Suchergebnisse

2nd Freshwater Invasives - Networking for Strategy II (FINS-II) Conference -- JUL 11-14, 2016 -- Zagreb, CROATIA ; Skora, Michal Edward/0000-0002-9121-1318; Groom, Quentin/0000-0002-0596-5376; Lukas, Juliane/0000-0003-3336-847X; Skora, Michal/0000-0002-9121-1318; Piria, Marina/0000-0001-6324-9282; Smith, Emily/0000-0003-2767-9933; Simonovic, Predrag/0000-0002-4819-4962; Pastorino, Paolo/0000-0002-0585-1168; Koutsikos, Nicholas/0000-0003-0680-4504; Vilizzi, Lorenzo/0000-0001-8103-885X; Dobrzycka-Krahel, Aldona/0000-0002-4252-895X; Tarkan, Ali Serhan/0000-0001-8628-0514 ; WOS: 000412582000002 ; Invasive alien species (IAS) are a significant and growing problem worldwide. In Europe, some aspects of IAS have been addressed through existing legal instruments, but these are far from sufficient to tackle the problem comprehensively. The FINS II Conference considered the relevance of Top 20 IAS issues (Top 10 threats and opportunities) for Europe determined at the 1st Freshwater Invasiveness-Networking for Strategy (FINS I) conference held in Ireland in 2013. Using a similar format of sequential group voting, threats from FINS I (lack of funding, of awareness and education; poor communication) and several new threats (lack of lead agencies, of standardized management and of common approach; insufficient monitoring and management on private property) were identified by 80 academics, applied scientists, policy makers and stakeholders from 14 EU and three non-EU countries (including 10 invited speakers) during four workshop break-out sessions (legislation remit in both EU/non-EU countries; best management and biosecurity practice for control; data management and early warning; pathways of introductions and citizen science). Identified opportunities include improved cooperation and communication, education and leadership to enhance public awareness and stakeholder participation, systems establishment for early detection, rapid response, monitoring and management of IAS using standardised methods of data collection, storage and usage. The sets of threats and opportunities identified underline the importance of international cooperation on IAS issues in communication, education and funding as priorities, as well as in standardization of legislation, control methods and best practise of research. ; Univ Zagreb, European Inland Fisheries & Aquaculture Advisory Commiss ; University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture; European Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Commission (EIFAAC); Croatian Biological Society; Ministry of Science; Education and Sport of Republic of Croatia; Croatian Association of Sports Fishing Societies; Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts; Nature Conservation Committee [NEC04932]; Natural Environment Research CouncilNERC Natural Environment Research Council [NEC04932]; UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural AffairsDepartment for Environment, Food & Rural Affairs (DEFRA); Irish EPA project "Prevention, control and eradication of invasive alien species" [2015-NC-MS-4]; Topfishing; Zagreb ZOO; Zagreb; Karlovac towns ; We wish to thank the University of Zagreb, Faculty of Agriculture, the European Inland Fisheries and Aquaculture Commission (EIFAAC), the Croatian Biological Society, the Ministry of Science, the Education and Sport of Republic of Croatia, the Croatian Association of Sports Fishing Societies, the Croatian Academy of Sciences and Arts, Topfishing, Zagreb ZOO, Zagreb and Karlovac towns for sponsoring the FINS II conference. We also thank the large number of people who assisted but are not co-authors on the manuscript including M. Pofuk, T. Stuhne, R. Jasarevic, K. Culag, I. Cuze, M. Cvitanic and S. Hudina for their selfless assistance during the conference. H.E. Roy received support from the Joint Nature Conservation Committee and the Natural Environment Research Council (via National Capability funding to the Centre for Ecology & Hydrology, project NEC04932), and G.H. Copp was supported by the UK Department of Environment, Food and Rural Affairs. COST Action TD1209 ALIEN Challenge is acknowledged. F. Lucy, J. Caffrey, J. Dick, E. Davis and N. Coughlan were supported by the Irish EPA project "Prevention, control and eradication of invasive alien species" (2015-NC-MS-4).

