charles R. (2002). "Zebra Mussels and Fire Control Equipment" (PDF). SUNY College at Brockport: Sea Grant. Archived (PDF) from the original on November 5, 2021. Retrieved May 23, 2021.
148. Ouellet, Nicky (August 23, 2017). "Wildland Firefighters Try to Combat Spread of Invasive Species". All Things Considered. NPR. Archived from the original on June 13, 2021. Retrieved May 23, 2021.
149. Ouellet, Nicky (July 27, 2017). "How Montana Is Fighting Invasive Hitchhikers On Firefighting Aircraft". Montana Public Radio. Archived from the original on May 23, 2021. Retrieved May 23, 2021.
150. National Wildfire Coordinating Group (January 2017). "Guide to Preventing Aquatic Invasive Species Transport by Wildland Fire Operations" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on April 19, 2021. Retrieved May 23, 2021.
151. National Wildfire Coordinating Group (June 11, 2018). "Decontaminating Firefighting Equipment to Reduce the Spread of Aquatic Invasive Species" (PDF). Archived (PDF) from the original on April 28, 2021. Retrieved May 23, 2021.
152. Holmes, Nick (March 27, 2019). "Globally important islands where eradicating invasive mammals will benefit highly threatened vertebrates". PLOS ONE. 14 (3): e0212128. Bibcode:2019PLoSO..1412128H. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0212128. PMC 6436766. PMID 30917126.
153. de Wit, Luz A.; Zilliacus, Kelly M.; Quadri, Paulo; Will, David; Grima, Nelson; Spatz, Dena; et al. (September 2020). "Invasive vertebrate eradications on islands as a tool for implementing global Sustainable Development Goals". Environmental Conservation. 47 (3): 139–148. Bibcode:2020EnvCo..47..139D. doi:10.1017/S0376892920000211. S2CID 221990256.
154. "Pursuing Sustainable Development for Island Communities by Removing Invasive Species". Island Conservation. August 13, 2020. Archived from the original on September 26, 2020. Retrieved August 13, 2020.
155. Warren, Matt (May 8, 2018). "Rat begone: Record eradication effort rids sub-Antarctic island of invasive rodents". Science. Archived from the original on May 9, 2018. Retrieved May 9, 2018.
156. Hester, Jessica Leight (May 17, 2018). "The Intrepid Rat-Sniffing Terriers of South Georgia Island". Atlas Obscura. Archived from the original on May 22, 2018. Retrieved June 6, 2018.
157. "Invasive plants can create positive ecological change". Science Daily. February 14, 2011. Archived from the original on May 25, 2017. Retrieved June 22, 2017. Invasive species could fill niches in degraded ecosystems and help restore native biodiversity....
158. Searcy, Christopher A.; Rollins, Hilary B.; Shaffer, H. Bradley (2016). "Ecological equivalency as a tool for endangered species management". Ecological Applications. 26 (1): 94–103. Bibcode:2016EcoAp..26...94S. doi:10.1890/14-1674. PMID 27039512.
159. Hansen, Dennis M.; Donlan, C. Josh; Griffiths, Christine J.; Campbell, Karl J. (2010). "Ecological history and latent conservation potential: Large and giant tortoises as a model for taxon substitutions". Ecography. 33 (2): 272–284. Bibcode:2010Ecogr..33..272H. doi:10.1111/j.1600-0587.2010.06305.x.
160. ^ Jacobsen, Rowan (March 24, 2014). "The Invasivore's Dilemma". Outside. Archived from the original on May 28, 2019. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
161. Lai, Bun (September 1, 2013). "Invasive Species Menu of a World-Class Chef". Scientific American. 309 (3): 40–43. Bibcode:2013SciAm.309c..40L. doi:10.1038/scientificamerican0913-40. PMID 24003552.
162. Billock, Jennifer (February 9, 2016). "Bite Back Against Invasive Species at Your Next Meal". Smithsonian Magazine. Archived from the original on March 22, 2019. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
163. Snyder, Michael (May 19, 2017). "Can We Really Eat Invasive Species into Submission?". Scientific American. Archived from the original on August 1, 2020. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
164. Kolbert, Elizabeth (December 2, 2012). "Alien Entrées". New Yorker. Archived from the original on October 18, 2019. Retrieved February 13, 2020.
165. "Bio". Joe Roman. March 12, 2015. Archived from the original on May 28, 2019. Retrieved June 26, 2022.
166. "Eat The Invaders — Fighting Invasive Species, One Bite At A Time!". eattheinvaders.org. Archived from the original on May 19, 2019. Retrieved June 26, 2022.
167. Parks, Mary; Thanh, Thai (2019). The Green Crab Cookbook. Green Crab R&d. ISBN 9780578427942. Archived from the original on October 4, 2020. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
168. "Lionfish Cookbook 2nd Edition | Reef Environmental Education Foundation". www.reef.org. Archived from the original on May 28, 2019. Retrieved May 28, 2019.
