Search

It is important for regulators and managers to effectively distinguish native from alien taxa. However, a taxon can have both native and alien populations within the same country as biogeographic and administrative boundaries do not always align. Here we propose a protocol for classifying populations as native, alien, cryptogenic, or native-alien, and describe the evidence required. This protocol comprises of three questions: (1) is the population outside the historic native range of the taxon, (2) is/was natural dispersal from the native range unlikely, and (3) is the taxon native to a part of the administrative region where the population is found. If information on introduction pathways, genetics, and biogeographical barriers is available, we propose an alternative process to answer question 2. The protocol was applied to 176 suspected native-alien populations in South Africa. A total of 132 populations from 77 native taxa were classified as native-alien, 13 as cryptogenic, 13 as alien (native-alien status uncertain), and 18 as native. We believe the protocol provides a transparent and standardised method for categorising native-alien populations and thereby facilitates the appropriate regulation and management of this type of biological invasion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Risk analysis plays a crucial role in regulating and managing alien and invasive species but can be timeconsuming and costly. Alternatively, combining invasion and impact history with species distribution models offers a cost-effective and time-efficient approach to assess invasion risk and identify species for which a comprehensive risk analysis should take precedence. We conducted such an assessment for six traded alien fern species, determining their invasion risk in countries where they are traded. Four of the species (Dicksonia antarctica, Dryopteris erythrosora, Lygodium japonicum, and Phlebodium aureum) showed limited global distributions, while Adiantum raddianum and Sphaeropteris cooperi had broader distributions. A. raddianum, however, was the only species found to pose a high invasion risk in two known trade countries - the USA and Australia - and requires a complete risk analysis to determine the appropriate regulatory responses. Dicksonia antarctica, Phlebodium aureum (for New Zealand), and Dryopteris erythrosora (for the USA) posed a medium risk of invasion due to the lack of evidence of impacts, and a complete risk analysis is thus deemed less crucial for these species in these countries. For other species, suitable environments were not predicted in the countries where they are traded, thus the risk of invasion is low, and a complete risk analysis is not required. For species in countries where suitable environments are predicted but no trade information or presence data are available, risk assessments are recommended to better determine the risk posed. Despite the relatively limited potential global distribution of the studied ferns relative to other major plant invaders (e.g., Pinus spp. and Acacia spp.), their history of invasion, documented impacts in pristine environments, and high propagule pressure from trade warrants concern, possibly necessitating legislative and regulatory measures in environmentally suitable regions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Many countries define nativity at a country-level--taxa are categorised as either alien species or native species. However, there are often substantial within-country biogeographical barriers and so a taxon can be native and alien to different parts of the same country. Here, we use the term 'native-alien populations' as a short-hand for populations that result from the human-mediated dispersal of individuals of a species beyond a biogeographical barrier to a point beyond that species' native range, but that is still within the same political entity as parts of the species' native range. Based on these criteria, we consider native-alien populations to be biological invasions. However, we argue that, in comparison to other alien populations, native-alien populations: 1) are likely to be closer geographically to their native range; 2) are likely to be phylogenetically and ecologically more similar to native species in their introduced range; and 3) options to control their introduction or manage them will likely be more limited. We argue this means nativealien populations tend to differ from other alien populations in the likelihood of invasion, the types of impacts they have, and in how they can be most effectively managed. We also argue that native-alien populations are similarly a distinct phenomenon from native populations that are increasing in abundance or range extent. And note that native-alien populations are expected to be particularly common in large, ecologically diverse countries with disjunct biomes and ecoregions. Reporting, monitoring, regulating and managing native-alien populations will, we believe, become an increasingly important component of managing global change. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The dispersal of organisms in the Anthropocene has been profoundly altered by human activities, with far-reaching consequences for humans, biodiversity, and ecosystems. Managing such dispersal effectively is critical to achieve the 2030 targets of the Kunming-Montreal Global Biodiversity Framework. Here, we bring together insights from invasion science, movement ecology, and conservation biology, and extend a widely used classification framework for the introduction pathways of alien species to encompass other forms of dispersal. We develop a simple, global scheme for classifying the movement of organisms into the types of dispersal that characterise the Anthropocene. The scheme can be used to improve our understanding of dispersal, provide policy relevant advice, inform conservation and biosecurity actions, and enable monitoring and reporting towards conservation targets., Competing Interests: Declaration of interests The authors have no interests to declare., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)