Biological Invasions

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 17–30 | Cite as

Trans-national horizon scanning for invasive non-native species: a case study in western Europe

  • Belinda Gallardo
  • Alexandra Zieritz
  • Tim Adriaens
  • Céline Bellard
  • Pieter Boets
  • J. Robert Britton
  • Jonathan R. Newman
  • Johan L. C. H. van Valkenburg
  • David C. Aldridge
Original Paper

Abstract

Horizon scanning for high-risk invasive non-native species (INNS) is crucial in preparing and implementing measures to prevent introductions, as well as to focus efforts in the control of species already present. We initiated a trans-national horizon-scanning exercise focused on four countries in western Europe: Great Britain, France, Belgium and The Netherlands, which share similar environmental and socio-economic characteristics. We followed a structured four-step approach combining existing knowledge about INNS, with a collaborative identification of priorities for research and management: (1) systematic review of potential INNS of concern, (2) discrimination of INNS into an Alert and Black List depending on their absence or presence in the study area respectively, (3) risk analysis of the Alert List, and (4) expert ranking of species in the Black List. Amongst species not yet present in the four countries (i.e. Alert List), assessors reliably pointed to the Emerald ash-borer (Agrilus planipennis) and Sosnowski’s hogweed (Heracleum sosnowskyi) as those INNS with the highest risk of invasion and impact. The Japanese knotweed (Fallopia japonica), Himalayan balsam (Impatiens glandulifera), zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) and killer shrimp (Dikerogammarus villosus) were consistently highlighted as some of the most problematic INNS already present in the study area (i.e. Black List). The advantages of our combined approach include that it is inclusive of all-taxa, prioritizes both established and emerging biological threats across trans-national scales, and considers not only the ecological impact, but also potential direct economic consequences as well as the manageability of invasive species.

Keywords

Collaborative risk assessment Ecological impact Invasive potential Economic impact Management Invasive species Alert List Black List Prioritization 

Supplementary material

10530_2015_986_MOESM1_ESM.pdf (1.1 mb)
Supplementary material 1 (PDF 1152 kb)