Since 2016, the European Union (EU) has required Member States to prevent, control and eradicate selected invasive alien species (IAS) designated as Species of Union Concern. To improve these conservation efforts, online information systems are used to convey IAS information to the wider public, often as a means to bolster community-based environmental monitoring. Despite this, both the conformity and quality of information presented amongst online databases remain poorly understood. Here, we assess the harmonisation and educational potential of four major IAS databases (i.e., conformity of information and information quality, respectively): CABI, EASIN, GISD and NOBANIS. All databases were interrogated for information concerning 49 IAS of Union Concern. For each species, information presented within the evaluated databases was scored in relation to several key topics: morphological identification; EU distribution; detrimental impacts; control options; and the use of source material citations. Overall, scores differed significantly among databases and thus lacked harmonisation, whereby CABI ranked significantly highest based on the combined scores for all topics. In addition, CABI ranked highest for the individual topics of species identification, impacts, control options, and for the use of citations. EASIN ranked highest for species distribution data. NOBANIS consistently ranked as the lowest scoring database across all topics. For each topic, the highest scoring databases achieved scores indicative of detailed or highly detailed information, which suggests a high educational potential for the information portrayed. Nevertheless, the extent of harmonisation and quality of information presented amongst online databases should be improved. This is especially pertinent if online databases are to contribute to public participatory monitoring initiatives for IAS detection.

Since 2016, the European Union (EU) has required Member States to prevent, control and eradicate selected invasive alien species (IAS) designated as Species of Union Concern. To improve these conservation efforts, online information systems are used to convey IAS information to the wider public, often as a means to bolster community-based environmental monitoring. Despite this, both the conformity and quality of information presented amongst online databases remain poorly understood. Here, we assess the harmonisation and educational potential of four major IAS databases (i.e., conformity of information and information quality, respectively): CABI, EASIN, GISD and NOBANIS. All databases were interrogated for information concerning 49 IAS of Union Concern. For each species, information presented within the evaluated databases was scored in relation to several key topics: morphological identification; EU distribution; detrimental impacts; control options; and the use of source material citations. Overall, scores differed significantly among databases and thus lacked harmonisation, whereby CABI ranked significantly highest based on the combined scores for all topics. In addition, CABI ranked highest for the individual topics of species identification, impacts, control options, and for the use of citations. EASIN ranked highest for species distribution data. NOBANIS consistently ranked as the lowest scoring database across all topics. For each topic, the highest scoring databases achieved scores indicative of detailed or highly detailed information, which suggests a high educational potential for the information portrayed. Nevertheless, the extent of harmonisation and quality of information presented amongst online databases should be improved. This is especially pertinent if online databases are to contribute to public participatory monitoring initiatives for IAS detection.

Invasive alien species (IAS) cause myriad negative impacts, such as ecosystem disruption, human, animal and plant health issues, economic damage and species extinctions. There are many sources of emerging and future IAS, such as the poorly regulated international pet trade. However, we lack methodologies to predict the likely ecological impacts and invasion risks of such IAS which have little or no informative invasion history. This study develops the Relative Impact Potential (RIP) metric, a new measure of ecological impact that incorporates per capita functional responses (FRs) and proxies for numerical responses (NRs) associated with emerging invaders. Further, as propagule pressure is a determinant of invasion risk, we combine the new measure of Pet Propagule Pressure (PPP) with RIP to arrive at a second novel metric, Relative Invasion Risk (RIR). We present methods to calculate these metrics and to display the outputs on intuitive bi- and triplots. We apply RIP/RIR to assess the potential ecological impacts and invasion risks of four commonly traded pet turtles that represent emerging IAS: Trachemys scripta scripta, the yellow-bellied slider; T. s. troostii, the Cumberland slider; Sternotherus odoratus, the common musk turtle; and Kinosternon subrubrum, the Eastern mud turtle. The high maximum feeding rate and high attack rate of T. s. scripta, combined with its numerical response proxies of lifespan and fecundity, gave it the highest impact potential. It was also the second most readily available according to our UK surveys, indicating a high invasion risk. Despite having the lowest maximum feeding rate and attack rate, S. odoratus has a high invasion risk due to high availability and we highlight this species as requiring monitoring. The RIP/RIR metrics offer two universally applicable methods to assess potential impacts and risks associated with emerging and future invaders in the pet trade and other sources of future IAS. These metrics highlight T. s. scripta as having high impact and invasion risk, corroborating its position on the EU list of 49 IAS of Union Concern. This suggests our methodology and metrics have great potential to direct future IAS policy decisions and management. This, however, relies on collation and generation of new data on alien species functional responses, numerical responses and their proxies, and imaginative measures of propagule pressure.

