Biological Invasions

, Volume 15, Issue 4, pp 785–797 | Cite as

What determines the impact of alien birds and mammals in Europe?

  • Sabrina Kumschick
  • Sven Bacher
  • Tim M. Blackburn
Original Paper

Abstract

An often-cited reason for studying the process of invasion by alien species is that the understanding sought can be used to mitigate the impacts of the invaders. Here, we present an analysis of the correlates of local impacts of established alien bird and mammal species in Europe, using a recently described metric to quantify impact. Large-bodied, habitat generalist bird and mammal species that are widespread in their native range, have the greatest impacts in their alien European ranges, supporting our hypothesis that surrogates for the breadth and the amount of resources a species uses are good indicators of its impact. However, not all surrogates are equally suitable. Impacts are generally greater for mammal species giving birth to larger litters, but in contrast are greater for bird species laying smaller clutches. There is no effect of diet breadth on impacts in birds or mammals. On average, mammals have higher impacts than birds. However, the relationships between impact and several traits show common slopes for birds and mammals, and relationships between impact and body mass and latitude do not differ between birds and mammals. These results may help to anticipate which species would have large impacts if introduced, and so direct efforts to prevent such introductions.

Keywords

Bird Clutch size Diet breadth Exotic Habitat breadth Invasion Litter size Mammal Species traits 