References

  1. Baker R, Black R, Copp G, Haysom K, Hulme P, Thomas M, Brown A, Brown M, Cannon R, Ellis J (2008) The UK risk assessment scheme for all non-native species. Biological Invasions—from Ecology to Conservation. NEOBIOTA, Berlin, pp 46–57Google Scholar
  2. Bax N, Williamson A, Aguero M, Gonzalez E, Geeves W (2003) Marine invasive alien species: a threat to global biodiversity. Mar Policy 27:313–323CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blackburn TM, Essl F, Evans T, Hulme PE, Jeschke JM, Kühn I, Kumschick S, Marková Z, Mrugała A, Nentwig W, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Rabitsch W, Ricciardi A, Richardson DM, Sendek A, Vilà M, Wilson JRU, Winter M, Genovesi P, Bacher S (2014) A unified classification of alien species based on the magnitude of their environmental impacts. PLoS Biol 12:e1001850PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bonesi L, Palazon S (2007) The American mink in Europe: status, impacts, and control. Biol Conserv 134:470–483CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Branquart E, Verreycken H, Vanderhoeven S, Van Rossum F, Cigar J (2009) ISEIA, a Belgian non-native species assessment protocol. In: Segers H, Branquart E (eds) Science facing aliens. Belgian Biodiversity Platform, Brussels, pp 11–17Google Scholar
  6. Britton JR, Gozlan RE (2013) Geo-politics and freshwater fish introductions: how the Cold War shaped Europe’s fish allodiversity. Glob Environ Change 23:1566–1574CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Britton J, Gozlan RE, Copp GH (2011) Managing non-native fish in the environment. Fish Fish 12:256–274CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Brunel S, Branquart E, Fried G, Van Valkenburg J, Brundu G, Starfinger U, Buholzer S, Uludag A, Joseffson M, Baker R (2010) The EPPO prioritization process for invasive alien plants. EPPO Bull 40:407–422CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Burgman MA, Regan HM, Maguire LA, Colyvan M, Justus J, Martin TG, Rothley K (2014) Voting systems for environmental decisions. Conserv Biol 28:322–332PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Caffrey JM, Baars J-R, Barbour JH, Boets P, Boon P, Davenport K, Dick JTA, Early J, Edsman L, Gallagher C, Gross J, Heinimaa P, Horrill C, Hudin S, Hulme PE, Hynes S, MacIsaac HJ, McLoone P, Millane M, Moen TL, Moore N, Newman J, O’Conchuir R, O’Farrell M, O’Flynn C, Oidtmann B, Renals T, Ricciardi A, Roy H, Shaw R, Weyl O, Williams F, Lucy FE (2014) Tackling invasive alien species in Europe: the top 20 issues. Manag Biol Invasions 5:1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Chytrý M, Pysek P, Wild J, Pino J, Maskell LC, Vilà M (2009) European map of alien plant invasions based on the quantitative assessment across habitats. Divers Distrib 15:98–107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Clavero M, García-Berthou E (2005) Invasive species are a leading cause of animal extinctions. Trends Ecol Evol 20:110–110PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Copp GH, Vilizzi L, Mumford J, Fenwick GV, Godard MJ, Gozlan RE (2009) Calibration of FISK, an invasiveness screening tool for nonnative freshwater fishes. Risk Anal 29:457–467PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Copp GH, Russell IC, Peeler EJ, Gherardi F, Tricarico E, Macleod A, Cowx IG, Nunn AD, Occhipinti-Ambrogi A, Savini D, Mumford J, Britton JR (2014) European non-native species in aquaculture risk analysis scheme—a summary of assessment protocols and decision support tools for use of alien species in aquaculture. Fish Manag Ecol. doi:10.1111/fme.12074 Google Scholar
  15. D’hondt B, Vanderhoeven S, Roelandt S, Mayer F, Versteirt V, Adriaens T, Ducheyne E, San Martin G, Grégoire J-C, Stiers I, Quoilini S, Cigar J, Heughebaert A, Branquart E (2015) Harmonia+ and Pandora+: risk screening tools for potentially invasive plants, animals and their pathogens. Biol Invasions 17:1869–1883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. DAISIE (2009) Handbook of alien species in Europe. Springer, KnoxvilleGoogle Scholar
  17. Davidson AM, Jennions M, Nicotra AB (2011) Do invasive species show higher phenotypic plasticity than native species and if so, is it adaptive? A meta-analysis. Ecol Lett 14:419–431PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Dawson F (1996) Crassula helmsii: attempts at elimination using herbicides. In: Caffrey JM, Barrett PRF, Murphy KJ, Wade PM (eds) Management and Ecology of Freshwater Plants. Springer, Berlin, pp 241–245Google Scholar
  19. Demolder H, Peymen J, Anselin A, Adriaens T, De Beck L, Boone N, De Keersmaeker L, De Knijf G, Devos K, Everaert J, Jansen I, Laurijssens G, Louette G, Maes D, Meiresonne L, Neirynck J, Simoens I, Stevens M, Onkelinx T, Van Daele T, Van der Aa B, Van Landuyt W, Van Uytvanck J, Vermeersch G, Verreycken H (2014) Natuurindicatoren 2014. Toestand van de natuur in Vlaanderen: cijfers voor het beleid. Mededeling van het Instituut voor Natuur- en Bosonderzoek, INBO, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  20. European Commission (2014) Regulation No. 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the prevention and management of the introduction and spread of invasive alien species. Off J Eur Union L317:35–55Google Scholar
