Alien invaders get a bad press

Jun 10, 2013 by Alex Peel
Alien invaders get a bad press

A new study, published in Acta Oecologia, says many of the most damning claims about invaders are not backed up with hard evidence. This might be skewing priorities when it comes to dealing with them.

'Some invasive species are possibly getting a harder time than they deserve,' says Claire McLaughlan, a NERC-funded PhD student at the University of Cambridge, who led the study.

'It's an emotive subject but it needs to be looked at in a balanced way. For many of the species in the list of Europe's top ten worst invaders, we could find little evidence of their reported effects in the literature.'

'If this is the literature behind the worst species, then what is the evidence like for others?'

There are thought to be more than 12,000 non-native species in Europe. Having evolved under different competitive pressures, some can quickly overwhelm their new and become invasive.

These invaders can wreak havoc, out-competing their native and damaging the many economic, cultural and health benefits of nature, known as .

Alien invaders get a bad press

Several projects have been launched to tackle invasive species and protect those services, but there is only so much money available. To help prioritise spending, a group of European scientists put together a list of the 10 most damaging invasive species in Europe.

Sika deer, and all made the list, but McLaughlan and her team wanted to examine the evidence behind it.

They found that the damaging effects of invaders are often assumed, rather than based on hard evidence. Some , particularly those in environments which are already severely damaged, could even enhance ecosystem services.

'It's context-dependant,' explains McLaughlan. 'For example, with the zebra mussel, if they were to invade a stream full of rare, native species, they would obviously be very damaging.'

'But if they were to become established in a large man-made reservoir with very few species and an algae problem, they could help to process the algae and improve some ecosystem services.'

'We're not for a moment suggesting that you should introduce anywhere; prevention is always better than cure.'

'But with the species that are already there, there's only limited money available and we need new ways to prioritise which species we tackle. That has to be based on the evidence of their effects.'

McLaughlan's PhD research focusses on the invasive zebra mussel and its effects on the ecosystem services of UK reservoirs.

Explore further: PacifiCorp Energy pleads guilty in bird deaths (Update)

More information: McLaughlan, C., Gallardo, B. and Aldridge, D. How complete is our knowledge of ecosystem services impacts of Europe's top 10 invasive species?, Acta Oecologia, 2013. DOI: 10.1016/j.actao.2013.03.005

Provided by PlanetEarth Online search and more info website

5 /5 (2 votes)

Related Stories

'Dirty dozen' invasive species threaten UK

May 01, 2013

Parts of the UK are at greater risk of invasion by non-native aquatic species than previously thought, according to new research. The first to include human factors in models used to predict where invasive species will arrive ...

Ecologists put price tag on invasive species

Apr 20, 2009

Invasive species can disrupt natural and human-made ecosystems, throwing food webs out of balance and damaging the services they provide to people. Now scientists have begun to put a price tag on this damage. In a study ...

Recommended for you

Study finds tropical fish moving into temperate waters

Dec 19, 2014

Tropical herbivorous fish are beginning to expand their range into temperate waters – likely as a result of climate change – and a new international study documents the dramatic impact of the intrusion ...

User comments : 1

Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

LariAnn
1 / 5 (2) Jun 10, 2013
Even though the article admits that there is little, if any, evidence for the supposed or assumed "damaging" effects of the top 10 "invaders", the article goes on to promote the pseudoscience anyway. See the contradictory statements in the direct quote below:

For many of the species in the list of Europe's top ten worst invaders, we could find little evidence of their reported effects in the literature.'

'If this is the literature behind the worst species, then what is the evidence like for others?'

There are thought to be more than 12,000 non-native species in Europe. Having evolved under different competitive pressures, some can quickly overwhelm their new ecosystems and become invasive.


Didn't the author read the paper about which he is writing, or is he so invested in the pseudoscience that he cannot be objective even in the face of objective evidence?

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.