References

  1. Bates D, Maechler M (2008) lme4: Linear mixed-effects models using S4 classes. R package version 0.999375. http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=lme4
  2. Bennett PM (1986) Comparative studies of morphology, life history and ecology among birds. Ph.D. thesis, University of SussexGoogle Scholar
  3. Bennett PM, Owens IPF (2002) Evolutionary ecology of birds: life histories, mating systems, and extinction. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  4. Blackburn TM (1991) An interspecific relationship between egg size and clutch size in birds. Auk 108:973–977Google Scholar
  5. Blackburn TM, Duncan RP (2001) Determinants of establishment success in introduced birds. Nature 414:195–197PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Blackburn TM, Gaston KJ (2005) Biological invasions and the loss of birds on islands: insights into the idiosyncrasies of extinction. In: Sax DF, Gaines SD, Stachowicz JJ (eds) Exotic species: a source of insight into ecology, evolution, and biogeography. Academic Press, New York, pp 85–110Google Scholar
  7. Blackburn TM, Lockwood JL, Cassey P (2009a) Avian invasions. The ecology and evolution of exotic birds. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Lockwood JL (2009b) The role of species traits in the establishment success of exotic birds. Glob Change Biol 15:2852–2860CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Blanvillain C, Salducci JM, Tutururai G, Maeura M (2003) Impact of introduced birds on the recovery of the Tahiti Flycatcher (Pomarea nigra), a critically endangered forest bird of Tahiti. Biol Conserv 109:197–205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bomford M, Darbyshire RO, Randall L (2009) Determinants of establishment success for introduced exotic mammals. Wildlife Res 36:192–202CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Cassey P, Blackburn TM, Russell GJ, Jones KE, Lockwood JL (2004a) Influences on the transport and establishment of exotic bird species: an analysis of the parrots (Psittaciformes) of the world. Glob Change Biol 10:417–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Cassey P, Blackburn TM, Sol D, Duncan RP, Lockwood JL (2004b) Global patterns of introduction effort and establishment success in birds. Biol Lett 271:405–408Google Scholar
  13. Clement P, Harris A, Davis J (1993) Finches and sparrows. An identification guide. Christopher Helm, LondonGoogle Scholar
  14. Davis MA (2009) Invasion biology. Oxford University Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  15. del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J (1992) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol 1. Ostrich to ducks. International Council for Bird Preservation, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  16. del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J (1994) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol 2. New World vultures to guineafowl. BirdLife International, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  17. del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J (1997) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol 4. Sangrouse to cuckoos. BirdLife International, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  18. del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J (2009) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol 14. Bush-shrikes to Old World Sparrows. BirdLife International, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  19. Duncan RP, Blackburn TM, Veltman CJ (1999) Determinants of geographical range sizes: a test using introduced New Zealand birds. J Anim Ecol 68:963–975CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Duncan RP, Bomford M, Forsyth DM, Conibear L (2001) High predictability in introduction outcomes and the geographical range size of introduced Australian birds: a role for climate. J Anim Ecol 70:621–632CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Duncan RP, Blackburn TM, Sol D (2003) The ecology of bird introductions. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 34:71–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Fauna Europaea Web Service (2004) Fauna Europaea version 1.1. Available from www.faunaeur.org. Accessed September 2011
  23. Forsyth DM, Duncan RP, Bomford M, Moore G (2004) Climatic suitability, life-history traits, introduction effort, and the establishment and spread of introduced mammals in Australia. Conserv Biol 18:557–569CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Fritz SA, Bininda-Emonds ORP, Purvis A (2009) Geographical variation in predictors of mammalian extinction risk: big is bad, but only in the tropics. Ecol Lett 12:538–549PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gebhardt H, Kinzelbach R, Schmidt-Fischer S (1996) Gebietsfremde tierarten—auswirkungen auf einheimische lebensgemeinschaften und biotope—situationsanalyse. Ecomed, Landsberg, GermanyGoogle Scholar
  26. Holyoak DT, Thibault JC (1984) Contribution à l’étude des oiseaux de Polynésie orientale. Memoirs du Museum National d’Histoire Naturelle (France). Nouvelle Serie. Serie A. Zoologie 127:1–209Google Scholar
  27. Hughes JB, Martin GR, Reynolds SJ (2008) Has eradication of feral cats Felis silvestris halted the decline in the Sooty Tern Onychoprion fuscata population on Ascension Island, South Atlantic? Ibis 150(1):122–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Jeschke JM (2008) Across islands and continents, mammals are more successful invaders than birds. Divers Distrib 14:913–916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Jeschke JM, Strayer DL (2005) Invasion success of vertebrates in Europe and North America. PNAS 102:7198–7202PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jeschke JM, Strayer DL (2006) Determinants of vertebrate invasion success in Europe and North America. Glob Change Biol 12:1608–1619CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Jones KE, Bielby J, Cardillo M et al (2009) PanTHERIA: a species-level database of life-history, ecology and geography of extant and recently extinct mammals. Ecology 90:2648CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Kraus F (2003) Invasion pathways for terrestrial vertebrates. In: Ruiz GM, Carlton J (eds) Invasive species: vectors and management strategies. Island Press, Washington, DC, pp 68–92Google Scholar
