Search

Aim: Human activities have introduced numerous non-native species (NNS) worldwide. Understanding and predicting large-scale NNS establishment patterns remain fundamental scientific challenges. Here, we evaluate if NNS composition represents a proportional subset of the total species pool available to invade (i.e. total global biodiversity), or, conversely, certain taxa are disproportionately pre-disposed to establish in non-native areas. Location: Global. Time period: Present day. Major taxa studied: Global diversity. Methods: We compiled one of the most comprehensive global databases of NNS (36,822 established species) to determine if NNS diversity is a representative proportional subset of global biodiversity. Results: Our study revealed that, while NNS diversity mirrors global biodiversity to a certain extent, due to significant deviance from the null model it is not always a representative proportional subset of global biodiversity. The strength of global biodiversity as a predictor depended on the taxonomic scale, with successive lower taxonomic levels less predictive than the one above it. Consequently, on average, 58%, 42% and 28% of variability in NNS numbers were explained by global biodiversity for phylum, class and family respectively. Moreover, global biodiversity was a similarly strong explanatory variable for NNS diversity among regions, but not habitats (i.e. terrestrial, freshwater and marine), where it better predicted NNS diversity for terrestrial than for freshwater and marine habitats. Freshwater and marine habitats were also greatly understudied relative to invasions in the terrestrial habitats. Over-represented NNS relative to global biodiversity tended to be those intentionally introduced and/or ‘hitchhikers’ associated with deliberate introductions. Finally, randomness is likely an important factor in the establishment success of NNS. Main conclusions: Besides global biodiversity, other important explanatory variables for large-scale patterns

Aim: Human activities have introduced numerous non-native species (NNS) worldwide. Understanding and predicting large-scale NNS establishment patterns remain fundamental scientific challenges. Here, we evaluate if NNS composition represents a proportional subset of the total species pool available to invade (i.e. total global biodiversity), or, conversely, certain taxa are disproportionately pre-disposed to establish in non-native areas. Location: Global. Time period: Present day. Major taxa studied: Global diversity. Methods: We compiled one of the most comprehensive global databases of NNS (36,822 established species) to determine if NNS diversity is a representative proportional subset of global biodiversity. Results: Our study revealed that, while NNS diversity mirrors global biodiversity to a certain extent, due to significant deviance from the null model it is not always a representative proportional subset of global biodiversity. The strength of global biodiversity as a predictor depended on the taxonomic scale, with successive lower taxonomic levels less predictive than the one above it. Consequently, on average, 58%, 42% and 28% of variability in NNS numbers were explained by global biodiversity for phylum, class and family respectively. Moreover, global biodiversity was a similarly strong explanatory variable for NNS diversity among regions, but not habitats (i.e. terrestrial, freshwater and marine), where it better predicted NNS diversity for terrestrial than for freshwater and marine habitats. Freshwater and marine habitats were also greatly understudied relative to invasions in the terrestrial habitats. Over-represented NNS relative to global biodiversity tended to be those intentionally introduced and/or ‘hitchhikers’ associated with deliberate introductions. Finally, randomness is likely an important factor in the establishment success of NNS. Main conclusions: Besides global biodiversity, other important explanatory variables for large-scale patterns

Biological invasions are a major driver of biodiversity loss and socioeconomic burden globally. As invasion rates accelerate worldwide, understanding past invasion dynamics is essential to inform predictions of future invaders and impacts. Owing to a high diversity of pathways and current biosecurity gaps, aquatic systems near urban centres are especially susceptible to alien species establishments. Here, we compiled and compared alien species lists for three different aquatic recipient regions spanning the North Atlantic: Chesapeake Bay, Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River and North and Baltic Seas. Each system is a major trade centre, with a history of invasions, and characterised by a strong natural salinity gradient. Our goal was to compare the alien species across systems, to test for similarities in the taxonomic composition and geographic origin as well as species overlap among the three regions. We selected specific macroinvertebrate, algae and fish taxa for analysis, to control for uneven taxonomic and biogeographic resolution across regions. Cumulatively, we identified 326 individual alien species established in these aquatic systems, with the North and Baltic Seas most invaded overall (163), followed by Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River (84) and Chesapeake Bay (79). Most invasions were from Ponto-Caspian, Eurasian, Northwest Pacific, Northwest Atlantic and North American origins, and mostly comprised Arthropoda, Chordata, Mollusca and Annelida. However, origins and taxonomies differed significantly among destinations, with Ponto-Caspian species particularly successful invaders to the North and Baltic Seas then Great Lakes-St. Lawrence River, but less so to Chesapeake Bay. Nevertheless, approximately eight tenths of invaders established in only one region, indicating disparate invasion patterns and a high potential for future aliens to accrue from increasingly diverse source pools and pathways. These results support biosecurity strategies that consider a broad ran

