Kourantidou Melina

Last Name

Kourantidou

First Name

Melina

ORCID

0000-0001-9595-3354

Full item page

Search Results

Now showing 1 - 15 of 15

Economic costs of invasive alien species across Europe

(Pensoft Publishers, 2021-06-29) Haubrock, Phillip J. ; Turbelin, Anna J. ; Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Novoa, Ana ; Taylor, Nigel G. ; Angulo, Elena ; Ballesteros-Mejia, Liliana ; Bodey, Thomas W. ; Capinha, César ; Diagne, Christophe ; Essl, Franz ; Golivets, Marina ; Kirichenko, Natalia ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Leroy, Boris ; Renault, David ; Verbrugge, Laura N.H. ; Courchamp, Franck

Biological invasions continue to threaten the stability of ecosystems and societies that are dependent on their services. Whilst the ecological impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) have been widely reported in recent decades, there remains a paucity of information concerning their economic impacts. Europe has strong trade and transport links with the rest of the world, facilitating hundreds of IAS incursions, and largely centralised decision-making frameworks. The present study is the first comprehensive and detailed effort that quantifies the costs of IAS collectively across European countries and examines temporal trends in these data. In addition, the distributions of costs across countries, socioeconomic sectors and taxonomic groups are examined, as are socio-economic correlates of management and damage costs. Total costs of IAS in Europe summed to US$140.20 billion (or €116.61 billion) between 1960 and 2020, with the majority (60%) being damage-related and impacting multiple sectors. Costs were also geographically widespread but dominated by impacts in large western and central European countries, i.e. the UK, Spain, France, and Germany. Human population size, land area, GDP, and tourism were significant predictors of invasion costs, with management costs additionally predicted by numbers of introduced species, research effort and trade. Temporally, invasion costs have increased exponentially through time, with up to US$23.58 billion (€19.64 billion) in 2013, and US$139.56 billion (€116.24 billion) in impacts extrapolated in 2020. Importantly, although these costs are substantial, there remain knowledge gaps on several geographic and taxonomic scales, indicating that these costs are severely underestimated. We, thus, urge increased and improved cost reporting for economic impacts of IAS and coordinated international action to prevent further spread and mitigate impacts of IAS populations.
Non-English languages enrich scientific knowledge: the example of economic costs of biological invasions

(Elsevier, 2021-03-10) Angulo, Elena ; Diagne, Christophe ; Ballesteros-Mejia, Liliana ; Adamjy, Tasnime ; Ahmed, Danish A. ; Akulov, Evgeny ; Banerjee, Achyut K. ; Capinha, César ; Dia, Cheikh A.K.M. ; Dobigny, Gauthier ; Duboscq-Carra, Virginia G. ; Golivets, Marina ; Haubrock, Phillip J. ; Heringer, Gustavo ; Kirichenko, Natalia ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Liu, Chunlong ; Nuñez, Martin A. ; Renault, David ; Roiz, David ; Taheri, Ahmed ; Verbrugge, Laura N.H. ; Watari, Yuya ; Xiong, Wen ; Courchamp, Franck

We contend that the exclusive focus on the English language in scientific research might hinder effective communication between scientists and practitioners or policy makers whose mother tongue is non-English. This barrier in scientific knowledge and data transfer likely leads to significant knowledge gaps and may create biases when providing global patterns in many fields of science. To demonstrate this, we compiled data on the global economic costs of invasive alien species reported in 15 non-English languages. We compared it with equivalent data from English documents (i.e., the InvaCost database, the most up-to-date repository of invasion costs globally). The comparison of both databases (~7500 entries in total) revealed that non-English sources: (i) capture a greater amount of data than English sources alone (2500 vs. 2396 cost entries respectively); (ii) add 249 invasive species and 15 countries to those reported by English literature, and (iii) increase the global cost estimate of invasions by 16.6% (i.e., US$ 214 billion added to 1.288 trillion estimated from the English database). Additionally, 2712 cost entries — not directly comparable to the English database — were directly obtained from practitioners, revealing the value of communication between scientists and practitioners. Moreover, we demonstrated how gaps caused by overlooking non-English data resulted in significant biases in the distribution of costs across space, taxonomic groups, types of cost, and impacted sectors. Specifically, costs from Europe, at the local scale, and particularly pertaining to management, were largely under-represented in the English database. Thus, combining scientific data from English and non-English sources proves fundamental and enhances data completeness. Considering non-English sources helps alleviate biases in understanding invasion costs at a global scale. Finally, it also holds strong potential for improving management performance, coordination among experts (scientists and practitioners), and collaborative actions across countries. Note: non-English versions of the abstract and figures are provided in Appendix S5 in 12 languages.
Mesopelagic-epipelagic fish nexus in viability and feasibility of commercial-scale mesopelagic fisheries

