Abstract

The regulation of biological invasions is often focussed at the species level. However, the risks posed by infra- and inter-specific entities can be significantly different from the risks posed by the corresponding species, to the extent that they should be regulated and managed differently. In particular, many ornamental plants have been the subject of long-term breeding and selection programmes, with an increasing focus on trying to develop cultivars and hybrids that are less invasive. In this paper, we frame the problem of determining the risk of invasion posed by cultivars or hybrids as a set of six questions that map on to the key components of a risk analysis, viz., risk identification, risk assessment, risk management, and risk communication. 1) Has an infra- or inter-specific entity been proposed as “safe to use” despite at least one of the corresponding species being a harmful invasive? 2) What are the trait differences between the proposed safe alternative and its corresponding invasive species? 3) Do the differences in traits translate into a difference in invasion risk that is significant for regulation? 4) Are the differences spatially and temporally stable? 5) Can the entities be distinguished from each other in practice? 6) What are the appropriate ways to communicate the risks and what can be done to manage them? For each question, we use examples to illustrate how they might be addressed focussing on plant cultivars that are purported to be safe due to sterility. We review the biological basis of sterility, methods used to generate sterile cultivars, and the methods available to confirm sterility. It is apparent that separating invasive genetic entities from less invasive, but closely related, genetic entities in a manner appropriate for regulation currently remains unfeasible in many circumstances – it is a difficult, expensive and potentially fruitless endeavour. Nonetheless, we strongly believe that an a priori assumption of risk should be inherited from the constituent taxa and the onus (and cost) of proof should be held by those who wish to benefit from infra- (or inter-) specific genetic entities. The six questions outlined here provide a general, science-based approach to distinguish closely-related taxa based on the invasion risks they pose.

Highlights

  • Invasion is a population-level phenomenon (Petit 2004; Zenni et al 2014)

  • 1) Has an infra- or inter-specific entity been proposed as “safe to use” despite at least one of the corresponding species being a harmful invasive? 2) What are the trait differences between the proposed safe alternative and its corresponding invasive species? 3) Do the differences in traits translate into a difference in invasion risk that is significant for regulation? 4) Are the differences spatially and temporally stable? 5) Can the entities be distinguished from each other in practice? 6) What are the appropriate ways to communicate the risks and what can be done to manage them? For each question, we use examples to illustrate how they might be addressed focussing on plant cultivars that are purported to be safe due to sterility

  • We review the biological basis of sterility, methods used to generate sterile cultivars, and the methods available to confirm sterility

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Invasion is a population-level phenomenon (Petit 2004; Zenni et al 2014). Most regulatory policies focus implicitly or explicitly at the species-level. The enormous variation that exists at infra-specific levels is often not considered in regulatory frameworks. The inability to recognise differences below the species rank may lead to serious underestimation or overestimation of invasion risk (Gordon et al 2016). Infra-specific entities can vary in the bioclimatic niches they occupy in their invasive ranges (Thompson et al 2011; Gotelli and Stanton-Geddes 2015), their host-specificity (Goolsby et al 2006), and the impacts they cause (Novoa et al 2018). It is vital that policy and regulation can adequately address invasion risk at levels other than the species

Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Published version (Free)

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call