Show simple item record

dc.contributor.authorvan Wilgen, N.J.
dc.contributor.authorGillespie, M.S.
dc.contributor.authorRichardson, D.M.
dc.contributor.authorMeasey, J.
dc.date.accessioned2019-01-17T10:00:59Z
dc.date.available2019-01-17T10:00:59Z
dc.date.issued2018
dc.identifier.citationVan Wilgen, N.J.; Gillespie, M.S.; Richardson, D.M.; Measey, J. (2018) A taxonomically and geographically constrained information base limits non-native reptile and amphibian risk assessment: a systematic review. PeerJ, 6: #e5850en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn2167-8359en_ZA
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/123456789/2568
dc.description.abstractFor many taxa, new records of non-native introductions globally occur at a near exponential rate. We undertook a systematic review of peer-reviewed publications on non-native herpetofauna, to assess the information base available for assessing risks of future invasions, resulting in 836 relevant papers. The taxonomic and geographic scope of the literature was also compared to a published database of all known invasions globally. We found 1,116 species of herpetofauna, 95% of which were present in fewer than 12 studies. Nearly all literature on the invasion ecology of herpetofauna has appeared since 2000, with a strong focus on frogs (58%), particularly cane toads (Rhinella marina) and their impacts in Australia. While fewer papers have been published on turtles and snakes, proportionately more species from both these groups have been studied than for frogs. Within each herpetofaunal group, there are a handful of well-studied species: R. marina, Lithobates catesbeianus, Xenopus laevis, Trachemys scripta, Boiga irregularis and Anolis sagrei. Most research (416 papers; 50%) has addressed impacts, with far fewer studies on aspects like trade (2%). Besides Australia (213 studies), most countries have little location-specific peer-reviewed literature on non-native herpetofauna (on average 1.1 papers per established species). Other exceptions were Guam, the UK, China, California and France, but even their publication coverage across established species was not even. New methods for assessing and prioritizing invasive species such as the Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa provide useful frameworks for risk assessment, but require robust species-level studies. Global initiatives, similar to the Global Amphibian Assessment, using the species and taxonomic groups identified here, are needed to derive the level of information across broad geographic ranges required to apply these frameworks. Expansive studies on model species can be used to indicate productive research foci for understudied taxa.en_ZA
dc.language.isoenen_ZA
dc.publisherCreative Commons CC-BY 4.0en_ZA
dc.subjectAlien speciesen_ZA
dc.subjectCrocodilesen_ZA
dc.subjectExoticen_ZA
dc.subjectBiological invasionsen_ZA
dc.subjectFrogsen_ZA
dc.subjectLizardsen_ZA
dc.subjectSnakesen_ZA
dc.subjectTurtlesen_ZA
dc.subjectSalamandersen_ZA
dc.subjectRisk assessmenten_ZA
dc.titleA taxonomically and geographically constrained information base limits non-native reptile and amphibian risk assessment: a systematic reviewen_ZA
dc.typeJournalArticlesen_ZA
dc.cibjournalPeerJen_ZA
dc.cibprojectNAen_ZA


Files in this item

Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

Show simple item record