  21. Fleiss JL (1971) Measuring nominal scale agreement among many raters. Psychol Bull 76:378CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gallardo B, Aldridge DC (2013) The ‘dirty dozen’: socio-economic factors amplify the invasion potential of 12 high risk aquatic invasive species in Great Britain and Ireland. J Appl Ecol 50:757–766CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gallardo B, Aldridge DC (2015) Is Great Britain heading for a Ponto-Caspian invasional meltdown? J Appl Ecol 52:41–49CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gallardo B, Zu Ermgassen PSE, Aldridge D (2013) Invasion ratcheting in the zebra mussel (Dreissena polymorpha) and the ability of native and invaded ranges to predict its global distribution. J Biogeogr 40:2274–2284CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gamer M, Lemon J, Fellows I, Singh P (2012) irr: various coefficients of interrater reliability and agreement (R package version 0.83). Internet resource: http://CRAN.R-project.org/package=irr] (Verified April 10, 2013)
  26. Genovesi P, Carboneras C, Vila M, Walton P (2015) EU adopts innovative legislation on invasive species: A step towards a global response to biological invasions? Biol Invasions 17:1307–1311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gherardi F (2007) Biological invasions in inland waters: an overview. In: Gherardi F (ed) Biological invaders in inland waters: profiles, distribution, and threats. Springer, Netherlands, pp 3–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Gilioli G, Schrader G, Baker R, Ceglarska E, Kertész V, Lövei G, Navajas M, Rossi V, Tramontini S, van Lenteren J (2014) Environmental risk assessment for plant pests: a procedure to evaluate their impacts on ecosystem services. Sci Total Environ 468:475–486PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hallgren KA (2012) Computing inter-rater reliability for observational data: an overview and tutorial. Tutor Quant Methods Psychol 8:23PubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  30. Jackson MC, Grey J (2013) Accelerating rates of freshwater invasions in the catchment of the River Thames. Biol Invasions 15:945–951CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Katsanevakis S, Wallentinus I, Zenetos A, Leppäkoski E, Çinar ME, Oztürk B, Grabowski M, Golani D, Cardoso AC (2014) Impacts of invasive alien marine species on ecosystem services and biodiversity: a pan-European review. Aquat Invasions 9:391–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keller RP, Lodge DM, Finnoff DC (2007) Risk assessment for invasive species produces net bioeconomic benefits. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 104:203–207PubMedPubMedCentralCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kelly J, O’Flynn C, Maguire C (2013) Risk analysis and prioritisation for invasive and non-native species in Ireland and Northern Ireland. A report prepared for the the Northern Ireland Environment Agency and the National Parks and Wildlife Service as part of Invasive Species Ireland, p 59Google Scholar
  34. Kenis M, Bacher S, Baker RHA, Branquart E, Brunel S, Holt J, Hulme PE, MacLeod A, Pergl J, Petter F, Pyšek P, Schrader G, Sissons A, Starfinger U, Schaffner U (2012) New protocols to assess the environmental impact of pests in the EPPO decision-support scheme for pest risk analysis. EPPO Bull 42:21–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kettunen M, Genovesi P, Gollasch S, Pagad S, Starfinger U, ten Brink P, Shine C (2008) Technical support to EU strategy on invasive species (IS)—assessment of the impacts of IS in Europe and the EU. Institute for European Environmental Policy (IEEP), Brussels, p 40Google Scholar
  36. Louette G, Devisscher S, Adriaens T (2014) Combating adult invasive American bullfrog Lithobates catesbeianus. Eur J Wildlife Res 60:703–706Google Scholar
  37. Lowe SJ, Browne M, Boudjelas S (2000) 100 of the world’s worst invasive alien species. IUCN/SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group (ISSG), AucklandGoogle Scholar
  38. Mack R, Lonsdale W (2002) Eradicating invasive plants: hard-won lessons for islands. In: Veitch CR, Clout MN (eds) Turning the tide: the eradication of invasive species. Proceedings of the international conference on eradication of island invasives IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group, pp 164–172Google Scholar
  39. Matthews J, Beringen R, Creemers R, Hollander H, van Kessel N, van Kleef H, van de Koppel S, Lemaire AJJ, Odé B, van der Velde G, Verbrugge LNH, Leuven RSEW (2014) Horizonscanning for new invasive non-native species in the Netherlands. Department of Environmental Science, Institute for Water and Wetland Research, Faculty of Science, Radboud University, NijmegenGoogle Scholar
  40. McLaughlan C, Gallardo B, Aldridge DC (2014) How complete is our knowledge of the ecosystem services impacts of Europe’s top 10 invasive species? Acta Oecolo 54:119–130Google Scholar
  41. Molnar JL, Gamboa RL, Revenga C, Spalding MD (2008) Assessing the global threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Front Ecol Environ 6:485–492CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Parrott D, Roy S, Baker R, Cannon R, Eyre D, Hill M, Wagner M, Roy H, Preston C, Beckmann B, Copp GH, Edmonds N, Ellis J, Laing I, Britton JR, Gozlan RE (2009) Horizon scanning for new invasive non-native species in England. Natural England, PeterboroughGoogle Scholar
  43. 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
  44. Pimentel D, McNair S, Janecka J, Wightman J, Simmonds C, O’connell C, Wong E, Russel L, Zern J, Aquino T (2001) Economic and environmental threats of alien plant, animal, and microbe invasions. Agric Ecosyst Environ 84:1–20.Google Scholar
