Impact assessment with different scoring tools : how well do alien amphibian assessments match?

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorKumschick, Sabrinaen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorVimercati, Giovannien_ZA
dc.contributor.authorDe Villiers, F. Andreen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorMokhatla, Mohlamatsane M.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorDavies, Sarah J.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorThorp, Corey J.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorRebelo, Alexander D.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorMeasey, G. Johnen_ZA
dc.contributor.editorRabitsch, W.en_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2019-02-19T14:02:16Z
dc.date.available2019-02-19T14:02:16Z
dc.date.issued2017-01-27
dc.descriptionCITATION: Kumschick, S., et al. 2017. Impact assessment with different scoring tools : how well do alien amphibian assessments match?. NeoBiota, 35:53-66, doi:10.3897/neobiota.33.10736.en_ZA
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at https://neobiota.pensoft.neten_ZA
dc.description.abstractClassification of alien species’ impacts can aid policy making through evidence based listing and management recommendations. We highlight differences and a number of potential difficulties with two scoring tools, the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT) and the Generic Impact Scoring System (GISS) using amphibians as a case study. Generally, GISS and EICAT assessments lead to very similar impact levels, but scores from the schemes are not equivalent. Small differences are attributable to discrepancies in the verbal descriptions for scores. Differences were found in several impact categories. While the issue of disease appears to be related to uncertainties in both schemes, hybridisation might be inflated in EICAT. We conclude that GISS scores cannot directly be translated into EICAT classifications, but they give very similar outcomes and the same literature base can be used for both schemes.en_ZA
dc.description.urihttps://neobiota.pensoft.net/article/10376/
dc.description.versionPublisher's versionen_ZA
dc.format.extent14 pages : illustrationsen_ZA
dc.identifier.citationKumschick, S., et al. 2017. Impact assessment with different scoring tools : how well do alien amphibian assessments match?. NeoBiota, 35:53-66, doi:10.3897/neobiota.33.10736en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn1314-2488 (online)
dc.identifier.issn1619-0033 (print)
dc.identifier.otherdoi:10.3897/neobiota.33.10736
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/105439
dc.language.isoen_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherPensoft Publishersen_ZA
dc.rights.holderAuthors retain copyrighten_ZA
dc.subjectAlien speciesen_ZA
dc.subjectEnvironmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT)en_ZA
dc.subjectGeneric Impact Scoring System (GISS)en_ZA
dc.subjectBiological invasionsen_ZA
dc.subjectAmphibians -- Listingen_ZA
dc.titleImpact assessment with different scoring tools : how well do alien amphibian assessments match?en_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
kumschick_impact_2017.pdf
Size:
356.14 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download article
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.71 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Research Articles (Botany and Zoology)