View Item 

Show simple item record

Integrated assessment of biological invasions

dc.contributor.authorIbáñez, Inésen_US
dc.contributor.authorDiez, Jeffrey M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorMiller, Luke P.en_US
dc.contributor.authorOlden, Julian D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorSorte, Cascade J. B.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBlumenthal, Dana M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorBradley, Bethany A.en_US
dc.contributor.authorD'Antonio, Carla M.en_US
dc.contributor.authorDukes, Jeffrey S.en_US
dc.contributor.authorEarly, Regan I.en_US
dc.contributor.authorGrosholz, Edwin D.en_US
dc.contributor.authorLawler, Joshua J.en_US
dc.date.accessioned2016-02-01T18:48:01Z
dc.date.available2016-02-01T18:48:01Z
dc.date.issued2014-01en_US
dc.identifier.citationIbáñez, Inés ; Diez, Jeffrey M.; Miller, Luke P.; Olden, Julian D.; Sorte, Cascade J. B.; Blumenthal, Dana M.; Bradley, Bethany A.; D'Antonio, Carla M.; Dukes, Jeffrey S.; Early, Regan I.; Grosholz, Edwin D.; Lawler, Joshua J. (2014). "Integrated assessment of biological invasions." Ecological Applications 24(1): 25-37.en_US
dc.identifier.issn1051-0761en_US
dc.identifier.issn1939-5582en_US
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/116966
dc.publisherEcological Society of Americaen_US
dc.publisherWiley Periodicals, Inc.en_US
dc.subject.otherrisk assessmenten_US
dc.subject.otherMytilus galloprovincialisen_US
dc.subject.otherOrconectes rusticusen_US
dc.subject.othermultiple scalesen_US
dc.subject.otherCelastrus orbiculatusen_US
dc.subject.otherdemographic frameworken_US
dc.subject.otherhierarchical Bayesian modelsen_US
dc.subject.otherinvasive species managementen_US
dc.subject.otherproliferation phaseen_US
dc.subject.othercolonization phaseen_US
dc.subject.otherdispersal phaseen_US
dc.titleIntegrated assessment of biological invasionsen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.rights.robotsIndexNoFollowen_US
dc.subject.hlbsecondlevelEcology and Evolutionary Biologyen_US
dc.subject.hlbtoplevelScienceen_US
dc.description.peerreviewedPeer Revieweden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationumSchool of Natural Resources and the Environment, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherSchool of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washinigton 98105 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherHopkins Marine Station, Stanford University, Pacific Grove, California 93950 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherInstitute of Integrative Biology, ETH, Zurich, Switzerlanden_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherSchool of Environmental and Forest Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington 98195 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Environmental Science and Policy, University of California, Davis, California 95616 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherCátedra Rui Nabeiro, Universidade de Évora, Évora, Portugalen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Forestry and Natural Resources and Department of Biological Sciences, Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana 47907 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Ecology, Evolution, and Marine Biology, University of California, Santa Barbara, California 93106 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Environmental Conservation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts 01003 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherRangeland Resources Research Unit, USDA Agricultural Research Service, Fort Collins, Colorado 80526 USAen_US
dc.contributor.affiliationotherDepartment of Environmental, Earth and Ocean Sciences, University of Massachusetts, Boston, Massachusetts 02125 USAen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttp://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/116966/1/eap201424125.pdf
dc.identifier.doi10.1890/13-0776.1en_US
dc.identifier.sourceEcological Applicationsen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLodge, D. M., et al. 2006. Biological invasions: Recommendations for U.S. policy and management. Ecological Applications 16: 2035 – 2054.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDaehler, C. C. 2003. Performance comparisons of co-occurring native and alien plants: Implications for conservation and restoration. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 34: 183 – 211.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDavis, M. A., J. P. Grime, and K. Thompson. 2000. Fluctuating resources in plant communities: a general theory of invasibility. Journal of Ecology 88: 528 – 536.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDeGasperis, B. G., and G. Motzkin. 2007. Windows of opportunity: historical and ecological controls on Berberis thunbergii invasions. Ecology 88: 3115 – 3125.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDiez, J. M., et al. 2012. Will extreme climatic events facilitate biological invasions? Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10: 249 – 257.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceDukes, J. S., et al. 2009. Responses of insect pests, pathogens, and invasive plant species to climate change in the forests of northeastern North America: What can we predict? Canadian Journal of Forest Research 39: 231 – 248.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEarly, R., and D. F. Sax. 2011. Analysis of climate paths reveals potential limitations on species range shifts. Ecology Letters 14: 1125 – 1133.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceEllsworth, J. W., R. A. Harrington, and J. H. Fownes. 2004. Survival, growth and gas exchange of Celastrus orbiculatus seedlings in sun and shade. American Midland Naturalist 151: 233 – 240.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFeldman, G., and C. McClain. 2012. Ocean Color Web, MODIS-Aqua Reprocessing R2010.0. N. Kuring and S. W. Bailey, editors. http://gcmd.gsfc.nasa.gov/KeywordSearch/Keywords.do?Portal=GCMD&KeywordPath=Parameters|OCEANS|OCEAN+CHEMISTRY|CHLOROPHYLL &MetadataType=0&Columns=0&lbnode=mdlb6#maincontenten_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFoxcroft, L. C., S. T. A. Pickett, and M. L. Cadenasso. 2011. Expanding the conceptual frameworks of plant invasion ecology. Perspectives in Plant Ecology, Evolution and Systematics 13: 89 – 100.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceFranklin, J. 2010. Moving beyond static species distribution models in support of conservation biogeography. Diversity and Distributions 16: 321 – 330.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGelman, A., and J. Hill. 2007. Data analysis using regression and multilevel/hierarchical models. Cambridge University Press, New York, New York, USA.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGreenberg, C. H., L. M. Smith, and D. J. Levey. 2001. Fruit fate, seed germination and growth of an invasive vine—an experimental test of “sit and wait” strategy. Biological Invasions 3: 363 – 372.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceGurevitch, J., G. A. Fox, G. M. Wardle, and T. D. Inderjit. 2011. Emergent insights from the synthesis of conceptual frameworks for biological invasions. Ecology Letters 14: 407 – 418.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHobbs, R. J., and L. F. Huenneke. 1992. Disturbance, diversity, and invasion: implications for conservation. Conservation Biology 6: 324 – 337.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceHuntley, B., et al. 2010. Beyond bioclimatic envelopes: dynamic species' range and abundance modelling in the context of climatic change. Ecography 33: 621 – 626.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIbáñez, I., J. A. Silander, J. M. Allen, S. A. Treanor, and A. Wilson. 2009 b. Identifying hotspots for plant invasions and forecasting focal points of further spread. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 1219 – 1228.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceIbáñez, I., J. A. Silander, A. M. Wilson, N. LaFleur, N. Tanaka, and I. Tsuyama. 2009 a. Multivariate forecasts of potential distributions of invasive plant species. Ecological Applications 19: 359 – 375.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceKeith, D. A., H. R. Akçakaya, W. Thuiller, G. F. Midgley, R. G. Pearson, S. J. Phillips, H. M. Regan, M. B. Araújo, and T. G. Rebelo. 2008. Predicting extinction risks under climate change: coupling stochastic population models with dynamic bioclimatic habitat models. Biology Letters 4: 560 – 563.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLaDeau, S. L., G. E. Glass, N. T. Hobbs, A. Latimer, and R. S. Ostfeld. 2011. Data–model fusion to better understand emerging pathogens and improve infectious disease forecasting. Ecological Applications 21: 1443 – 1460.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLafleur, N. E., M. A. Rubega, and C. S. Elphick. 2007. Invasive fruits, novel foods, and choice: an investigation of European starling and American Robin frugivory. Wilson Journal of Ornithology 119: 429 – 438.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeicht, S. A., and J. A. Silander. 2006. Differential responses of invasive Celastrus orbiculatus (Celastraceae) and native C. scandens to changes in light quality. American Journal of Botany 93: 972 – 977.