  45. R Core Team (2014) R: a language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  46. Ricciardi A (2003) Predicting the impacts of an introduced species from its invasion history: an empirical approach applied to zebra mussel invasions. Freshw Biol 48:972–981CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Ricciardi A, Hoopes MF, Marchetti MP, Lockwood JL (2013) Progress toward understanding the ecological impacts of nonnative species. Ecol Monogr 83:263–282CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Robertson P, Adriaens T, Caizergues A, Cranswick P, Devos K, Gutiérrez-Expósito C, Henderson I, Hughes B, Mill A, Smith G (2014) Towards the European eradication of the North American ruddy duck. Biol Invasions 17:9–12CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Roy H, Peyton J, Aldridge DC, Bantock T, Blackburn T, Bishop J, Britton R, Clark P, Cook E, Dehnen-Schmutz K, Dines T, Dobson M, Edwards F, Harrower C, Harvey M, Minchin D, Newman J, Noble D, Parrott D, Pocock M, Preston C, Roy S, Salisbury A, Schonrogge K, Sewell J, Shaw RE, Stebbing P, Stewart A, Walker K (2014a) Horizon-scanning for invasive alien species with the potential to threaten biodiversity in Great Britain. Glob Change Biol 20:3859–3871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Roy HE, Schonrogge K, Dean H et al (2014b) Invasive alien species—framework for the identification of invasive alien species of EU concern ENV.B.2/ETU/2013/0026. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  51. Roy HE, Adriaens T, Aldridge DC, Bacher S, Bishop JDD, Blackburn TM, Branquart E, Brodie J, Carboneras C, Cook EJ, Copp GH, Dean HJ, Eilenberg J, Essl F, Gallardo B, Garcia M, García-Berthou E, Genovesi P, Hulme PE, Kenis M, Kerckhof F, Kettunen M, Minchin D, Nentwig W, Nieto A, Pergl J, Pescott O, Peyton J, Preda C, Rabitsch W, Roques A, Rorke S, Scalera R, Schindler S, Schönrogge K, Sewell J, Solarz W, Stewart A, Tricarico E, Vanderhoeven S, van der Velde G, Vilà M, Wood CA, Zenetos A (2015) Invasive alien species—prioritising prevention efforts through horizon scanning. ENV.B.2/ETU/2014/0016. European Commission, BrusselsGoogle Scholar
  52. Sala OE, Chapin FS, Armesto JJ, Berlow E, Bloomfield J, Dirzo R, Huber-Sanwald E, Huenneke LF, Jackson RB, Kinzig A, Leemans R, Lodge DM, Mooney HA, Oesterheld M, Poff NL, Sykes MT, Walker BH, Walker M, Wall DH (2000) Biodiversity—global biodiversity scenarios for the year 2100. Science 287:1770–1774PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Sandvik H, Sæther B-E, Holmern T, Tufto J, Engen S, Roy H (2013) Generic ecological impact assessments of alien species in Norway: a semi-quantitative set of criteria. Biodivers Conserv 22:37–62CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Secord D (2003) Biological control of marine invasive species: cautionary tales and land-based lessons. Biol Invasions 5:117–131CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Sutherland WJ, Woodroof HJ (2009) The need for environmental horizon scanning. Trends Ecol Evol 24:523–527PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Sutherland WJ, Fleishman E, Mascia MB, Pretty J, Rudd MA (2011) Methods for collaboratively identifying research priorities and emerging issues in science and policy. Methods Ecol Evol 2:238–247CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Wadsworth R, Collingham Y, Willis S, Huntley B, Hulme P (2000) Simulating the spread and management of alien riparian weeds: Are they out of control? J Appl Ecol 37:28–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Walther G-R, Roques A, Hulme PE, Sykes MT, Pyšek P, Kühn I, Zobel M, Bacher S, Botta-Dukát Z, Bugmann H, Czúcz B, Dauber J, Hickler T, Jarošík V, Kenis M, Klotz S, Minchin D, Moora M, Nentwig W, Ott J, Panov VE, Reineking B, Robinet C, Semenchenko V, Solarz W, Thuiller W, Vilà M, Vohland K, Settele J (2009) Alien species in a warmer world: risks and opportunities. Trends Ecol Evol 24:686–693PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Zieritz A, Gallardo B, Aldridge DC (2014) Registry of non-native species in the Two Seas region countries (Great Britain, France, Belgium and the Netherlands). NeoBiota 23:65–80CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Belinda Gallardo
    • 1
    • 2
  • Alexandra Zieritz
    • 1
    • 3
  • Tim Adriaens
    • 4
  • Céline Bellard
    • 5
    • 6
  • Pieter Boets
    • 7
    • 8
  • J. Robert Britton
    • 9
  • Jonathan R. Newman
    • 10
  • Johan L. C. H. van Valkenburg
    • 11
  • David C. Aldridge
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of ZoologyUniversity of CambridgeCambridgeUK
  2. 2.Department of Biodiversity Conservation and Ecological RestorationPyrenean Institute of Ecology (IPE-CSIC)SaragossaSpain
  3. 3.School of GeographyUniversity of Nottingham Malaysia CampusSemenyihMalaysia
  4. 4.Research Institute for Nature and Forest (INBO)BrusselsBelgium
  5. 5.Department of Genetics, Evolution and Environment, Centre for Biodiversity and Environment Research, Darwin BuildingUCLLondonUK
  6. 6.Ecology, Systematic and Evolution, UMR CNRS 8079Université Paris SudOrsayFrance
  7. 7.Laboratory of Environmental Toxicology and Aquatic EcologyGhent UniversityGhentBelgium
  8. 8.Provincial Centre of Environmental ResearchGhentBelgium
  9. 9.Department of Life and Environmental Sciences, Faculty of Science and TechnologyBournemouth UniversityPooleUK
  10. 10.Centre for Ecology and Hydrobiology (CEH Wallingford)WallingfordUK
  11. 11.Netherlands Food and Consumer Product Safety Authority, National Reference CentreWageningenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations