Consistency of impact assessment protocols for non-native species

Thumbnail
View/Open
Issue date
2019-04-01
Author
González-Moreno, Pablo
Lazzaro, Lorenzo
Vilà, Montserrat (Vilà Planella)
Preda, Cristina
Adriaens, Tim
Bacher, Sven
Brundu, G.
Copp, Gordon H.
Essl, Franz
García-Berthou, Emili
Katsanevakis, Stelios
Moen, Toril Loennechen
Lucy, Frances E.
Nentwig, Wolfgang
Roy, Helen E.
Srėbalienė, Greta
Talgø, Venche
Vanderhoeven, Sonia
Andjelković, Ana
Arbačiauskas,Kęstutis
Auger-Rozenberg,Marie-Anne
Bae, Mi-Jung
Bariche, Michel
Boets, Pieter
Boieiro, Mário
Borges, Paulo Alexandre
Canning-Clode, João
Cardigos, Federico
Chartosia, Niki
Cottier-Cook, Elizabeth Joanne
Crocetta, Fabio
D'Hondt, Bram
Foggi, Bruno
Follak, Swen
Gallardo, Belinda
Gammelmo, Øivind
Giakoumi, Sylvaine
Giuliani, Claudia
Fried, Guillaume
Juárez Escario, Alejandro
Suggested citation
González-Moreno, Pablo; Lazzaro, Lorenzo; Vilà, Montserrat (Vilà Planella); Preda, Cristina; Adriaens, Tim; Bacher, Sven; ... Juárez Escario, Alejandro. (2019) . Consistency of impact assessment protocols for non-native species. Neobiota, 2019, num. 44, p. 1-25. https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.44.31650.
Impact

Google Scholar logo  Google Scholar
Share
Export to Mendeley
Metadata
Show full item record
Abstract
Standardized tools are needed to identify and prioritize the most harmful non-native species (NNS). A plethora of assessment protocols have been developed to evaluate the current and potential impacts of non-native species, but consistency among them has received limited attention. To estimate the consistency across impact assessment protocols, 89 specialists in biological invasions used 11 protocols to screen 57 NNS (2614 assessments). We tested if the consistency in the impact scoring across assessors, quantified as the coefficient of variation (CV), was dependent on the characteristics of the protocol, the taxonomic group and the expertise of the assessor. Mean CV across assessors was 40%, with a maximum of 223%. CV was lower for protocols with a low number of score levels, which demanded high levels of expertise, and when the assessors had greater expertise on the assessed species. The similarity among protocols with respect to the final scores was higher when the protocols considered the same impact types. We conclude that all protocols led to considerable inconsistency among assessors. In order to improve consistency, we highlight the importance of selecting assessors with high expertise, providing clear guidelines and adequate training but also deriving final decisions collaboratively by consensus.
URI
http://hdl.handle.net/10459.1/66383
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.44.31650
Is part of
Neobiota, 2019, num. 44, p. 1-25
Collections
cc-by (c) González-Moreno et al., 2019
Except where otherwise noted, this item's license is described as cc-by (c) González-Moreno et al., 2019