Description: 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.

Description: Invasive alien species continue to arrive in new locations with no abatement in rate, and thus greater predictive powers surrounding their ecological impacts are required. In particular, we need improved means of quantifying the ecological impacts of new invasive species under different contexts. Here, we develop a suite of metrics based upon the novel Relative Impact Potential (RIP) metric, combining the functional response (consumer per capita effect), with proxies for the numerical response (consumer population response), providing quantification of invasive species ecological impact. These metrics are comparative in relation to the eco-evolutionary baseline of trophically analogous natives, as well as other invasive species and across multiple populations. Crucially, the metrics also reveal how impacts of invasive species change under abiotic and biotic contexts. While studies focused solely on functional responses have been successful in predictive invasion ecology, RIP retains these advantages while adding vital other predictive elements, principally consumer abundance. RIP can also be combined with propagule pressure to quantify overall invasion risk. By highlighting functional response and numerical response proxies, we outline a user-friendly method for assessing the impacts of invaders of all trophic levels and taxonomic groups. We apply the metric to impact assessment in the face of climate change by taking account of both changing predator consumption rates and prey reproduction rates. We proceed to outline the application of RIP to assess biotic resistance against incoming invasive species, the effect of evolution on invasive species impacts, application to interspecific competition, changing spatio-temporal patterns of invasion, and how RIP can inform biological control. We propose that RIP provides scientists and practitioners with a user-friendly, customisable and, crucially, powerful technique to inform invasive species policy and management.

Description: Biodiversity is declining on a global scale and the spread of invasive alien species (IAS) is a major driver, particularly through predatory impacts. Thus, effective means of assessing and predicting the consequences of IAS predation on native prey population stability remains a vital goal for conservation. Here, we applied two classic ecological concepts, consumer functional response (FR) and prey switching, to predict and understand the ecological impacts of juveniles of the lionfish (Pterois volitans), a notorious and widespread marine invader. Functional responses and prey switching propensities were quantified towards three representative prey species: Artemia salina, Palaemonetes varians, and Gammarus oceanicus. Lionfish exhibited potentially destabilising Type II FRs towards individual prey species, owing to high consumption rates at low prey densities, whilst FR magnitudes differed among prey species. Functional response attack rates (a) were highest, and handling times (h) lowest, towards A. salina, followed by P. varians and then G. oceanicus. Maximum feeding rates (1/h) and functional response ratios (FRR; a/h) also followed this impact gradient for the three prey species. Lionfish, however, displayed a potentially population stabilising prey switching propensity (i.e. frequency-dependent predation) when multiple prey species were presented simultaneously, where disproportionately less of rare prey, and more of abundant prey, were consumed. Whilst FR and FRR magnitudes indicate marked per capita lionfish predatory impacts towards prey species, a strong prey switching propensity may reduce in-field impacts by offering low density prey refuge in biodiverse communities. Our results thus corroborate field patterns documenting variable impacts of lionfish, with prey extirpations less likely in diverse communities owing to frequency-dependent predation.

Description: Highlights: • Ecological impact changes with environmental context for both consumer and resource. • We adapt previous impact metrics to include resource abundance dynamics. • Metric utility is demonstrated with invasive and native species. • Results predict and quantify environmental impact in a more complex manner. • The metric can be used broadly for rapid impact assessments. Abstract: Predicting future changes in interspecific interactions continues to be a challenge for environmental managers. This uncertainty is exacerbated by increasing biological invasions and the likelihood that the strength of trophic interactions among native species will change. Abiotic variables influence predator resource utilisation and abundance as well as resource population dynamics. Currently no practical metric or impact prediction methodology can adequately account for all of these factors. Functional Response (FR) methods successfully incorporate resource utilisation rates with regards to resource density to quantify consumer-resource interactions under varying abiotic contexts. This approach has been extended to create the Relative Impact Potential (RIP) metric to compare invader vs native impact. However, this does not incorporate resource abundance dynamics, which clearly can also change with abiotic context. We propose a Resource Reproduction Qualifier (RRQ) be incorporated into the RIP metric, whereby RRQ is the reciprocal of the fraction or proportion to which reproduction (e.g. of prey species) changes under an environmental context. This modifies the RIP score to give a more informative RIPq value, which may be contextually increased or decreased. We empirically demonstrate the utility and benefits of including RRQ into impact potential predictions with an invasive species (the lionfish Pterois volitans) and two European native species (shanny fish Lipophyris pholis and lesser spotted dogfish Scyliorhinus canicula) under different abiotic contexts. Despite high FR and abundance, lionfish impacts were reduced by increasing prey recruitment at higher temperatures, however, remained high impact overall. Shanny predatory impact increased with increasing temperature and was exacerbated by decreasing prey fecundity. Two population increase scenarios (50% and 80%) were assessed for lesser spotted dogfish under predicted temperature increases, preying upon E. marinus. Both scenarios indicated heightened predatory impact with increasing predator FR and decreasing prey fecundity. Our new metric demonstrates that accounting for resource reproductive responses to abiotic drivers, in tandem with the consumer per capita and abundance responses, better estimate the magnitudes of predicted inter-species interactions and ecological impacts. This can be used in stock assessments and predictions, as well as invasive species risk assessments in a comprehensive yet user-friendly manner..