Aim The introduction of aquatic non‐indigenous species (ANS) has become a major driver for global changes in species biogeography. We examined spatial patterns and temporal trends of ANS detections since 1965 to inform conservation policy and management. Location Global. Methods We assembled an extensive dataset of first records of detection of ANS (1965–2015) across 49 aquatic ecosystems, including the (a) year of first collection, (b) population status and (c) potential pathway(s) of introduction. Data were analysed at global and regional levels to assess patterns of detection rate, richness and transport pathways. Results An annual mean of 43 (±16 SD) primary detections of ANS occurred—one new detection every 8.4 days for 50 years. The global rate of detections was relatively stable during 1965–1995, but increased rapidly after this time, peaking at roughly 66 primary detections per year during 2005–2010 and then declining marginally. Detection rates were variable within and across regions through time. Arthropods, molluscs and fishes were the most frequently reported ANS. Most ANS were likely introduced as stowaways in ships’ ballast water or biofouling, although direct evidence is typically absent. Main conclusions This synthesis highlights the magnitude of recent ANS detections, yet almost certainly represents an underestimate as many ANS go unreported due to limited search effort and diminishing taxonomic expertise. Temporal rates of detection are also confounded by reporting lags, likely contributing to the lower detection rate observed in recent years. There is a critical need to implement standardized, repeated methods across regions and taxa to improve the quality of global‐scale comparisons and sustain core measures over longer time‐scales. It will be fundamental to fill in knowledge gaps given that invasion data representing broad regions of the world's oceans are not yet readily available and to maintain knowledge pipelines for adaptive management.

Biological invasions are a global consequence of an increasingly connected world and the rise in human population size. The numbers of invasive alien species – the subset of alien species that spread widely in areas where they are not native, affecting the environment or human livelihoods – are increasing. Synergies with other global changes are exacerbating current invasions and facilitating new ones, thereby escalating the extent and impacts of invaders. Invasions have complex and often immense long‐term direct and indirect impacts. In many cases, such impacts become apparent or problematic only when invaders are well established and have large ranges. Invasive alien species break down biogeographic realms, affect native species richness and abundance, increase the risk of native species extinction, affect the genetic composition of native populations, change native animal behaviour, alter phylogenetic diversity across communities, and modify trophic networks. Many invasive alien species also change ecosystem functioning and the delivery of ecosystem services by altering nutrient and contaminant cycling, hydrology, habitat structure, and disturbance regimes. These biodiversity and ecosystem impacts are accelerating and will increase further in the future. Scientific evidence has identified policy strategies to reduce future invasions, but these strategies are often insufficiently implemented. For some nations, notably Australia and New Zealand, biosecurity has become a national priority. There have been long‐term successes, such as eradication of rats and cats on increasingly large islands and biological control of weeds across continental areas. However, in many countries, invasions receive little attention. Improved international cooperation is crucial to reduce the impacts of invasive alien species on biodiversity, ecosystem services, and human livelihoods. Countries can strengthen their biosecurity regulations to implement and enforce more effective management

In 2014, a DNA‐based phylogenetic study confirming the paraphyly of the grass subtribe Sporobolinae proposed the creation of a large monophyletic genus Sporobolus, including (among others) species previously included in the genera Spartina, Calamovilfa, and Sporobolus. Spartina species have contributed substantially (and continue contributing) to our knowledge in multiple disciplines, including ecology, evolutionary biology, molecular biology, biogeography, experimental ecology, biological invasions, environmental management, restoration ecology, history, economics, and sociology. There is no rationale so compelling to subsume the name Spartina as a subgenus that could rival the striking, global iconic history and use of the name Spartina for over 200 yr. We do not agree with the subjective arguments underlying the proposal to change Spartina to Sporobolus. We understand the importance of both the objective phylogenetic insights and of the subjective formalized nomenclature and hope that by opening this debate we will encourage positive feedback that will strengthen taxonomic decisions with an interdisciplinary perspective. We consider that the strongly distinct, monophyletic clade Spartina should simply and efficiently be treated as the genus Spartina.