Defining the Impact of Non‐Native Species

Non‐native species cause changes in the ecosystems to which they are introduced. These changes, or some of them, are usually termed impacts; they can be manifold and potentially damaging to ecosystems and biodiversity. However, the impacts of most non‐native species are poorly understood, and a synthesis of available information is being hindered because authors often do not clearly define impact. We argue that explicitly defining the impact of non‐native species will promote progress toward a better understanding of the implications of changes to biodiversity and ecosystems caused by non‐native species; help disentangle which aspects of scientific debates about non‐native species are due to disparate definitions and which represent true scientific discord; and improve communication between scientists from different research disciplines and between scientists, managers, and policy makers. For these reasons and based on examples from the literature, we devised seven key questions that fall into 4 categories: directionality, classification and measurement, ecological or socio‐economic changes, and scale. These questions should help in formulating clear and practical definitions of impact to suit specific scientific, stakeholder, or legislative contexts. Definiendo el Impacto de las Especies No‐Nativas     

Changes in concentrations of fluoroquinolones and of ciprofloxacin-resistant Enterobacteriaceae in chicken feces and manure stored in a heap

This study evaluated the impact of storing chicken manure on the degradation of enrofloxacin (ENR) and ciprofloxacin (CIP), and on the survival of CIP-resistant Enterobacteriaceae. At 24 d of age, half of 8900 chickens received ENR for 5 d. After the animals departed, their manure was stored in two heaps for 63 d. Enterobacteriaceae were cultured on media containing 0 to 32 mg L?1 of CIP. A total of 320 isolates were fingerprinted using enterobacterial repetitive intergenic consensus-polymerase chain reaction (ERIC-PCR) to evaluate community structure. Initial concentrations of ENR and CIP in the heap were 22 and 1.8 mg kg?1, respectively. Seventy-three percent of the two fluoroquinolones were eliminated during storage. The administration of ENR led to a 5.1 log??? decrease in Enterobacteriaceae concentrations and emergence of CIP-resistant bacteria, which became dominant in the feces. concentrations decreased 1.2 to 2.3 log??? 2 d after the heaps were made and continued to decline during storage. No resistant were found by Day 63. The highest CIP minimum inhibitory concentration (MIC) values observed among isolates of and of both and sp. were 128 and 4 mg L?1, respectively. The dominant ERIC-PCR profiles changed over time. There was no relationship between genotype and resistance-isolated strains to CIP. Storing chicken manure in heaps appeared to be an effective way of limiting the entrance of CIP-resistant E. coli into the environment but did not prevent the dissemination of fluoroquinolones after land spreading.     

Protected‐Area Boundaries as Filters of Plant Invasions

Abstract: Human land uses surrounding protected areas provide propagules for colonization of these areas by non‐native species, and corridors between protected‐area networks and drainage systems of rivers provide pathways for long‐distance dispersal of non‐native species. Nevertheless, the influence of protected‐area boundaries on colonization of protected areas by invasive non‐native species is unknown. We drew on a spatially explicit data set of more than 27,000 non‐native plant presence records for South Africa's Kruger National Park to examine the role of boundaries in preventing colonization of protected areas by non‐native species. The number of records of non‐native invasive plants declined rapidly beyond 1500 m inside the park; thus, we believe that the park boundary limited the spread of non‐native plants. The number of non‐native invasive plants inside the park was a function of the amount of water runoff, density of major roads, and the presence of natural vegetation outside the park. Of the types of human‐induced disturbance, only the density of major roads outside the protected area significantly increased the number of non‐native plant records. Our findings suggest that the probability of incursion of invasive plants into protected areas can be quantified reliably.