Search

Fungal invasions can have far-reaching consequences, and despite increasing relevance, fungi are notoriously underrepresented in invasion science. Here, we present the second annotated checklist for alien and cryptogenic fungi and oomycetes in Austria. This list contains 375 taxa of which 278 are classified as established; compared to the first checklist from 2002, this amounts to an almost five-fold increase and the number of decade-wise first records is steadily rising since the mid-twentieth century. The introduction pathway is unclear for the vast majority of taxa, while the main means of spread within the country is unassisted secondary spread. Fungi were predominantly introduced from the Northern Hemisphere, especially North America and Temperate Asia. Rates of newly recorded alien fungi differ among phyla; the majority belongs to the Ascomycota , which experienced an 9.6-fold increase in numbers. Orders found most frequently are powdery mildews ( Erysiphales, Ascomycota ), downy mildews ( Peronosporales , Oomycota ), agarics ( Agaricales , Basidiomycota ), Mycosphaerellales ( Ascomycota ), rusts ( Pucciniales , Basidiomycota ) and Pleosporales ( Ascomycota ). The majority (about 80%) of the taxa are plant pathogens, while animal pathogens are few but severely affecting their native hosts. The dominance of pathogens in our checklist underlines the need of better tackling fungal invasions-especially in the light of emerging infectious diseases-and highlights potential knowledge gaps for ectomycorrhizal and saprobic alien fungi, whose invasion processes are often much more inconspicuous. Our results show that fungal invasions are a phenomenon of increasing importance, and collaborative efforts are needed for advancing the knowledge and management of this important group., Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10530-022-02896-2., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestThe authors have no relevant financial or non-financial interests to disclose., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

The total impact of an alien species was conceptualised as the product of its range size, local abundance and per-unit effect in a seminal paper by Parker et al. (Biol Invasions 1:3-19, 1999). However, a practical approach for estimating the three components has been lacking. Here, we generalise the impact formula and, through use of regression models, estimate the relationship between the three components of impact, an approach we term GIRAE (Generalised Impact = Range size × Abundance × per-unit Effect). We discuss how GIRAE can be applied to multiple types of impact, including environmental impacts, damage and management costs. We propose two methods for applying GIRAE. The species-specific method computes the relationship between impact, range size, abundance and per-unit effect for a given species across multiple invaded sites or regions of different sizes. The multi-species method combines data from multiple species across multiple sites or regions to calculate a per-unit effect for each species and is computed using a single regression model. The species-specific method is more accurate, but it requires a large amount of data for each species and assumes a constant per-unit effect for a species across the invaded area. The multi-species method is more easily applicable and data-parsimonious, but assumes the same relationship between impact, range size and abundance for all considered species. We illustrate these methods using data about money spent managing plant invasions in different biomes of South Africa. We found clear differences between species in terms of money spent per unit area invaded, with per-unit expenditure varying substantially between biomes for some species-insights that are useful for monitoring and evaluating management. GIRAE offers a versatile and practical method that can be applied to many different types of data to better understand and manage the impacts of biological invasions., Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10530-022-02836-0., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestThe authors declare no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022.)

Community science (also often referred to as citizen science) provides a unique opportunity to address questions beyond the scope of other research methods whilst simultaneously engaging communities in the scientific process. This leads to broad educational benefits, empowers people, and can increase public awareness of societally relevant issues such as the biodiversity crisis. As such, community science has become a favourable framework for researching alien species where data on the presence, absence, abundance, phenology, and impact of species is important in informing management decisions. However, uncertainties arising at different stages can limit the interpretation of data and lead to projects failing to achieve their intended outcomes. Focusing on alien species centered community science projects, we identified key research questions and the relevant uncertainties that arise during the process of developing the study design, for example, when collecting the data and during the statistical analyses. Additionally, we assessed uncertainties from a linguistic perspective, and how the communication stages among project coordinators, participants and other stakeholders can alter the way in which information may be interpreted. We discuss existing methods for reducing uncertainty and suggest further solutions to improve data reliability. Further, we make suggestions to reduce the uncertainties that emerge at each project step and provide guidance and recommendations that can be readily applied in practice. Reducing uncertainties is essential and necessary to strengthen the scientific and community outcomes of community science, which is of particular importance to ensure the success of projects aimed at detecting novel alien species and monitoring their dynamics across space and time., Supplementary Information: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10530-022-02858-8., Competing Interests: Conflict of interestThe authors declare no conflict of interest., (© The Author(s) 2022.)