(Wiley, 2022-07-20) Kourantidou, Melina ; Jin, Di

While considerable scientific uncertainties persist for mesopelagic ecosystems, the fishing industry has developed a great interest in commercial exploitation with improved technologies as part of their search for new sources of feed for fishmeal and fish oil for aquaculture, which will intensify with the planet's growing population. The multiple uncertainties surrounding the ecosystem structure and particularly the size of biomass, hinder a good understanding of the risks associated with large-scale exploitation, which is needed for a management framework for sustainable ocean uses. Despite concerns regarding irreversible losses triggered by commercial fishing, work exploring the vulnerability of mesopelagic fish to harvesting is largely missing. This study investigates the economic feasibility of mesopelagic fishing which is the primary driver for any possible future expansion. Using very limited information currently available, we conduct a high-level assessment focusing on key ecological and economic interactions and develop an initial understanding of the economic feasibility of commercial harvesting for mesopelagic fish in the coming years. We conduct simulations using a classical bioeconomic model that captures two species groups, mesopelagic and epipelagic fish, using a wide range of price and cost parameters. We analyze different scenarios for the economic profitability of the fishery in a regional fishery management context. The results of our study highlight the importance of better understanding key biological and ecological mechanisms and parameters which can in turn help inform policies aimed at protecting the mesopelagic.
Global economic costs of aquatic invasive alien species

(Elsevier, 2021-01-20) Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Pattison, Zarah ; Taylor, Nigel G. ; Verbrugge, Laura N.H. ; Diagne, Christophe ; Ahmed, Danish A. ; Leroy, Boris ; Angulo, Elena ; Briski, Elizabeta ; Capinha, César ; Catford, Jane A. ; Dalu, Tatenda ; Essl, Franz ; Gozlan, Rodolphe E. ; Haubrock, Phillip J. ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Kramer, Andrew M. ; Renault, David ; Wasserman, Ryan J. ; Courchamp, Franck

Much research effort has been invested in understanding ecological impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) across ecosystems and taxonomic groups, but empirical studies about economic effects lack synthesis. Using a comprehensive global database, we determine patterns and trends in economic costs of aquatic IAS by examining: (i) the distribution of these costs across taxa, geographic regions and cost types; (ii) the temporal dynamics of global costs; and (iii) knowledge gaps, especially compared to terrestrial IAS. Based on the costs recorded from the existing literature, the global cost of aquatic IAS conservatively summed to US$345 billion, with the majority attributed to invertebrates (62%), followed by vertebrates (28%), then plants (6%). The largest costs were reported in North America (48%) and Asia (13%), and were principally a result of resource damages (74%); only 6% of recorded costs were from management. The magnitude and number of reported costs were highest in the United States of America and for semi-aquatic taxa. Many countries and known aquatic alien species had no reported costs, especially in Africa and Asia. Accordingly, a network analysis revealed limited connectivity among countries, indicating disparate cost reporting. Aquatic IAS costs have increased in recent decades by several orders of magnitude, reaching at least US$23 billion in 2020. Costs are likely considerably underrepresented compared to terrestrial IAS; only 5% of reported costs were from aquatic species, despite 26% of known invaders being aquatic. Additionally, only 1% of aquatic invasion costs were from marine species. Costs of aquatic IAS are thus substantial, but likely underreported. Costs have increased over time and are expected to continue rising with future invasions. We urge increased and improved cost reporting by managers, practitioners and researchers to reduce knowledge gaps. Few costs are proactive investments; increased management spending is urgently needed to prevent and limit current and future aquatic IAS damages.
Equitable allocations in northern fisheries: bridging the divide for Labrador Inuit

(Frontiers Media, 2021-02-18) Kourantidou, Melina ; Hoagland, Porter ; Dale, Aaron ; Bailey, Megan

