Biodiversity and Conservation

, Volume 22, Issue 1, pp 37–62

Generic ecological impact assessments of alien species in Norway: a semi-quantitative set of criteria

  • Hanno Sandvik
  • Bernt-Erik Sæther
  • Tomas Holmern
  • Jarle Tufto
  • Steinar Engen
  • Helen E. Roy
Original Paper

Abstract

The ecological impact assessment scheme that has been developed to classify alien species in Norway is presented. The underlying set of criteria enables a generic and semi-quantitative impact assessment of alien species. The criteria produce a classification of alien species that is testable, transparent and easily adjustable to novel evidence or environmental change. This gives a high scientific and political legitimacy to the end product and enables an effective prioritization of management efforts, while at the same time paying attention to the precautionary principle. The criteria chosen are applicable to all species regardless of taxonomic position. This makes the assessment scheme comparable to the Red List criteria used to classify threatened species. The impact of alien species is expressed along two independent axes, one measuring invasion potential, the other ecological effects. Using this two-dimensional approach, the categorization captures the ecological impact of alien species, which is the product rather than the sum of spread and effect. Invasion potential is assessed using three criteria, including expected population lifetime and expansion rate. Ecological effects are evaluated using six criteria, including interactions with native species, changes in landscape types, and the potential to transmit genes or parasites. Effects on threatened species or landscape types receive greater weightings.

Keywords

Black List criteria Ecological effect Invasion potential Non-native species Quantitative risk assessment Risk classification 