Non-native species cause changes in the ecosystems to which they are introduced. These changes, or some of them, are usually termed impacts; they can be manifold and potentially damaging to ecosystems and biodiversity. However, the impacts of most non-native species are poorly understood, and a synthesis of available information is being hindered because authors often do not clearly define impact. We argue that explicitly defining the impact of non-native species will promote progress toward a better understanding of the implications of changes to biodiversity and ecosystems caused by non-native species; help disentangle which aspects of scientific debates about non-native species are due to disparate definitions and which represent true scientific discord; and improve communication between scientists from different research disciplines and between scientists, managers, and policy makers. For these reasons and based on examples from the literature, we devised seven key questions that fall into 4 categories: directionality, classification and measurement, ecological or socio-economic changes, and scale. These questions should help in formulating clear and practical definitions of impact to suit specific scientific, stakeholder, or legislative contexts.

Unprecedented rates of introduction and spread of non-native species pose burgeoning challenges to biodiversity, natural resource management, regional economies, and human health. Current biosecurity efforts are failing to keep pace with globalization, revealing critical gaps in our understanding and response to invasions. Here, we identify four priority areas to advance invasion science in the face of rapid global environmental change. First, invasion science should strive to develop a more comprehensive framework for predicting how the behavior, abundance, and interspecific interactions of non-native species vary in relation to conditions in receiving environments and how these factors govern the ecological impacts of invasion. A second priority is to understand the potential synergistic effects of multiple co-occurring stressors— particularly involving climate change—on the establishment and impact of non-native species. Climate adaptation and mitigation strategies will need to consider the possible consequences of promoting non-native species, and appropriate management responses to non-native species will need to be developed. The third priority is to address the taxonomic impediment. The ability to detect and evaluate invasion risks is compromised by a growing deficit in taxonomic expertise, which cannot be adequately compensated by new molecular technologies alone. Management of biosecurity risks will become increasingly challenging unless academia, industry, and governments train and employ new personnel in taxonomy and systematics. Fourth, we recommend that internationally cooperative biosecurity strategies consider the bridgehead effects of global dispersal networks, in which organisms tend to invade new regions from locations where they have already established. Cooperation among countries to eradicate or control species established in bridgehead regions should yield greater benefit than independent attempts by individual countries to exclude these species from arriving and establishing.

Globally, Invasive Alien Species (IAS) are considered to be one of the major threats to native biodiversity, with the World Conservation Union (IUCN) citing their impacts as ?immense, insidious, and usually irreversible?. It is estimated that 11% of the c. 12,000 alien species in Europe are invasive, causing environmental, economic and social damage; and it is reasonable to expect that the rate of biological invasions into Europe will increase in the coming years. In order to assess the current position regarding IAS in Europe and to determine the issues that were deemed to be most important or critical regarding these damaging species, the international Freshwater Invasives - Networking for Strategy (FINS) conference was convened in Ireland in April 2013. Delegates from throughout Europe and invited speakers from around the world were brought together for the conference. These comprised academics, applied scientists, policy makers, politicians, practitioners and representative stakeholder groups. A horizon scanning and issue prioritization approach was used by in excess of 100 expert delegates in a workshop setting to elucidate the Top 20 IAS issues in Europe. These issues do not focus solely on freshwater habitats and taxa but relate also to marine and terrestrial situations. The Top 20 issues that resulted represent a tool for IAS management and should also be used to support policy makers as they prepare European IAS legislation.