Canada has undertaken commitments to recognize the rights of Indigenous Peoples in fisheries through policies and agreements, including Integrated Fishery Management Plans, the Reconciliation Strategy, and Land Claim Agreements (LCAs). In addition to recognizing rights, these commitments were intended to respect geographic adjacency principles, to enhance the economic viability of Indigenous communities, and to be reflective of community dependence on marine resources. We examined the determinants of quota allocations in commercial fisheries involving Nunatsiavut, Northern Labrador, the first self-governing region for the Inuit peoples in Canada. It has been argued that current fishery allocations for Nunatsiavut Inuit have not satisfied federal commitments to recognize Indigenous rights. Indicators that measure equity in commercial allocations for the turbot or Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) and northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) fisheries were identified and assessed. In these two cases, historical allocations continue to predominate for allocations based upon equity or other social or economic considerations. We illustrate equity-enhancing changes in the quota distribution under scenarios of different levels of inequality aversion, and we make qualitative assessments of the effects of these allocations to Nunatsiavut for socioeconomic welfare. This approach could benefit fisheries governance in Northern Labrador, where federal commitments to equity objectives continue to be endorsed but have not yet been integrated fully into quota allocations.
Pathways to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in marine science and conservation

(Frontiers Media, 2021-12-23) Johri, Shaili ; Carnevale, Maria ; Porter, Lindsay ; Zivian, Anna ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Meyer, Erin L. ; Seevers, Jessica ; Skubel, Rachel A.

Marine conservation sciences have traditionally been, and remain, non-diverse work environments with many barriers to justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion (JEDI). These barriers disproportionately affect entry of early career scientists and practitioners and limit the success of marine conservation professionals from under-represented, marginalized, and overburdened groups. These groups specifically include women, LGBTQ+, Black, Indigenous, and people of color (BIPOC). However, the issues also arise from the global North/South and East/West divide with under-representation of scientists from the South and East in the global marine conservation and science arena. Persisting inequities in conservation, along with a lack of inclusiveness and diversity, also limit opportunities for innovation, cross-cultural knowledge exchange, and effective implementation of conservation and management policies. As part of its mandate to increase diversity and promote inclusion of underrepresented groups, the Diversity and Inclusion committee of the Society for Conservation Biology-Marine Section (SCB Marine) organized a JEDI focus group at the Sixth International Marine Conservation Congress (IMCC6) which was held virtually. The focus group included a portion of the global cohort of IMCC6 attendees who identified issues affecting JEDI in marine conservation and explored pathways to address those issues. Therefore, the barriers and pathways identified here focus on issues pertinent to participants’ global regions and experiences. Several barriers to just, equitable, diverse, and inclusive conservation science and practice were identified. Examples included limited participation of under-represented minorities (URM) in research networks, editorial biases against URM, limited professional development and engagement opportunities for URM and non-English speakers, barriers to inclusion of women, LGBTQ+, and sensory impaired individuals, and financial barriers to inclusion of URM in all aspects of marine conservation and research. In the current policy brief, we explore these barriers, assess how they limit progress in marine conservation research and practice, and seek to identify initiatives for improvements. We expect the initiatives discussed here to advances practices rooted in principles of JEDI, within SCB Marine and, the broader conservation community. The recommendations and perspectives herein broadly apply to conservation science and practice, and are critical to effective and sustainable conservation and management outcomes.
Inuit food insecurity as a consequence of fragmented marine resource management policies? Emerging lessons from Nunatsiavut

(Arctic Institute of North America, 2022-01-28) Kourantidou, Melina ; Hoagland, Porter ; Bailey, Megan