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeicht-Young, S. A., J. A. Silander, and A. M. Latimer. 2007. Comparative performance of invasive and native Celastrus species across environmental gradients. Oecologia 154: 273 – 282.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLeung, B., et al. 2012. TEASIng apart alien species risk assessments: a framework for best practices. Ecology Letters 15: 1475 – 1493.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLevine, J. M., and C. M. D'Antonio. 2003. Forecasting biological invasions with increasing international trade. Conservation Biology 17: 322 – 326.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLockwood, B. L., and G. N. Somero. 2011. Invasive and native blue mussels (genus Mytilus ) on the California coast: the role of physiology in a biological invasion. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 400: 167 – 174.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLodge, D. M., J. W. Kershner, J. E. Aloi, and A. P. Covich. 1994. Effects of an omnivorous crayfish ( Orconectes rusticus ) on a freshwater littoral food web. Ecology 75: 1265 – 1281.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceLuo, Y., K. Ogle, C. Tucker, S. Fei, C. Gao, S. LaDeau, J. S. Clark, and D. S. Schimel. 2011. Ecological forecasting and data assimilation in a data-rich era. Ecological Applications 21: 1429 – 1442.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMack, R. N., D. Simberloff, W. M. Lonsdale, H. Evans, M. Clout, and F. A. Bazzaz. 2000. Biotic invasions: causes, epidemiology, global consequences, and control. Ecological Applications 10: 689 – 710.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMcCarthy, J. M., C. L. Hein, J. D. Olden, and M. J. Vander Zanden. 2006. Coupling long-term studies with meta-analysis to investigate impacts of non-native crayfish on zoobenthic communities. Freshwater Biology 51: 224 – 235.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMehrhoff, L. J., J. A. Silander, Jr., S. A. Leicht-Young, E. S. Mosher, and N. M. Tabak. 2003. IPANE: invasive plant atlas of New England. Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology, University of Connecticut, Storrs, Connecticut, USA. http://www.ipane.orgen_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceMosher, E. S., J. A. Silander, Jr., and A. Latimer. 2009. The role of land-use history in major invasions by woody plant species in the northeastern North American Landscape. Biological Invasions 11: 2317 – 2328.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlden, J. D., J. M. McCarthy, J. T. Maxted, W. W. Fetzer, and M. J. Vander Zanden. 2006. The rapid spread of rusty crayfish ( Orconectes rusticus ) with observations on native crayfish declines in Wisconsin (USA) over the past 130 years. Biological Invasions 8: 1621 – 1628.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlden, J. D., M. J. Vander Zanden, and P. T. J. Johnson. 2011. Assessing ecosystem vulnerability to invasive rusty crayfish ( Orconectes rusticus ). Ecological Applications 21: 2587 – 2599.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceOlsen, T. M., D. M. Lodge, G. M. Capelli, and R. J. Houlihan. 1991. Mechanisms of impact of an introduced crayfish ( Orconectes rusticus ) on littoral congeners, snails, and macrophytes. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48: 1853 – 1861.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePapeş, M., M. Sallstrom, T. R. Asplund, and M. J. Vander Zanden. 2011. Invasive species research to meet the needs of resource management and planning. Conservation Biology 25: 867 – 872.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePearson, R. G., and T. P. Dawson. 2003. Predicting the impacts of climate change on the distribution of species: Are bioclimate envelope models useful? Global Ecology and Biogeography 12: 361 – 371.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencePeterson, A. T., and D. A. Vieglais. 2001. Predicting species invasions using ecological niche modeling: new approaches from bioinformatics attack a pressing problem. BioScience 51: 363 – 371.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceRothlisberger, J. D., W. L. Chadderton, J. McNulty, and D. M. Lodge. 2010. Aquatic invasive species transport via trailered boats: what is being moved, who is moving it, and what can be done. Fisheries 35: 121 – 132.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSala, O., et al. 2000. Global biodiversity scenarios of the year 2100. Science 287: 1770 – 1774.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceShea, K., and P. Chesson. 2002. Community ecology theory as a framework for biological invasions. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 17: 170 – 176.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSher, A. A., and L. A. Hyatt. 1999. The disturbed resource–flux invasion matrix: a new framework for patterns of plant invasion. Biological Invasions 1: 107 – 114.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSimberloff, D. 2009. The role of propagule pressure in biological invasions. Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systematics 40: 81 – 102.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSomero, G. N. 2012. The physiology of global change: linking patterns to mechanisms. Annual Review of Marine Science 4: 39 – 61.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSorte, C. J. B., et al. 2013. Poised to prosper? A cross-system comparison of climate change effects on native and non-native species performance. Ecology Letters 16: 260 – 271.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceSpiegelhalter, D. J., N. Best, B. P. Carlin, and A. V. D. Linde. 2000. Bayesian measures of model complexity and fit. Journal of the Royal Statistical Society: Series B 64: 583 – 639.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVander Zanden, M. J., and J. D. Olden. 2008. A management framework for preventing the secondary spread of aquatic invasive species. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 65: 1512 – 1522.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferencevan Erkom Schurink, C., and C. L. Griffiths. Factors affecting relative rates of growth in four South African mussel species. Aquaculture International 109: 257 – 273.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceVitousek, P. M., H. A. Mooney, J. Lubchenco, and J. M. Melillo. 1997. Human domination of Earth's ecosystems. Science 277: 494 – 499.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceAlbright, T. P., D. P. Anderson, N. S. Keuler, S. M. Pearson, and M. G. Turner. 2009. The spatial legacy of introduction: Celastrus orbiculatus in the southern Appalachians, USA. Journal of Applied Ecology 46: 1229 – 1238.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBesaw, L. M., G. C. Thelen, S. Sutherland, K. Metlen, and R. M. Callaway. 2011. Disturbance, resource pulses and invasion: short-term shifts in competitive effects, not growth responses, favour exotic annuals. Journal of Applied Ecology 48: 998 – 1006.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBlumenthal, D., C. E. Mitchell, P. Pysek, and V. Jarosik. 2009. Synergy between pathogen release and resource availability in plant invasion. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA 106: 7899 – 7904.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBradley, B. A., et al. 2012. Global change, global trade, and the next wave of plant invasions. Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment 10: 20 – 28.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBranch, G. M., and C. N. Steffani. 2004. Can we predict the effects of alien species? A case-history of the invasion of South Africa by Mytilus galloprovincialis (Lamarck). Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 300: 189 – 215.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceBrook, B. W., H. R. Akcakaya, D. A. Keith, G. M. Mace, R. G. Pearson, and M. B. Araujo. 2009. Integrating bioclimate with population models to improve forecasts of species extinctions under climate change. Biology Letters 23: 723 – 725.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCarlton, J. T. 1992. Introduced marine and estuarine mollusks of North America: an end-of-the-20th-century perspective. Journal of Shellfish Research 11: 489 – 505.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClark, J. S. 2005. Why environmental scientists are becoming Bayesians. Ecology Letters 8: 2 – 14.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClark, J. S., et al. 2010. High-dimensional coexistence based on individual variation: a synthesis of evidence. Ecological Monographs 80: 569 – 608.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceClark, J. S., and A. E. E. Gelfand. 2006. Hierarchical Modelling for the Environmental Sciences Statistical methods and applications. Oxford University Press, Oxford, UK.en_US
dc.identifier.citedreferenceCressie, N., C. A. Calder, J. S. Clark, J. M. V. Hoef, and C. K. Wikle. 2009. Accounting for uncertainty in ecological analysis: the strengths and limitations of hierarchical statistical modeling. Ecological Applications 19: 553 – 570.en_US
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Name:
eap201424125.pdf
Size:
4.754MB
Format:
PDF
View/Open

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.