Multiple national and international trends and drivers are radically changing what biological security means for the United Kingdom (UK). New technologies present novel opportunities and challenges, and globalisation has created new pathways and increased the speed, volume and routes by which organisms can spread. The UK Biological Security Strategy (2018) acknowledges the importance of research on biological security in the UK. Given the breadth of potential research, a targeted agenda identifying the questions most critical to effective and coordinated progress in different disciplines of biological security is required. We used expert elicitation to generate 80 policy-relevant research questions considered by participants to have the greatest impact on UK biological security. Drawing on a collaboratively-developed set of 450 questions, proposed by 41 experts from academia, industry and the UK government (consulting 168 additional experts) we subdivided the final 80 questions into six categories: bioengineering; communication and behaviour; disease threats (including pandemics); governance and policy; invasive alien species; and securing biological materials and securing against misuse. Initially, the questions were ranked through a voting process and then reduced and refined to 80 during a one-day workshop with 35 participants from a variety of disciplines. Consistently emerging themes included: the nature of current and potential biological security threats, the efficacy of existing management actions, and the most appropriate future options. The resulting questions offer a research agenda for biological security in the UK that can assist the targeting of research resources and inform the implementation of the UK Biological Security Strategy. These questions include research that could aid with the mitigation of Covid-19, and preparation for the next pandemic. We hope that our structured and rigorous approach to creating a biological security research agenda will be replicated in other countries and regions. The world, not just the UK, is in need of a thoughtful approach to directing biological security research to tackle the emerging issues.

Multiple national and international trends and drivers are radically changing what biological security means for the United Kingdom (UK). New technologies present novel opportunities and challenges, and globalisation has created new pathways and increased the speed, volume and routes by which organisms can spread. The UK Biological Security Strategy (2018) acknowledges the importance of research on biological security in the UK. Given the breadth of potential research, a targeted agenda identifying the questions most critical to effective and coordinated progress in different disciplines of biological security is required. We used expert elicitation to generate 80 policy-relevant research questions considered by participants to have the greatest impact on UK biological security. Drawing on a collaboratively-developed set of 450 questions, proposed by 41 experts from academia, industry and the UK government (consulting 168 additional experts) we subdivided the final 80 questions into six categories: bioengineering; communication and behaviour; disease threats (including pandemics); governance and policy; invasive alien species; and securing biological materials and securing against misuse. Initially, the questions were ranked through a voting process and then reduced and refined to 80 during a one-day workshop with 35 participants from a variety of disciplines. Consistently emerging themes included: the nature of current and potential biological security threats, the efficacy of existing management actions, and the most appropriate future options. The resulting questions offer a research agenda for biological security in the UK that can assist the targeting of research resources and inform the implementation of the UK Biological Security Strategy. These questions include research that could aid with the mitigation of Covid-19, and preparation for the next pandemic. We hope that our structured and rigorous approach to creating a biological security research agenda will be replicated in other countries and regions. The world, not just the UK, is in need of a thoughtful approach to directing biological security research to tackle the emerging issues.

