Using structured eradication feasibility assessment to prioritize the management of new and emerging invasive alien species in Europe
Using structured eradication feasibility assessment to prioritize the management of new and emerging invasive alien species in Europe
复制标题
DOI：
10.1111/gcb.15280
复制
发表时间：
2020-08-27
影响因子：
11.6
通讯作者：
Mill, Aileen C.
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Booy, Olaf;Robertson, Pete A.;Mill, Aileen C.
优先管理外来入侵物种（IAS）具有全球重要性，在欧洲是欧盟IAS法规的组成部分。为了有效地确定管理的优先次序，需要评估国际会计准则带来的风险，但也需要评估其管理的可行性。虽然已经评估了国际会计准则对欧盟的风险，但管理的可行性尚未评估。我们评估了消除60个新物种（尚未建立）和35个新兴物种（已建立但分布有限）的可行性，这些物种对欧盟构成威胁，正如地平线扫描所确定的那样。该评估由来自欧洲各地的34名入侵管理专家进行，将非本地风险管理计划应用于定义的入侵情景和每个物种的根除策略，使用七个关键风险管理标准评估根除的可行性。通过结合风险评分（来自地平线扫描）和根除的可行性来确定管理优先事项。结果表明，根除可行性评分和风险评分不相关，表明风险管理标准评估的信息与风险评估不同。总共有17个新物种被确定为今后应特别优先根除的物种，而14个新物种被确定为现在应优先根除的物种。被视为最优先根除的一些物种是陆生脊椎动物，这是欧洲一些根除尝试的重点。然而，根除优先事项还包括各种各样的其他分类群（植物、无脊椎动物和鱼类），这表明在欧洲有扩大试图根除的分类范围的余地。我们表明，大规模的结构化评估管理的可行性，可以帮助优先IAS管理。需要这种框架来支持循证决策。
Prioritizing the management of invasive alien species (IAS) is of global importance and within Europe integral to the EU IAS regulation. To prioritize management effectively, the risks posed by IAS need to be assessed, but so too does the feasibility of their management. While the risk of IAS to the EU has been assessed, the feasibility of management has not. We assessed the feasibility of eradicating 60 new (not yet established) and 35 emerging (established with limited distribution) species that pose a threat to the EU, as identified by horizon scanning. The assessment was carried out by 34 experts in invasion management from across Europe, applying the Non-Native Risk Management scheme to defined invasion scenarios and eradication strategies for each species, assessing the feasibility of eradication using seven key risk management criteria. Management priorities were identified by combining scores for risk (derived from horizon scanning) and feasibility of eradication. The results show eradication feasibility score and risk score were not correlated, indicating that risk management criteria evaluate different information than risk assessment. In all, 17 new species were identified as particularly high priorities for eradication should they establish in the future, whereas 14 emerging species were identified as priorities for eradication now. A number of species considered highest priority for eradication were terrestrial vertebrates, a group that has been the focus of a number of eradication attempts in Europe. However, eradication priorities also included a diverse range of other taxa (plants, invertebrates and fish) suggesting there is scope to broaden the taxonomic range of attempted eradication in Europe. We demonstrate that broad scale structured assessments of management feasibility can help prioritize IAS for management. Such frameworks are needed to support evidence-based decision-making.