Historically, Inuit communities of the Arctic have relied significantly on the living marine resources of their coastal waters for nutrition, underpinning community cohesion and enhancing individual and collective well-being. Inadequate understanding of the conditions of coastal marine stocks and their dynamics, along with failed past fisheries management practices, now threatens secure access to these resources for food and nutrition. We examine the degree of integration of modern Canadian federal food and marine resource management policies, which heretofore have been unable to lessen food insecurity in the Arctic, suggesting that causes rather than symptoms need to be treated. Using evidence from Nunatsiavut, northern Labrador, we assess the limits to marine resource governance affecting access to traditionally important food sources. We explore the potential for both increased subsistence harvests and enhanced access to commercial fisheries in mitigating Inuit food insecurity, arguing for the relevance of expanded marine resource assessments, more focused fisheries management, and integration with policies designed to mitigate food insecurity. Crucially, the absence of methods for tracking changes in locally harvested marine resources threatens not only individual and household nutrition but also the social, economic, and cultural integrity of Inuit communities. We further describe the needs for monitoring and propose the use of indicators that capture the contributions of locally harvested marine resources to increased food security along with a framework that allows for utilizing local knowledge and observations. Relying on emerging lessons from research in Nunatsiavut, we build a foundation for a better understanding of both the political and institutional legacies that contribute to Labrador Inuit food insecurity and discuss how the deeper integration of food and marine resource management policies could help mitigate it.
Identifying economic costs and knowledge gaps of invasive aquatic crustaceans

(Elsevier, 2021-12-31) Kouba, Antonín ; Oficialdegui, Francisco J. ; Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Kourantidou, Melina ; South, Josie ; Tricarico, Elena ; Gozlan, Rodolphe E. ; Courchamp, Franck ; Haubrock, Phillip J.

Despite voluminous literature identifying the impacts of invasive species, summaries of monetary costs for some taxonomic groups remain limited. Invasive alien crustaceans often have profound impacts on recipient ecosystems, but there may be great unknowns related to their economic costs. Using the InvaCost database, we quantify and analyse reported costs associated with invasive crustaceans globally across taxonomic, spatial, and temporal descriptors. Specifically, we quantify the costs of prominent aquatic crustaceans — crayfish, crabs, amphipods, and lobsters. Between 2000 and 2020, crayfish caused US$ 120.5 million in reported costs; the vast majority (99%) being attributed to representatives of Astacidae and Cambaridae. Crayfish-related costs were unevenly distributed across countries, with a strong bias towards European economies (US$ 116.4 million; mainly due to the signal crayfish in Sweden), followed by costs reported from North America and Asia. The costs were also largely predicted or extrapolated, and thus not based on empirical observations. Despite these limitations, the costs of invasive crayfish have increased considerably over the past two decades, averaging US$ 5.7 million per year. Invasive crabs have caused costs of US$ 150.2 million since 1960 and the ratios were again uneven (57% in North America and 42% in Europe). Damage-related costs dominated for both crayfish (80%) and crabs (99%), with management costs lacking or even more under-reported. Reported costs for invasive amphipods (US$ 178.8 thousand) and lobsters (US$ 44.6 thousand) were considerably lower, suggesting a lack of effort in reporting costs for these groups or effects that are largely non-monetised. Despite the well-known damage caused by invasive crustaceans, we identify data limitations that prevent a full accounting of the economic costs of these invasive groups, while highlighting the increasing costs at several scales based on the available literature. Further cost reports are needed to better assess the true magnitude of monetary costs caused by invasive aquatic crustaceans.
Managing biological invasions: the cost of inaction

(Springer, 2022-03-18) Ahmed, Danish A. ; Hudgins, Emma J. ; Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Diagne, Christophe ; Haubrock, Phillip J. ; Leung, Brian ; Liu, Chunlong ; Leroy, Boris ; Petrovskii, Sergei ; Beidas, Ayah ; Courchamp, Franck

Ecological and socioeconomic impacts from biological invasions are rapidly escalating worldwide. While effective management underpins impact mitigation, such actions are often delayed, insufficient or entirely absent. Presently, management delays emanate from a lack of monetary rationale to invest at early invasion stages, which precludes effective prevention and eradication. Here, we provide such rationale by developing a conceptual model to quantify the cost of inaction, i.e., the additional expenditure due to delayed management, under varying time delays and management efficiencies. Further, we apply the model to management and damage cost data from a relatively data-rich genus (Aedes mosquitoes). Our model demonstrates that rapid management interventions following invasion drastically minimise costs. We also identify key points in time that differentiate among scenarios of timely, delayed and severely delayed management intervention. Any management action during the severely delayed phase results in substantial losses (>50% of the potential maximum loss). For Aedes spp., we estimate that the existing management delay of 55 years led to an additional total cost of approximately $ 4.57 billion (14% of the maximum cost), compared to a scenario with management action only seven years prior (< 1% of the maximum cost). Moreover, we estimate that in the absence of management action, long-term losses would have accumulated to US$ 32.31 billion, or more than seven times the observed inaction cost. These results highlight the need for more timely management of invasive alien species—either pre-invasion, or as soon as possible after detection—by demonstrating how early investments rapidly reduce long-term economic impacts.
Economic costs of invasive alien species in the Mediterranean basin