Invasive alien species (IAS) are a significant and growing problem worldwide. In Europe, some aspects of IAS have been addressed through existing legal instruments, but these are far from sufficient to tackle the problem comprehensively. The FINS II Conference considered the relevance of Top 20 IAS issues (Top 10 threats and opportunities) for Europe determined at the 1st Freshwater Invasiveness – Networking for Strategy (FINS I) conference held in Ireland in 2013. Using a similar format of sequential group voting, threats from FINS I (lack of funding, of awareness and education; poor communication) and several new threats (lack of lead agencies, of standardized management and of common approach; insufficient monitoring and management on private property) were identified by 80 academics, applied scientists, policy makers and stakeholders from 14 EU and three non-EU countries (including 10 invited speakers) during four workshop break-out sessions (legislation remit in both EU/non-EU countries; best management and biosecurity practice for control; data management and early warning; pathways of introductions and citizen science). Identified opportunities include improved cooperation and communication, education and leadership to enhance public awareness and stakeholder participation, systems establishment for early detection, rapid response, monitoring and management of IAS using standardised methods of data collection, storage and usage. The sets of threats and opportunities identified underline the importance of international cooperation on IAS issues in communication, education and funding as priorities, as well as in standardization of legislation, control methods and best practise of research. ; peerReviewed

Invasive alien species (IAS) are a significant and growing problem worldwide. In Europe, some aspects of IAS have been addressed through existing legal instruments, but these are far from sufficient to tackle the problem comprehensively. The FINS II Conference considered the relevance of Top 20 IAS issues (Top 10 threats and opportunities) for Europe determined at the 1st Freshwater Invasiveness – Networking for Strategy (FINS I) conference held in Ireland in 2013. Using a similar format of sequential group voting, threats from FINS I (lack of funding, of awareness and education; poor communication) and several new threats (lack of lead agencies, of standardized management and of common approach; insufficient monitoring and management on private property) were identified by 80 academics, applied scientists, policy makers and stakeholders from 14 EU and three non-EU countries (including 10 invited speakers) during four workshop break-out sessions (legislation remit in both EU/non-EU countries; best management and biosecurity practice for control; data management and early warning; pathways of introductions and citizen science). Identified opportunities include improved cooperation and communication, education and leadership to enhance public awareness and stakeholder participation, systems establishment for early detection, rapid response, monitoring and management of IAS using standardised methods of data collection, storage and usage. The sets of threats and opportunities identified underline the importance of international cooperation on IAS issues in communication, education and funding as priorities, as well as in standardization of legislation, control methods and best practise of research.

Ireland, being an island situated on Europe's western seaboard, has a fewer number of native species than mainland European Union Member States (MS). Increased numbers of vectors and pathways have reduced the island's biotic isolation, increasing the risk of new introductions and their associated impacts on native biodiversity. It is likely that these risks are greater here than they are in continental Member States, where the native biodiversity is richer. A horizon scanning approach was used to identify the most likely IAS (with the potential to impact biodiversity) to arrive on the island of Ireland within the next ten years. To achieve this, we used a consensus-based approach, whereby expert opinion and discussion groups were utilised to establish and rank a list of 40 species of the most likely terrestrial, freshwater and marine IAS to arrive on the island of Ireland within the decade 2017–2027. The list of 40 included 18 freshwater invaders, 15 terrestrial IAS and seven marine species. Crustacean species (freshwater and marine) were taxonomically dominant (11 out of 40); this reflects their multiple pathways of introduction, their ability to act as ecosystem engineers and their resulting high impacts on biodiversity. Freshwater species dominated the top ten IAS (seven species out of ten), with the signal crayfish (Pacifastacus leniusculus) highlighted as the most likely species to arrive and establish in freshwaters, while roe deer (Capreolus capreolus) (second) and the warm-water barnacle (Hesperibalanus fallax) (fifth), were the most likely terrestrial and marine invaders. This evidence-based list provides important information to the relevant statutory agencies in both jurisdictions in Ireland to prioritise the prevention of the most likely invaders and aid in compliance with legislation, in particular the EU Regulation on Invasive Alien Species (EU 1143/2014). Targeted biosecurity in both jurisdictions is urgently required in order to manage the pathways and vectors of arrival, and is vital to maintaining native biodiversity on the island of Ireland.