Editorial: Impacts of invasive plant management on forest biodiversity and ecosystem services
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Forest ecosystems and biodiversity are considered integral to maintaining carbon capture capacity, forest health and resilience on one hand while they support human wellbeing, livelihoods, and provide other important ecosystem services to sustain life on the planet (Rawat, 2017). Biological invasion is considered (e.g.,caused by non-native organisms such as plants, insects, or pathogens) as a non-native species that has been introduced outside of itstheir native distribution range intentionally or accidently for a specific purpose called invasive alien species. These invasive alien species were escaped from their areas of introductioned areas and aggressively spread out and all over in overwhelmingly dominate the entire landscapes (e.g., forest ecosystems) thatby out-competinged the native species called invasion. Invasiveness can also be described as the tendency of an introduced species to aggressively spread due to its determining characteristics (i.e., introduction history, species traits, ecology, and evolutionary processes) into a recipient ecosystem (such as a forest ecosystem) (van Kleunen et al., 2010).Invasion in complex forest ecosystems isare often becomes a concern when the system has become incapacitated to regulate itself and once the invasion has already altered the regular composition, abundance and diversity of given complex ecosystem. Early detection of invasiveness and implementation of subsequent restorative measures, hence, are of paramount importance (van Wilgen and Wannenburgh, 2016). In a holistic approach, first comes detection, followed by understanding of the dynamics, exploration of mitigating options, implementation of mitigation measures and attempting to restore to the state of pre-invasion state (Rai and Singh, 2020). Invasiveness is the tendency of an introduced species to spread due to its determining characteristics (i.e., introduction history, species traits, ecology, and evolutionary processes) into a recipient ecosystem (such as a forest ecosystem) (van Kleunen et al., 2010). Some of the invasiveness are responses to the impacts of climate change such as flooding and local weather conditions which call for an implementation of multidimensional investigation so as to identify and avail effective mitigation measures. Mitigation and restorative intervention measures are being urgently sought while managing invasiveness in a complex forest ecosystems poses a strong challenge as the outcomes are not straight forward.Nevertheless, targeted multi-dimensional interventions which are supported by adequate empirical evidences are helpful in managing invasiveness in the absence of comprehensive understanding of interactions and causations. Thus, this issue communicates current five contributions of dedicated scholars' empirical investigations and results on impacts of invasive plant management on forest biodiversity and ecosystem services with regard to detection, application of restorative measures and the outcomes.In many regions of the world, measures for the detection and management of invasive alien plant species are either at their early stage or still being developed (Rai and Singh, 2020).Evidence shows that the abundance of invasive alien plants has risen in forest ecosystems due to global climate change and the ability of these plants to quickly adapt to adverse conditions (Rawat et al., 2023;2024). Even conservation areas have been invaded, and regions that have not yet been affected may be invaded in the near future due to global environmental change and expansive pathways of distribution pathways related to international trade (van Wilgen and Wannenburgh, 2016). There is a need for a simple, quick and early detection Wwith increasing pathways for spread there is a need for a simple, quick and early detection.In the paper aimed at investigation of detection tools and contributed by Bérubé et al.;"Comparison of intercept trap fluids and aerial spore collectors to survey fungal spores" comparisoned of the efficacy of passive spore collectionng devices and insect intercept traps (with wet collection cups) for sampling of fungal species was done. Bérubé et al.;They have also tested the effect of site type (rural, urban) on abundance and the number of fungal species detected. compared that the fungal species detected in wet collection cups of Lindgren traps vs. those detected on slides with oiled cheesecloth as aerial spore collectors. The DNA was extracted and amplified from both using the primers ITS1F and gITS7, and Illumina sequencing was used for the metabarcoding of fungi present in samples. They found that there were 1,277 fungal operational taxonomic units (OTUs) in 90 samples while insect traps had three times the number of fungal OTUs compared to slides, and this pattern persisted when analyses were restricted to pathogens and forest pathogens. In this comparative investigation, Aa total of 1,277 fungal operational taxonomic unites (OTUs) were detected, of which 220 were plant pathogens, and 101 were forest pathogens using both methods (i.e., trap fluids, aerial spore collectors). Ninety percent (90%) of all fungi