References

  1. Alberternst B (1998) Biologie, Ökologie, Verbreitung und Kontrolle von Reynoutria-Sippen in Baden-Württemberg. Culterra 23:1–198Google Scholar
  2. Amiri A, Talebi AA, Zamani AA, Kamali K (2010) Effect of temperature on demographic parameters of the hawthorn red midget moth, Phyllonorycter corylifoliella, on apple. J Insect Sci 10(134):1–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Augustin S, Guichard S, Heitland W, Freise J, Svatoš A, Gilbert M (2009) Monitoring and dispersal of the invading Gracillariidae Cameraria ohridella. J Appl Entomol 133:58–66Google Scholar
  4. Baiser B, Lockwood JL, La Puma D, Aronson MFJ (2008) A perfect storm: two ecosystem engineers interact to degrade deciduous forests of New Jersey. Biol Invasions 10:785–795CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Baker R, Hulme P, Copp GH, Thomas M, Black R, Haysom K (2005) UK non-native organism risk assessment scheme user manual: version 3.3. Great Britain Non-native Species Secretariat, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  6. Beissinger SR, McCollough DR (eds) (2002) Population viability analysis. University of Chicago Press, ChicagoGoogle Scholar
  7. Blackburn TM, Lockwood JL, Cassey P (2009) Avian invasions: the ecology and evolution of exotic birds. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bomford M (2008) Risk assessment models for establishment of exotic vertebrates in Australia and New Zealand. Invasive Animals Cooperative Research Centre, CanberraGoogle Scholar
  9. Borgstrøm R, Brittain JE, Hasle K, Skjølås S, Dokk JG (1996) Reduced recruitment in brown trout Salmo trutta, the role of interactions with the minnow Phoxinus phoxinus. Nord J Freshw Res 72:30–38Google Scholar
  10. Branquart E (2009) Guidelines for environmental impact assessment and list classification of non-native organisms in Belgium: version 2.6. Belgian Forum on Invasive Species, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  11. Brown PMJ, Adriaens T, Bathon H et al (2008) Harmonia axyridis in Europe: spread and distribution of a non-native coccinellid. BioControl 53:5–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brunel S, Branquart E, Fried G et al (2010) The EPPO prioritization process for invasive alien plants. Bull OEPP 40:407–422Google Scholar
  13. Buhl O, Falck P, Jørgensen B, Karsholt O, Larsen K, Vilhelmsen F (2003) Fund af småsommerfugle fra Danmark i 2002 (Lepidoptera). Entomol Medd 71:65–76Google Scholar
  14. Burgman MA (2002) Flaws in subjective assessments of ecological risks and means for correcting them. Aust J Environ Manag 8:219–226Google Scholar
  15. Butchard SHM (2008) Red List indices to measure the sustainability of species use and impacts of invasive alien species. Bird Conserv Int 18(Suppl):S245–S262Google Scholar
  16. CEC (2009) Trinational risk assessment guidelines for aquatic alien invasive species. Commission for Environmental Cooperation, MontréalGoogle Scholar
  17. CEU (2009) A mid-term assessment of implementing the EU biodiversity action plan and towards an EU strategy on invasive alien species. Council of the European Union, BruxellesGoogle Scholar
  18. CFIA (2001) Canadian PHRA rating guidelines. Canadian Food Inspection Agency, MontrealGoogle Scholar
  19. Clark JS, Lewis M, McLachlan JS, HilleRisLambers J (2003) Estimating population spread: what can we forecast and how well? Ecology 84:1979–1988CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Colautti RI, Grigorovich IA, MacIsaac HJ (2006) Propagule pressure: a null model for biological invasions. Biol Invasions 8:1023–1037CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Cox GW (2004) Alien species and evolution: the evolutionary ecology of exotic plants, animals, microbes, and interacting native species. Island Press, Washington DCGoogle Scholar
  22. Deschka G, Dimić N (1986) Cameraria ohridella sp. n. (Lep., Lithocolletidae) aus Mazedonien. Jugoslawien Acta Entomol Jugosl 22:11–23Google Scholar
  23. Dextrase AJ, Mandrak NE (2006) Impacts of alien invasive species on freshwater fauna at risk in Canada. Biol Invasions 8:13–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Doak DF, Estes JA, Halpern BS et al (2008) Understanding and predicting ecological dynamics: are major surprises inevitable? Ecology 89:952–961PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Ehrenfeld JG (2010) Ecosystem consequences of biological invasions. Annu Rev Ecol Evol Syst 41:59–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Essl F, Klingenstein F, Nehring S, Otto C, Rabitsch W, Stöhr O (2008) Schwarze Listen invasiver Arten – ein Instrument zur Risikobewertung für die Naturschutz-Praxis. Nat Landsch 83:418–424Google Scholar
  27. Essl F, Nehring S, Klingenstein F, Milasowszky N, Nowack C, Rabitsch W (2011) Review of risk assessment systems of IAS in Europe and introducing the German–Austrian Black List Information System (GABLIS). J Nat Conserv 19:339–350CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Euler T (2011) Der Japanische Staudenknöterich als „Ökosystemingenieur“ in Flussauen. Geogr Rundsch 63(3):59Google Scholar
  29. FAO (2004) Pest risk analysis for quarantine pests including analysis of environmental risks and living modified organisms: ISPM no. 11. Food and Agriculture Organization, RomaGoogle Scholar
  30. Fisher J (1953) The collared turtle dove in Europe. Br Birds 46:153–181Google Scholar