169. Iyer, Ajay; Bestwick, Charles S.; Duncan, Sylvia H.; Russell, Wendy R. (February 15, 2021). "Invasive Plants Are a Valuable Alternate Protein Source and Can Contribute to Meeting Climate Change Targets". Frontiers in Sustainable Food Systems. 5. doi:10.3389/fsufs.2021.575056. hdl:2164/15875.
170. Iyer, Ajay; Guerrier, Lisa; Leveque, Salomé; Bestwick, Charles S.; Duncan, Sylvia H.; Russell, Wendy R. (2022). "High throughput method development and optimised production of leaf protein concentrates with potential to support the agri-industry". Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization. 16 (1): 49–65. doi:10.1007/s11694-021-01136-w. hdl:2164/19275. S2CID 244407388.
171. Nuñez, Martin A.; Kuebbing, Sara; Dimarco, Romina D.; Simberloff, Daniel (December 2012). "Invasive Species: to eat or not to eat, that is the question". Conservation Letters. 5 (5): 334–341. Bibcode:2012ConL....5..334N. doi:10.1111/j.1755-263X.2012.00250.x. hdl:11336/198362.
172. Conniff, Richard (January 24, 2014). "Invasive Lionfish, the Kings of the Caribbean, May Have Met Their Match". Yahoo News. Archived from the original on January 27, 2014.
173. Bryce, Emma (February 6, 2015). "Cooking can't solve the threat of invasive species". The Guardian. Archived from the original on October 17, 2017. Retrieved October 16, 2017.
174. ^ Goss, EM; Kendig, AE; Adhikari, A; Lane, B; Kortessis, N; Holt, RD; Clay, K; Harmon, PF; Flory, SL (August 2020). "Disease in Invasive Plant Populations". Annual Review of Phytopathology. 58 (1): 97–117. doi:10.1146/annurev-phyto-010820-012757. PMID 32516034. S2CID 219563975.
175. Kalmakoff, James (October 11, 2016). "CRISPR for pest-free NZ". Archived from the original on October 19, 2016. Retrieved October 19, 2016.
176. ^ "Mission & Principles Statement". July 1, 2018. Retrieved November 14, 2018.
177. "GBIRd Fact Sheet" (PDF). April 1, 2018. Retrieved November 14, 2018.
178. "'Gene drives' could wipe out whole populations of pests in one fell swoop". The Conversation. August 8, 2017.
179. "An Argument Against Gene Drives to Extinguish New Zealand Mammals: Life Finds a Way". Plos blogs. November 30, 2017.
180. Campbell, Colin (October 17, 2016). "Risks may accompany gene drive technology". Otago Daily Times. Retrieved October 19, 2016.
181. Ööpik, Merle; Kukk, Toomas; Kull, Kalevi; Kull, Tiiu (2008). "The importance of human mediation in species establishment: analysis of the alien flora of Estonia". Boreal Environment Research. 13 (Supplement A): 53–67. hdl:10138/235238.
182. Lehan, Nora E.; Murphy, Julia R.; Thorburn, Lukas P.; Bradley, Bethany A. (July 2013). "Accidental introductions are an important source of invasive plants in the continental United States". American Journal of Botany. 100 (7): 1287–1293. doi:10.3732/ajb.1300061. PMID 23825135.
183. Virtue, J.G.; Bennett, Sarita; Randall, R.P. (2004). "Plant introductions in Australia: how can we resolve 'weedy' conflicts of interest?: Plant introductions in Australia: how can we resolve 'weedy' conflicts of interest?". In Sindel, Brian Mark; Johnson, Stephen Barry (eds.). Weed Management: Balancing People, Planet, Profit : 14th Australian Weeds Conference : Papers & Proceedings. Weed Society of New South Wales. pp. 42–48. ISBN 978-0-9752488-0-5. S2CID 82300163.
184. ^ Pheloung, P.C.; Williams, P.A.; Halloy, S.R. (December 1999). "A weed risk assessment model for use as a biosecurity tool evaluating plant introductions". Journal of Environmental Management. 57 (4): 239–251. Bibcode:1999JEnvM..57..239P. doi:10.1006/jema.1999.0297.
185. ^ Koop, Anthony L.; Fowler, Larry; Newton, Leslie P.; Caton, Barney P. (February 2012). "Development and validation of a weed screening tool for the United States". Biological Invasions. 14 (2): 273–294. Bibcode:2012BiInv..14..273K. doi:10.1007/s10530-011-0061-4. S2CID 254280051.
186. Pfadenhauer, William G.; Nelson, Michael F.; Laginhas, Brit B.; Bradley, Bethany A. (January 2023). "Remember your roots: Biogeographic properties of plants' native habitats can inform invasive plant risk assessments". Diversity and Distributions. 29 (1): 4–18. Bibcode:2023DivDi..29....4P. doi:10.1111/ddi.13639. S2CID 253220107.
187. Gordon, Doria R.; Flory, S. Luke; Lieurance, Deah; Hulme, Philip E.; Buddenhagen, Chris; Caton, Barney; et al. (March 2016). "Weed Risk Assessments Are an Effective Component of Invasion Risk Management". Invasive Plant Science and Management. 9 (1): 81–83. doi:10.1614/IPSM-D-15-00053.1. S2CID 86276601.
188. Hulme, Philip E. (February 2012). "Weed risk assessment: a way forward or a waste of time?: Weed risk assessment: a way forward or waste of time?". Journal of Applied Ecology. 49 (1): 10–19. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2664.2011.02069.x.