Description: Highlights: • The global economic costs of invasive aquatic crustaceans totalled US$ 271 million. • Invasive crayfish and crabs had the highest costs, US$ 120.5 and US$ 150.2 million, respectively. • The signal crayfish was the costliest species (US$ 103.9 million), as seen in Europe. • Among crabs, the European green crab and the Chinese mitten crab had the highest costs. • Taxonomic, geographical, and temporal gaps mean that these costs are severely underestimated. Abstract: Despite voluminous literature identifying the impacts of invasive species, summaries of monetary costs for some taxonomic groups remain limited. Invasive alien crustaceans often have profound impacts on recipient ecosystems, but there may be great unknowns related to their economic costs. Using the InvaCost database, we quantify and analyse reported costs associated with invasive crustaceans globally across taxonomic, spatial, and temporal descriptors. Specifically, we quantify the costs of prominent aquatic crustaceans — crayfish, crabs, amphipods, and lobsters. Between 2000 and 2020, crayfish caused US$ 120.5 million in reported costs; the vast majority (99%) being attributed to representatives of Astacidae and Cambaridae. Crayfish-related costs were unevenly distributed across countries, with a strong bias towards European economies (US$ 116.4 million; mainly due to the signal crayfish in Sweden), followed by costs reported from North America and Asia. The costs were also largely predicted or extrapolated, and thus not based on empirical observations. Despite these limitations, the costs of invasive crayfish have increased considerably over the past two decades, averaging US$ 5.7 million per year. Invasive crabs have caused costs of US$ 150.2 million since 1960 and the ratios were again uneven (57% in North America and 42% in Europe). Damage-related costs dominated for both crayfish (80%) and crabs (99%), with management costs lacking or even more under-reported. Reported costs for invasive amphipods (US$ 178.8 thousand) and lobsters (US$ 44.6 thousand) were considerably lower, suggesting a lack of effort in reporting costs for these groups or effects that are largely non-monetised. Despite the well-known damage caused by invasive crustaceans, we identify data limitations that prevent a full accounting of the economic costs of these invasive groups, while highlighting the increasing costs at several scales based on the available literature. Further cost reports are needed to better assess the true magnitude of monetary costs caused by invasive aquatic crustaceans.

Description: Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science - a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline - the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. 'non-native', 'alien', 'invasive' or 'invader', 'exotic', 'non-indigenous', 'naturalised', 'pest') to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) 'non-native', denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) 'established non-native', i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) 'invasive non-native' - populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising 'spread' for classifying invasiveness and 'impact' for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species.

Description: © The Author(s), 2022. This article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License. The definitive version was published in Kouba, A., Oficialdegui, F. J., Cuthbert, R. N., Kourantidou, M., South, J., Tricarico, E., Gozlan, R. E., Courchamp, F., & Haubrock, P. J. Identifying economic costs and knowledge gaps of invasive aquatic crustaceans. Science of the Total Environment, 813, (2022): 152325, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.152325.

Description: Despite voluminous literature identifying the impacts of invasive species, summaries of monetary costs for some taxonomic groups remain limited. Invasive alien crustaceans often have profound impacts on recipient ecosystems, but there may be great unknowns related to their economic costs. Using the InvaCost database, we quantify and analyse reported costs associated with invasive crustaceans globally across taxonomic, spatial, and temporal descriptors. Specifically, we quantify the costs of prominent aquatic crustaceans — crayfish, crabs, amphipods, and lobsters. Between 2000 and 2020, crayfish caused US$ 120.5 million in reported costs; the vast majority (99%) being attributed to representatives of Astacidae and Cambaridae. Crayfish-related costs were unevenly distributed across countries, with a strong bias towards European economies (US$ 116.4 million; mainly due to the signal crayfish in Sweden), followed by costs reported from North America and Asia. The costs were also largely predicted or extrapolated, and thus not based on empirical observations. Despite these limitations, the costs of invasive crayfish have increased considerably over the past two decades, averaging US$ 5.7 million per year. Invasive crabs have caused costs of US$ 150.2 million since 1960 and the ratios were again uneven (57% in North America and 42% in Europe). Damage-related costs dominated for both crayfish (80%) and crabs (99%), with management costs lacking or even more under-reported. Reported costs for invasive amphipods (US$ 178.8 thousand) and lobsters (US$ 44.6 thousand) were considerably lower, suggesting a lack of effort in reporting costs for these groups or effects that are largely non-monetised. Despite the well-known damage caused by invasive crustaceans, we identify data limitations that prevent a full accounting of the economic costs of these invasive groups, while highlighting the increasing costs at several scales based on the available literature. Further cost reports are needed to better assess the true magnitude of monetary costs caused by invasive aquatic crustaceans.

Description: This research was enabled thanks to the French National Research Agency (ANR-14-CE02-0021) and the BNP-Paribas Foundation Climate Initiative for funding the InvaCost project that allowed the construction of the InvaCost database. The present work was conducted following a workshop funded by the AXA Research Fund Chair of Invasion Biology and is part of the AlienScenario project funded by BiodivERsA and Belmont-Forum call 2018 on biodiversity scenarios. AK acknowledges the Czech Science Foundation (project no. 19-04431S). FJO is funded by the Regional Government of Andalusia in Spain (Excelencia project P12-RNM-936). RNC acknowledges funding from the Alexander von Humboldt Foundation. JS acknowledges funding from the DSI-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology (CIB).