  31. Freckleton RP, Dowling PM, Dulvy NK (2006) Stochasticity, nonlinearity and instability in biological invasions. In: Cadotte MW, McMahon SM, Fukami T (eds) Conceptual ecology and invasion biology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 125–146Google Scholar
  32. Fremstad E, Elven R (1997) Fremmede planter i Norge. De store Fallopia-artene. Blyttia 55:3–14Google Scholar
  33. Gederaas L, Moen TL, Skjelseth S, Hansen L-K (2013) Alien species in Norway: with the Norwegian Black List 2012. Artsdatabanken, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  34. Gederaas L, Salvesen I, Viken Å (2007) Norsk svarteliste 2007 – økologiske risikovurderinger av fremmede arter. Artsdatabanken, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  35. Genovesi P, Shine C (2004) European strategy on invasive alien species. Nat Environ Ser 137:1–60Google Scholar
  36. Gilbert M, Grégoire J-C, Freise JF, Heitland W (2004) Long-distance dispersal and human population density allow the prediction of invasive patterns in the horse chestnut leafminer. J Anim Ecol 73:459–468CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Goodenough AE (2010) Are the ecological impacts of alien species misrepresented? A review of the “native good, alien bad” philosophy. Community Ecol 11:13–21CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Halvorsen R, Andersen T, Blom HH et al (2009) Naturtyper i Norge – teoretisk grunnlag, prinsipper for inndeling og definisjoner. Artsdatabanken, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  39. Hartvigsen R (1997) Spredning av parasitter ved innvandring og/eller introduksjon av nye fiskearter: spredning av ørekyt (Phoxinus phoxinus) til ørretvassdrag. NINA Oppdragsmeld 466:1–14Google Scholar
  40. Hejda M, Pyšek P, Jarosik V (2009) Impact of invasive plants on the species richness, diversity and composition of invaded communities. J Ecol 97:393–403CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Higgins SN, Vander Zanden MJ (2010) What a difference a species makes: a meta-analysis of dreissenid mussel impact on freshwater ecosystems. Ecol Monogr 80:179–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Hooten MB, Wikle CK (2008) A hierarchical Bayesian non-linear spatio-temporal model for the spread of invasive species with application to the Eurasian collared-dove. Environ Ecol Stat 15:59–70CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Huang D, Haack RA, Zhang R (2011) Does global warming increase establishment rates of invasive alien species? A centurial time series analysis. PLoS ONE 6:e24733PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Invasive Species Ireland (2008) Invasive species Ireland risk assessment. National Parks and Wildlife Service/Northern Ireland Environment Agency, Dublin/Belfast Google Scholar
  45. IUCN (2000) IUCN guidelines for the prevention of biodiversity loss caused by alien invasive species. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, GlandGoogle Scholar
  46. IUCN (2001) IUCN Red List categories and criteria: version 3.1. International Union for the Conservation of Nature, CambridgeGoogle Scholar
  47. Jäger EJ (1995) Die Gesamtareale von Reynoutria japonica Houtt. und R. sachalinensis (F. Schmidt) Nakai, ihre klimatische Interpretation und Daten zur Ausbreitungsgeschichte. Schrr Vegkd 27:395–403Google Scholar
  48. Kålås JA, Viken Å, Henriksen S, Skjelseth S (eds) (2010) Norsk rødliste for arter 2010. Artsdatabanken, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  49. Keller RP, Lodge DM, Finnoff DC (2007) Risk assessment for invasive species produces net bioeconomic benefits. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:203–207PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Koch RL (2003) The multicolored Asian beetle, Harmonia axyridis: a review of its biology, uses in biological control, and non-target impacts. J Insect Sci 3(32):1–16Google Scholar
  51. Kot M, Lewis MA, van den Driessche P (1996) Dispersal data and the spread of invading organisms. Ecology 77:2027–2042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 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
  53. Lande R, Sæther B-E, Engen S (2003) Stochastic population dynamics in ecology and conservation. Oxford University Press, OxfordCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Lanzoni A, Accinelli G, Bazzocchi GG, Burgio G (2004) Biological traits and life table of the exotic Harmonia axyridis compared with Hippodamia variegata, and Adalia bipunctata (Col., Coccinellidae). J Appl Entomol 128:298–306CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Laska MS, Wootton JT (1998) Theoretical concepts and empirical approaches to measuring interaction strength. Ecology 79:461–476CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Lavergne S, Molofsky J (2007) Increased genetic variation and evolutionary potential drive the success of an invasive grass. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:3883–3888PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Leigh EG Jr (1981) The average lifetime of a population in a varying environment. J Theor Biol 90:213–239PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Lewis MA, Neubert MG, Caswell H, Clark JS, Shea K (2006) A guide to calculating discrete-time invasion rates from data. In: Cadotte MW, McMahon SM, Fukami T (eds) Conceptual ecology and invasion biology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 169–192Google Scholar
  59. Lindgaard A, Henriksen S (eds) (2011) Norsk rødliste for naturtyper 2011. Artsdatabanken, TrondheimGoogle Scholar