(Pensoft Publishers, 2021-07-29) Kourantidou, Melina ; Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Haubrock, Phillip J. ; Novoa, Ana ; Taylor, Nigel G. ; Leroy, Boris ; Capinha, César ; Renault, David ; Angulo, Elena ; Diagne, Christophe ; Courchamp, Franck

nvasive alien species (IAS) negatively impact the environment and undermine human well-being, often resulting in considerable economic costs. The Mediterranean basin is a culturally, socially and economically diverse region, harbouring many IAS that threaten economic and societal integrity in multiple ways. This paper is the first attempt to collectively quantify the reported economic costs of IAS in the Mediterranean basin, across a range of taxonomic, temporal and spatial descriptors. We identify correlates of costs from invasion damages and management expenditures among key socioeconomic variables, and determine network structures that link countries and invasive taxonomic groups. The total reported invasion costs in the Mediterranean basin amounted to $27.3 billion, or $3.6 billion when only realised costs were considered, and were found to have occurred over the last three decades. Our understanding of costs of invasions in the Mediterranean was largely limited to a few, primarily western European countries and to terrestrial ecosystems, despite the known presence of numerous high-impact aquatic invasive taxa. The vast majority of costs were attributed to damages or losses from invasions ($25.2 billion) and were mostly driven by France, Spain and to a lesser extent Italy and Libya, with significantly fewer costs attributed to management expenditure ($1.7 billion). Overall, invasion costs increased through time, with average annual costs between 1990 and 2017 estimated at $975.5 million. The lack of information from a large proportion of Mediterranean countries, reflected in the spatial and taxonomic connectivity analysis and the relationship of costs with socioeconomic variables, highlights the limits of the available data and the research effort needed to improve a collective understanding of the different facets of the costs of biological invasions. Our analysis of the reported costs associated with invasions in the Mediterranean sheds light on key knowledge gaps and provides a baseline for a Mediterranean-centric approach towards building policies and designing coordinated responses. In turn, these could help reach socially desirable outcomes and efficient use of resources invested in invasive species research and management.
Biological invasion costs reveal insufficient proactive management worldwide

(Elsevier, 2022-05-01) Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Diagne, Christophe ; Hudgins, Emma J. ; Turbelin, Anna J. ; Ahmed, Danish A. ; Albert, Céline ; Bodey, Thomas W. ; Briski, Elizabeta ; Essl, Franz ; Haubrock, Phillip J. ; Gozlan, Rodolphe E. ; Kirichenko, Natalia ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Kramer, Andrew M. ; Courchamp, Franck

The global increase in biological invasions is placing growing pressure on the management of ecological and economic systems. However, the effectiveness of current management expenditure is difficult to assess due to a lack of standardised measurement across spatial, taxonomic and temporal scales. Furthermore, there is no quantification of the spending difference between pre-invasion (e.g. prevention) and post-invasion (e.g. control) stages, although preventative measures are considered to be the most cost-effective. Here, we use a comprehensive database of invasive alien species economic costs (InvaCost) to synthesise and model the global management costs of biological invasions, in order to provide a better understanding of the stage at which these expenditures occur. Since 1960, reported management expenditures have totalled at least US$95.3 billion (in 2017 values), considering only highly reliable and actually observed costs — 12-times less than damage costs from invasions ($1130.6 billion). Pre-invasion management spending ($2.8 billion) was over 25-times lower than post-invasion expenditure ($72.7 billion). Management costs were heavily geographically skewed towards North America (54%) and Oceania (30%). The largest shares of expenditures were directed towards invasive alien invertebrates in terrestrial environments. Spending on invasive alien species management has grown by two orders of magnitude since 1960, reaching an estimated $4.2 billion per year globally (in 2017 values) in the 2010s, but remains 1–2 orders of magnitude lower than damages. National management spending increased with incurred damage costs, with management actions delayed on average by 11 years globally following damage reporting. These management delays on the global level have caused an additional invasion cost of approximately $1.2 trillion, compared to scenarios with immediate management. Our results indicate insufficient management — particularly pre-invasion — and urge better investment to prevent future invasions and to control established alien species. Recommendations to improve reported management cost comprehensiveness, resolution and terminology are also made.
The ocean twilight zone’s role in climate change

(Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution, 2022-02) Buesseler, Ken O. ; Jin, Di ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Levin, David S. ; Ramakrishna, Kilaparti ; Renaud, Philip

The ocean twilight zone (more formally known as the mesopelagic zone) plays a fundamental role in global climate. It is the mid-ocean region roughly 100 to 1000 meters below the surface, encompassing a half-mile deep belt of water that spans more than two-thirds of our planet. The top of the ocean twilight zone only receives 1% of incident sunlight and the bottom level is void of sunlight. Life in the ocean twilight zone helps to transport billions of metric tons (gigatonnes) of carbon annually from the upper ocean into the deep sea, due in part to processes known as the biological carbon pump. Once carbon moves below roughly 1000 meters depth in the ocean, it can remain out of the atmosphere for centuries to millennia. Without the benefits of the biological carbon pump, the atmospheric CO 2 concentration would increase by approximately 200 ppm 1 which would significantly amplify the negative effects of climate change that the world is currently trying to curtail and reverse. Unfortunately, existing scientific knowledge about this vast zone of the ocean, such as how chemical elements flow through its living systems and the physical environment, is extremely limited, jeopardizing the efforts to improve climate predictions and to inform fisheries management and ocean policy development.
Unveiling the hidden economic toll of biological invasions in the European Union

(Springer Open, 2023-06-08) Morgane, Henry ; Leung, Brian ; Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Bodey, Thomas W. ; Ahmed, Danish A. ; Angulo, Elena ; Balzani, Paride ; Briski, Elizabeta ; Courchamp, Franck ; Hulme, Philip E. ; Kouba, Antonin ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Liu, Chunlong ; Macedo, Rafael L. ; Oficialdegui, Francisco J. ; Renault, David ; Soto, Ismael ; Tarkan, Ali Serhan ; Turbelin, Anna J. ; Bradshaw, Corey J. A. ; Haubrock, Phillip J.

Background: Biological invasions threaten the functioning of ecosystems, biodiversity, and human well-being by degrading ecosystem services and eliciting massive economic costs. The European Union has historically been a hub for cultural development and global trade, and thus, has extensive opportunities for the introduction and spread of alien species. While reported costs of biological invasions to some member states have been recently assessed, ongoing knowledge gaps in taxonomic and spatio-temporal data suggest that these costs were considerably underestimated. Results: We used the latest available cost data in InvaCost (v4.1)—the most comprehensive database on the costs of biological invasions—to assess the magnitude of this underestimation within the European Union via projections of current and future invasion costs. We used macroeconomic scaling and temporal modelling approaches to project available cost information over gaps in taxa, space, and time, thereby producing a more complete estimate for the European Union economy. We identified that only 259 out of 13,331 (~ 1%) known invasive alien species have reported costs in the European Union. Using a conservative subset of highly reliable, observed, country-level cost entries from 49 species (totalling US$4.7 billion; 2017 value), combined with the establishment data of alien species within European Union member states, we projected unreported cost data for all member states. Conclusions: Our corrected estimate of observed costs was potentially 501% higher (US$28.0 billion) than currently recorded. Using future projections of current estimates, we also identified a substantial increase in costs and costly species (US$148.2 billion) by 2040. We urge that cost reporting be improved to clarify the economic impacts of greatest concern, concomitant with coordinated international action to prevent and mitigate the impacts of invasive alien species in the European Union and globally.
Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