  33. Krívánek M, Pyšek P (2006) Predicting invasions by woody species in a temperate zone: a test of three risk assessment schemes in the Czech Republic (Central Europe). Divers Distrib 12:319–327CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kumschick S, Nentwig W (2010) Some alien birds have as severe an impact as the most effectual alien mammals in Europe. Biol Conserv 143:2757–2762CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kumschick S, Nentwig W (2011) Response to Strubbe et al. (2011): Impact scoring of invasive birds is justified. Biol Conserv 144:2747Google Scholar
  36. Kumschick S, Alba C, Hufbauer RA, Nentwig W (2011) Weak or strong invaders? A comparison of impact between the native and invaded ranges of mammals and birds alien to Europe. Divers Distrib 17:663–672CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Leung B, Roura-Pascual N, Bacher S, Heikkilä J, Brotons L, Burgman MA, Dehnen-Schmutz K, Essl F, Hulme PE, Richardson DM, Sol D, Vilà M (2012) TEASIng apart alien species risk assessments: a framework for best practices. Ecol Lett (in press)Google Scholar
  38. Long JL (2003) Introduced mammals of the world: their history, distribution and influence. CSIRO Publishing, Collingwood, AustraliaGoogle Scholar
  39. Nentwig W, Kühnel E, Bacher S (2010) A generic impact-scoring system applied to alien mammals in Europe. Conserv Biol 24:302–311PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Olson V, Davies RG, Orme CDL et al (2009) Global biogeography and ecology of body size in birds. Ecol Lett 12:249–259PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Orme CDL, Davies RG, Burgess M et al (2005) Global biodiversity hotspots of species richness, threat and endemism are not congruent. Nature 436:1016–1019PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Parker I, Simberloff D, Lonsdale W, Goodell K, Wonham M, Kareiva P, Williamson M, Von Holle B, Moyle P, Byers J (1999) Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invasions 1:3–19Google Scholar
  43. Peters RH (1986) The ecological implications of body size. Cambridge University Press, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  44. Pheloung PC, Williams PA, Halloy SR (1999) A weed risk assessment model for use as a biosecurity tool evaluating plant introductions. J Environ Manage 57:239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Pimentel D, Lach L, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2000) Environmental and economic costs of nonindigenous species in the United States. Bioscience 50:53–65CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Pimentel D, McNair S, Janecka J, Wightman J, Simmonds C, O’Connell C, Wong E, Russel L, Zern J, Aquino T, Tsomondo T (2001) Economic and environmental threats of alien plant, animal, and microbe invasions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 84:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Pluess T, Cannon R, Jarošík V, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Bacher S (2012) When are eradication campaigns successful? A test of common assumptions. Biol Invasions 14:1365–1378. doi:10.1007/s10530-011-0160-2 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Purvis A, Gittleman JL, Cowlishaw G, Mace GM (2000) Predicting extinction risk in declining species. Proc R Soc Lond B 267:1947–1952CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. R Development Core Team (2006) A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  50. Rhymer JM, Simberloff D (1996) Extinction by hybridization and introgression. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 27:83–109CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Shirley SM, Kark S (2009) The role of species traits and taxonomic patterns in alien bird impacts. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 18:450–459CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Smith GC, Henderson IS, Robertson PA (2005) A model of ruddy duck Oxyura jamaicensis eradication for the UK. J Appl Ecol 42:546–555CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sol D, Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Duncan RP, Clavell J (2005a) The ecology and impact of non-indigenous birds. In: del Hoyo J, Elliott A, Sargatal J (eds) Handbook of the birds of the world, vol 10, cuckoo-shrikes to thrushes, vol 10. Lynx Ediçions and BirdLife International, Cambridge, pp 13–35Google Scholar
  54. Sol D, Duncan RP, Blackburn TM, Cassey P, Lefebvre L (2005b) Big brains, enhanced cognition, and response of birds to novel environments. PNAS 102:5460–5465PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sol D, Bacher S, Reader SM, Lefebvre L (2008) Brain size predicts the success of mammal species introduced into novel environments. Am Nat 172:63–71CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Strubbe D, Shwartz A, Chiron F (2011) Concerns regarding the scientific evidence informing impact risk assessment and management recommendations for invasive birds. Biol Conserv 144:2112–2118CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Thibault J-C (1988) Menacés et conservation des oiseaux de Polynésie Française. In: Thibault JC, Guyot I (eds) Livre rouge des oiseaux menacés des regions françaises d’outre-mer. Conseil International pour la Protection des Oiseaux, Saint CloudGoogle Scholar
  58. White EP, Ernest SKM, Kerkhoff AJ, Enquist BJ (2007) Relationships between body size and abundance in ecology. Trends Ecol Evol 22:323–330PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Wilson JRU, Richardson DM, Rouget M, Proches S, Amis MA, Henderson LS, Thuiller W (2007) Residence time and potential range: crucial considerations in modelling plant invasions. Divers Distrib 13:11–22CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Sabrina Kumschick
    • 1
    • 2
  • Sven Bacher
    • 3
  • Tim M. Blackburn
    • 4
    • 5
  1. 1.Institute of Ecology and EvolutionUniversity of BernBernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Department of Botany and Zoology, Centre of Excellence for Invasion BiologyUniversity of StellenboschMatielandSouth Africa
  3. 3.Unit Ecology and Evolution, Department of BiologyUniversity of FribourgFribourgSwitzerland
  4. 4.Institute of ZoologyZSLLondonUK
  5. 5.Distinguished Scientist Fellowship ProgramKing Saud UniversityRiyadhSaudi Arabia

Personalised recommendations