  60. Lockwood JL, Cassey P, Blackburn T (2005) The role of propagule pressure in explaining species invasions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:223–228PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. Mace GM, Lande R (1991) Assessing extinction threats: toward a reevaluation of IUCN threatened species categories. Conserv Biol 5:148–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  62. Mack RN, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Evans H, Clout M, Bazzaz FA (2000) Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecol Appl 10:689–710CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  63. Mainka SA, Howard GW (2010) Climate change and invasive species: double jeopardy. Integr Zool 5:102–111PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Makowski D, Mittinty MN (2010) Comparison of scoring systems for invasive pests using ROC analysis and Monte Carlo simulations. Risk Anal 30:906–915PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  65. McCarthy MA, Keith D, Tietjen J et al (2004) Comparing predictions of extinction risk using models and subjective judgement. Acta Oecol 26:67–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  66. Miljøministeriet (2008) Handlingsplan for invasive arter. Miljøministeriet, KøbenhavnGoogle Scholar
  67. Moore C (2011) Invasives: classify with care. Science 333:936PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  68. Morris WF, Doak DF (2002) Quantitative conservation biology: theory and practice of population viability analysis. Sinauer, SunderlandGoogle Scholar
  69. Mrosovsky N (1997) IUCN’s credibility critically endangered. Nature 389:436CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  70. Murphy HT, VanDerWal J, Lovett-Doust L, Lovett-Doust J (2006) Invasiveness in exotic plants: immigration and naturalization in an ecological continuum. In: Cadotte MW, McMahon SM, Fukami T (eds) Conceptual ecology and invasion biology. Springer, Dordrecht, pp 65–105Google Scholar
  71. Museth J, Hesthagen T, Sandlund OT, Thorstad E, Ugedal O (2007) The history of the European minnow in Norway: from harmless species to pest. J Fish Biol 71(Suppl D):184–195CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  72. Næstad F, Brittain JE (2010) Long-term changes in the littoral benthos of a Norwegian subalpine lake following the introduction of the European minnow (Phoxinus phoxinus). Hydrobiologia 642:71–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  73. Neubert MG, Kot M, Lewis MA (2000) Invasion speeds in fluctuating environments. Proc R Soc B 267:1603–1610, 2568–2569Google Scholar
  74. Norton LR, Firbank LG, Scott A, Watkinson AR (2005) Characterising spatial and temporal variation in the finite rate of population increase across the northern range boundary of the annual grass Vulpia fasciculata. Oecologia 144:407–415PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  75. Novak M, Wootton JT (2008) Estimating nonlinear interaction strengths: an observation-based method for species-rich food webs. Ecology 89:2083–2089PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  76. Paine RT (1992) Food-web analysis through field measurement of per capita interaction strength. Nature 355:73–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  77. Parker IM, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM et al (1999) Impact: toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invasions 1:3–19CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  78. Pejchar L, Mooney HA (2009) Invasive species, ecosystem services and human well-being. Trends Ecol Evol 24:497–504PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  79. Pell JK, Baverstock J, Roy HE, Ware RL, Majerus MEN (2008) Intraguild predation involving Harmonia axyridis: a review of current knowledge and future perspectives. BioControl 53:147–168CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  80. Petrovskii SV, Li B-L (2006) Exactly solvable models of biological invasions. Chapman & Hall, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  81. Pheloung PC, Williams PA, Halloy SR (1999) A weed risk assessment model for use as a biosecurity tool evaluating plant introductions. J Environ Manag 57:239–251CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  82. Pimentel D, Zuniga R, Morrison D (2005) Update on the environmental and economic costs associated with alien-invasive species in the United States. Ecol Econ 52:273–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  83. PLH [European Food Safety Authority Panel on Plant Health] (2011) Guidance on the environmental risk assessment of plant pests. EFSA J 9:2490Google Scholar
  84. Power ME, Tilman D, Estes JA et al (1996) Challenges in the quest for keystones. BioScience 46:609–620Google Scholar
  85. Pyšek P, Richardson DM, Rejmánek M, Webster GL, Williamson M, Kirschner J (2004) Alien plants in checklists and floras: towards a better communication between taxonomists and ecologists. Taxon 53:131–143CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  86. R development core team (2011) R: a language and environment for statistical computing, version 2.12.2. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Wien url: http://www.r-project.org
  87. Ree V (1994) Tyrkerdue Streptopelia decaocto. In: Gjershaug JO, Thingstad PG, Eldøy S, Byrkjeland S (eds) Norsk fugleatlas: Hekkefuglenes utbredelse og bestandsstatus i Norge. Norsk ornitologisk forening, Klæbu, pp 266–267Google Scholar