(Cambridge Philosophical Society, 2024-03-18) Soto, Ismael ; Balzani, Paride ; Carneiro, Lais ; Cuthbert, Ross N. ; Macedo, Rafael ; Tarkan, Ali Serhan ; Ahmed, Danish A. ; Bang, Alok ; Bacela-Spychalska, Karolina ; Bailey, Sarah A. ; Baudry, Thomas ; Ballesteros-Mejia, Liliana ; Bortolus, Alejandro ; Briski, Elizabeta ; Britton, J. Robert ; Buric, Milos ; Camacho-Cervantes, Morelia ; Cano-Barbacil, Carlos ; Copilas-Ciocianu, Denis ; Coughlan, Neil E. ; Courtois, Pierre ; Csabai, Zoltan ; Dalu, Tatenda ; De Santis, Vanessa ; Dickey, James W. E. ; Dimarco, Romina D. ; Falk-Andersson, Jannike ; Fernandez, Romina D. ; Florencio, Margarita ; Franco, Ana Clara S. ; Garcia-Berthou, Emili ; Giannetto, Daniela ; Glavendekic, Milka M. ; Grabowski, Michał ; Heringer, Gustavo ; Herrera, Ileana ; Huang, Wei ; Kamelamela, Katie L. ; Kirichenko, Natalia I. ; Kouba, Antonin ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Kurtul, Irmak ; Laufer, Gabriel ; Liptak, Boris ; Liu, Chunlong ; Lopez-Lopez, Eugenia ; Lozano, Vanessa ; Mammola, Stefano ; Marchini, Agnese ; Meshkova, Valentyna ; Milardi, Marco ; Musolin, Dmitrii L. ; Nunez, Martin A. ; Oficialdegui, Francisco J. ; Patoka, Jiri ; Pattison, Zarah ; Pincheira-Donoso, Daniel ; Piria, Marina ; Probert, Anna F. ; Rasmussen, Jes Jessen ; Renault, David ; Ribeiro, Filipe ; Rilov, Gil ; Robinson, Tamara B. ; Sanchez, Axel E. ; Schwindt, Evangelina ; South, Josie ; Stoett, Peter ; Verreycken, Hugo ; Vilizzi, Lorenzo ; Wang, Yong-Jian ; Watari, Yuya ; Wehi, Priscilla M. ; Weiperth, Andras ; Wiberg-Larsen, Peter ; Yapici, Sercan ; Yogurtcuoglu, Baran ; Zenni, Rafael D. ; Galil, Bella S. ; Dick, Jaimie T. A. ; Russell, James C. ; Ricciardi, Anthony ; Simberloff, Daniel ; Bradshaw, Corey J. A. ; Haubrock, Phillip J.

Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science – a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline – the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policymakers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g. ‘non-native’, ‘alien’, ‘invasive’ or ‘invader’, ‘exotic’, ‘non-indigenous’, ‘naturalised’, ‘pest’) to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The streamlined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) ‘non-native’, denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) ‘established non-native’, i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) ‘invasive non-native’ – populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising ‘spread’ for classifying invasiveness and ‘impact’ for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species.
Assessing the potential economic effects of mesopelagic fisheries as a novel source of fishmeal

(Wiley, 2024-04-26) Quang, Rohan Gowda Thanh ; Kourantidou, Melina ; Jin, Di

The continuous growth of the aquaculture industry implies increased demand for efficient sources of aquafeed, such as fishmeal. Pelagic fish are a desirable source of fishmeal due to their high nutritional content. Nevertheless, several pelagic stocks that have been exploited extensively for fishmeal production face ecological limits due to commercial exploitation, and the aquaculture industry is now seeking novel, efficient, and sustainable sources of aquafeed. The mesopelagic zone, an ecosystem with many scientific uncertainties, is being considered as a potential source for fishmeal, largely owing to the abundance of mesopelagic fish and their robust nutritional profile. However, both the ecological and economic viability of commercial exploitation of mesopelagic fish are not yet well understood. To understand the conditions that would make such an endeavor economically viable in the context of global fishmeal production systems, we use a bioeconomic model that assesses the economic consequences of including mesopelagic fish as a fishmeal source. Through simulations, we assess the economic implications of this hypothetical mesopelagic fishery on major pelagic fishmeal production systems. The mesopelagic fishery can be economically profitable for harvesters, and its addition to global fishmeal production reduces fishmeal market price, thus making it more accessible to aquaculture farmers and less profitable for pelagic fishers. While this may reduce fishing pressure on pelagic forage-fish stocks, the implications of commercial exploitation of mesopelagic on key ecosystem services remain a concern.

Kourantidou Melina

Last Name

First Name

ORCID

Filters

Author

Subject

Date

Type

Has files

Settings

Sort By

Results per page

Search Results