ITEM VIEW

A taxonomically and geographically constrained information base limits non-native reptile and amphibian risk assessment : a systematic review

dc.contributor.authorVan Wilgen, Nicola J.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorGillespie, Micaela S.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorRichardson, David M.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorMeasey, Johnen_ZA
dc.contributor.editorRoberts, Daviden_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2019-10-22T11:57:52Z
dc.date.available2019-10-22T11:57:52Z
dc.date.issued2018-11-08
dc.identifier.citationVan Wilgen, N. J., et al. 2018. A taxonomically and geographically constrained information base limits non-native reptile and amphibian risk assessment : a systematic review. PeerJ, 6:e5850, doi:10.7717/peerj.5850en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn2167-8359 (online)
dc.identifier.otherdoi:10.7717/peerj.5850
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/106693
dc.descriptionCITATION: Van Wilgen, N. J., et al. 2018. A taxonomically and geographically constrained information base limits non-native reptile and amphibian risk assessment : a systematic review. PeerJ, 6:e5850, doi:10.7717/peerj.5850.en_ZA
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at https://peerj.comen_ZA
dc.description.abstractENGLISH ABSTRACT: For 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.description.urihttps://peerj.com/articles/5850/
dc.format.extent25 pages : illustrations, mapsen_ZA
dc.language.isoen_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherPeerJen_ZA
dc.subjectAlien speciesen_ZA
dc.subjectNon-native reptile assessmenten_ZA
dc.subjectAmphibian risk assessmenten_ZA
dc.subjectInvasion ecology of herpetofaunaen_ZA
dc.titleA taxonomically and geographically constrained information base limits non-native reptile and amphibian risk assessment : a systematic reviewen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
dc.description.versionPublisher's versionen_ZA
dc.rights.holderAuthors retain copyrighten_ZA


Files in this item

Thumbnail
Thumbnail

This item appears in the following Collection(s)

ITEM VIEW