Further reading

• Mitchell, Heidi J.; Bartsch, Detlef (January 21, 2020). "Regulation of GM Organisms for Invasive Species Control". Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology. 7: 454. doi:10.3389/fbioe.2019.00454. PMC 6985037. PMID 32039172.
• Removing Threat from Invasive Species with Genetic Engineering—Science in the News
• Sheppard, Andy; et al. (September 4, 2023). "The true damage of invasive alien species was just revealed in a landmark report. Here's how we must act". The Conversation.
• White, Michael (13 Dec 2017) . "Should We Fight Invasive Species with Genetic Engineering?" Pacific Standard.

External links

• North American Invasive Species Network, a consortium that uses a coordinated network to advance science-based understanding and enhance management of non-native, invasive species.
• Great Britain Non-native Species Secretariat (NNNS) website
• CABI Invasive Species Compendium, an encyclopaedic resource of scientific information
• Invasive Species, National Invasive Species Information Center, United States National Agricultural Library
• Invasive Species Specialist Group – Global Invasive Species Database
• Pacific Island Ecosystems at Risk project
• invadingspecies.com of the Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources and Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters
• Aquatic invasive species in Ireland, Inland Fisheries Ireland
• Invasive alien species in Belgium Belgian Forum on Invasive Species (BFIS)

v t e Pollution
History
Air	Acid rain Air quality index Atmospheric dispersion modeling Chlorofluorocarbon Combustion Biofuel Biomass Joss paper Open burning of waste Construction Renovation Demolition Exhaust gas Diesel exhaust Haze Smoke Indoor air quality Internal combustion engine Global dimming Global distillation Mining Ozone depletion Particulates Asbestos Metal working Oil refining Wood dust Welding Persistent organic pollutant Smelting Smog Soot Black carbon Volatile organic compound Waste
Biological	Biological hazard Genetic pollution Introduced species Invasive species
Digital	Information pollution
Electromagnetic	Light Ecological light pollution Overillumination Radio spectrum pollution
Natural	Ozone Radium and radon in the environment Volcanic ash Wildfire
Noise	Transportation Land Water Air Rail Sustainable transport Urban Sonar Marine mammals and sonar Industrial Military Abstract Noise control
Radiation	Actinides Bioremediation Nuclear fission Nuclear fallout Plutonium Poisoning Radioactivity Uranium Electromagnetic radiation and health Radioactive waste
Soil	Agricultural pollution Herbicides Manure waste Pesticides Land degradation Bioremediation Open defecation Electrical resistance heating Soil guideline values Phytoremediation
Solid waste	Advertising mail Biodegradable waste Brown waste Electronic waste Battery recycling Foam food container Food waste Green waste Hazardous waste Biomedical waste Chemical waste Construction waste Lead poisoning Mercury poisoning Toxic waste Industrial waste Lead smelting Litter Mining Coal mining Gold mining Surface mining Deep sea mining Mining waste Uranium mining Municipal solid waste Garbage Nanomaterials Plastic pollution Microplastics Packaging waste Post-consumer waste Waste management Landfill Thermal treatment
Space	Satellite
Visual	Air travel Clutter (advertising) Traffic signs Overhead power lines Vandalism
War	Chemical warfare Herbicidal warfare (Agent Orange) Nuclear holocaust (Nuclear fallout - nuclear famine - nuclear winter) Scorched earth Unexploded ordnance War and environmental law
Water	Agricultural wastewater Biological pollution Diseases Eutrophication Firewater Freshwater Groundwater Hypoxia Industrial wastewater Marine debris Monitoring Nonpoint source pollution Nutrient pollution Ocean acidification Oil exploitation Oil exploration Oil spill Pharmaceuticals Sewage Septic tanks Pit latrine Shipping Stagnation Sulfur water Surface runoff Thermal Turbidity Urban runoff Water quality
Topics	Pollutants Heavy metals Paint Brain health and pollution
Misc	Area source Debris Dust Garbology Legacy pollution Midden Point source Waste
Responses	Cleaner production Industrial ecology Pollution haven hypothesis Pollutant release and transfer register Polluter pays principle Pollution control Waste minimisation Zero waste
Lists	Diseases Law by country Most polluted cities Least polluted cities by PM2.5 Most polluted countries Most polluted rivers Treaties
Categories (by country) Commons WikiProject Environment WikiProject Ecology Environment portal Ecology portal

• Invasive species
• Environmental conservation
• Environmental terminology
• Forest pathology
• Habitat
• Pest control