How repeatable is the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT)? Comparing independent global impact assessments of amphibians

Simple item page
dc.contributor.authorKumschick, Sabrinaen_ZA
dc.contributor.authorMeasey, G. Johnen_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.authorBlackburn, Tim M.en_ZA
dc.contributor.authorKraus, Freden_ZA
dc.date.accessioned2017-03-27T07:13:37Z
dc.date.available2017-03-27T07:13:37Z
dc.date.issued2017
dc.descriptionCITATION: Kumschick, S., et al. 2017. How repeatable is the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT)? Comparing independent global impact assessments of amphibians. Ecology and Evolution, 1-10, doi:10.1002/ece3.2877.en_ZA
dc.descriptionThe original publication is available at http://onlinelibrary.wiley.comen_ZA
dc.descriptionPublication of this article was funded by the Stellenbosch University Open Access Fund.en_ZA
dc.description.abstractThe magnitude of impacts some alien species cause to native environments makes them targets for regulation and management. However, which species to target is not always clear, and comparisons of a wide variety of impacts are necessary. Impact scoring systems can aid management prioritization of alien species. For such tools to be objective, they need to be robust to assessor bias. Here, we assess the newly proposed Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT) used for amphibians and test how outcomes differ between assessors. Two independent assessments were made by Kraus (Annual Review of Ecology Evolution and Systematics, 46, 2015, 75-97) and Kumschick et al. (Neobiota, 33, 2017, 53-66), including independent literature searches for impact records. Most of the differences between these two classifications can be attributed to different literature search strategies used with only one-third of the combined number of references shared between both studies. For the commonly assessed species, the classification of maximum impacts for most species is similar between assessors, but there are differences in the more detailed assessments. We clarify one specific issue resulting from different interpretations of EICAT, namely the practical interpretation and assigning of disease impacts in the absence of direct evidence of transmission from alien to native species. The differences between assessments outlined here cannot be attributed to features of the scheme. Reporting bias should be avoided by assessing all alien species rather than only the seemingly high-impacting ones, which also improves the utility of the data for management and prioritization for future research. Furthermore, assessments of the same taxon by various assessors and a structured review process for assessments, as proposed by Hawkins et al. (Diversity and Distributions, 21, 2015, 1360), can ensure that biases can be avoided and all important literature is included.en_ZA
dc.description.urihttp://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ece3.2877/full
dc.description.versionPublisher’s versionen_ZA
dc.format.extent10 pagesen_ZA
dc.identifier.citationKumschick, S., et al. 2017. How repeatable is the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT)? Comparing independent global impact assessments of amphibians. Ecology and Evolution, 1-10, doi:10.1002/ece3.2877en_ZA
dc.identifier.issn2045-7758 (online)
dc.identifier.otherdoi:10.1002/ece3.2877
dc.identifier.urihttp://hdl.handle.net/10019.1/100759
dc.language.isoen_ZAen_ZA
dc.publisherWiley Open Accessen_ZA
dc.rights.holderAuthor retains copyrighten_ZA
dc.subjectAlien speciesen_ZA
dc.subjectBiological invasionsen_ZA
dc.subjectEnvironmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa (EICAT)en_ZA
dc.subjectAmphibians -- Global impact assessmenten_ZA
dc.titleHow repeatable is the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT)? Comparing independent global impact assessments of amphibiansen_ZA
dc.typeArticleen_ZA
Files
Original bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
Kumschick_repeatable_2017.pdf
Size:
481.79 KB
Format:
Adobe Portable Document Format
Description:
Download article
Download
License bundle
Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Thumbnail Image
Name:
license.txt
Size:
1.95 KB
Format:
Item-specific license agreed upon to submission
Description:
Download
Collections
Research Articles (Botany and Zoology)