  88. Richardson DM, Pyšek P, Rejmánek M, Barbour MG, Panetta FD, West CJ (2000) Naturalization and invasion of alien plants: concepts and definitions. Divers Distrib 6:93–107Google Scholar
  89. Rocha G, Hidalgo SJ (2000) The spread of the collared dove Streptopelia decaocto in Europe: colonization patterns in the West of the Iberian Peninsula. Bird Study 49:11–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  90. Roy HE, Adriaens T, Isaac NJB et al (2012) Invasive alien predator causes rapid declines of native European ladybirds. Divers Distrib 18:717–725Google Scholar
  91. Sæthre M-G, Staverløkk A, Hågvar EB (2010) Stowaways in horticultural plants imported from the Netherlands, Germany and Denmark. Nor J Entomol 57:25–35Google Scholar
  92. Shigesada N, Kawasaki K (1997) Biological invasions: theory and practice. Oxford University Press, OxfordGoogle Scholar
  93. Simberloff D (2005) Non-native species do threaten the natural environment! J Agric Environ Ethics 18:595–607CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  94. Skarpaas O (2012) Levedyktighetsanalyse som grunnlag for risikovurdering av fremmede karplanter. NINA Minirapp 361:1–58Google Scholar
  95. Staverløkk A, Sæthre M-G (2008) Funn av harlekinmarihøna Harmonia axyridis i Norge. Insekt Nytt 33:8–12Google Scholar
  96. Stone ER, Yates JF, Parker AM (1994) Risk communication: absolute versus relative expressions of low-probability risks. Organ Behav Hum Decis Process 60:387–408CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  97. Sutcliffe OL, Thomas CD, Moss D (1996) Spatial synchrony and asynchrony in butterfly population dynamics. J Anim Ecol 65:85–95CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  98. Svorkmo-Lundberg M (2006) Tyrkerdue Streptopelia decaocto. In: Svorkmo-Lundberg T, Bakken V, Helberg M, Mork K, Røer JE, Sæbø S (eds) Norsk vinterfuglatlas: Fuglenes utbredelse, bestandsstørrelse og økologi vinterstid. Norsk ornitologisk forening, Trondheim, pp 254–255Google Scholar
  99. Syslo JM, Guy CS, Bigelow PE, Doepke PD, Ertel BD, Koel TM (2011) Response of non-native lake trout (Salvelinus namaycush) to 15 years of harvest in Yellowstone Lake, Yellowstone National Park. Can J Fish Aquat Sci 68:2132–2145CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  100. USDA (2000) Guidelines for pathway-initiated pest risk assessment: version 5.02. United States Department of Agriculture, RiverdaleGoogle Scholar
  101. Veit RR, Lewis MA (1996) Dispersal, population growth, and the Allee effect: dynamics of the house finch invasion of eastern North America. Am Nat 148:255–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  102. Venable DL (2007) Bet hedging in a guild of desert annuals. Ecology 88:1086–1090PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  103. Verbrugge LNH, Leuven RSEW, van der Velde G (2010) Evaluation of international risk assessment protocols for exotic species. Rep Environ Sci 352:1–54Google Scholar
  104. Vilà M, Basnou C, Pyšek P et al (2010) How well do we understand the impacts of alien species on ecosystem services? A pan-European, cross-taxa assessment. Front Ecol Environ 8:135–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  105. Vose D (2008) Risk analysis: a quantitative guide, 3rd edn. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  106. Waples RS, Jensen DW, McClure M (2010) Eco-evolutionary dynamics: fluctuations in population growth rate reduce effective population size in chinook salmon. Ecology 91:902–914PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  107. Ware RL, Majerus MEN (2008) Intraguild predation of immature stages of British and Japanese coccinellids by the invasive ladybird Harmonia axyridis. BioControl 53:169–188CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  108. Webber BL, Scott JK (2012) Rapid global change: implications for defining natives and aliens. Glob Ecol Biogeogr 21:305–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  109. Weber E, Köhler B, Gelpke G, Perrenoud A, Gigon A (2005) Schlüssel zur Einteilung von Neophyten in der Schweiz in die Schwarze Liste oder die Watch-Liste. Bot Helv 115:169–173CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  110. White EM, Wilson JC, Clarke AR (2006) Biotic indirect effects: a neglected concept in invasion biology. Divers Distrib 12:443–455CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  111. Whitney KD, Gabler CA (2008) Rapid evolution in introduced species, “invasive traits” and recipient communities: challenges for predicting invasive potential. Divers Distrib 14:569–580CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  112. WTO (1994) Agreement on the application of sanitary and phytosanitary measures. World Trade Organization, GenèveGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2012

Authors and Affiliations

  • Hanno Sandvik
    • 1
  • Bernt-Erik Sæther
    • 1
  • Tomas Holmern
    • 1
    • 2
  • Jarle Tufto
    • 3
  • Steinar Engen
    • 3
  • Helen E. Roy
    • 4
  1. 1.Centre for Conservation Biology, Department of BiologyNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  2. 2.Norwegian Directorate for Nature ManagementTrondheimNorway
  3. 3.Centre for Conservation Biology, Department of Mathematical SciencesNorwegian University of Science and TechnologyTrondheimNorway
  4. 4.Biological Records CentreNERC Centre for Ecology & HydrologyWallingfordUK

Personalised recommendations