collected were detected by trap fluids, while 63% of total fungi detected by aerial spore collectors. In all sites, trap fluids have detected a significant amount of fungi as compared to aerial spore collectors. Similar results were also obtained for plant and forest pathogens in Nova Scotia and Ontario sites. Species richness and abundance of fungi and pathogens (i.e., plant and forest pathogens) were significantly affected by the collection methods. Theis study suggest that insect trap fluids have an excellent potential for the detection of non-native forest pathogens compared to passive superiority over aerial spore collectors. TheyIt was concluded that surveillance of plant pathogens and the diseases they cause is critical to the early detection of invasive species and changes in the population densities of naturalized and native pest species. and ecosystem disservices (EDS), including the ecological and economic impacts of invasive alien plants. Kumar et al.;They found that 95% of respondents were familiar with at least one of the 12 invasive alien plants identified in the region. According to respondents, theyThe study revealed a preference for to eradicatione that of invasive alien plants that have direct harmful effects on human health and biodiversity (in line with previous works of Rai and Singh, (2020); Rawat et al., (2023;2024). Uprooting was the most commonly used management practice to control the invasion of plant species in the region. This study was useful in accounting to and incorporating people's perceptions into the control and management of invasive alien plants in the forest region.Invasive alien plants have contributed to the destruction and suppression of indigenous species (flora and fauna), the disruption of ecosystem services (such as water resources), and the reduction of forest biodiversity (van Wilgen and Wannenburgh, 2016;Rawat et al., 2023;2024). This has increased forest disturbances (e.g., pest, pathogens and disease outbreaks, fire, and flooding) and altered species competition in forest ecosystems (Roy et al., 2014;Rawat, 2017;Rai and Singh, 2020). Hence, integrated efforts are needed to address the expanding invasive alien plants populations that affect forest ecosystems (Rai and Singh, 20220;Rawat et al., 2023;2024). To achieve sustainable forest management, the UN Decades on Ecosystem Restoration and the Sustainable Development Goals, it is critical to prevent a deterioration of forest ecosystems owing tocaused by invasive alien plant species (Rawat et al., 2023;2024).As a result, an ecosystem approach is required to prioritize the invasive species and areas to be managed. In doing so, a variety of interdependent positive outcomes can be aeffected with regard to ecosystem services (such asinclusive of the protection of water resources and land productivity) can be protected, preservation of biodiversity can be preserved, and creation of jobs opportunitiescan be created through mitigation activities (Rawat et al., 2023;2024).Managing invasion means understanding invasiveness and invasive alien plants; Invasiveness (e.g., abundance and density) of invasive alien plants in forests need to be conceptualized not only in the view of forest biodiversity and ecosystem services but also in the framework of utilization of invasive plants species biomass as means of control and method for sustainable forest management.The paper by Sward et al.; "Shrub expansion in maritime forest responding to sea level rise" presents a comparative investigationed about the. The contribution of Sward et al.; looked into shrub distributions and compared it to with distributions of the invasive grass Phragmites australis so as to test if competition with this invasive species playedhad a role in the shrub distribution. Maritime forest growing along coastal areas that supports a prominent biodiversity. Sward et al.;They have found that shrubs were most abundant in the mid forest (stressed forest, about 200 m from the marsh edge), whereas, P. australis was most abundant in the low forest (developing ghost forest, closest to marsh, 100 m from the marsh edge).Therefore, the rapid growth of shrubs in the mid and high forest (apparently healthy forest, furthest inland, about 300 m from the marsh edge) radically changed the forest understory structure (van Wilgen and Wannenburgh, 2016;Rai and Singh, 2020). This study suggests that high salinity, rather than competition with P. australis, filters Morella cerifera from the low forest, whereas moderate salinity in the mid and high forest favors M. cerifera growth and expansion. The increase in the shrubs is an imperativethe impact of salt-affected maritime forest, which is an indicator of transgression in advance of P. australis and the coastal forest tree-line.In the same vein, article by Jäger et al.; "Restoring the threatened Scalesia forest: insights from a decade of invasive plant management in Galapagos" assessed the impacts of blackberry Rubus niveus, Cestrum auriculatum and Tradescantia fluminensis and their removal on cover, composition and diversity of native plant communities in the area. The study revealed that there were significant changes in both the species composition of plant communities and anthe average percentage cover of species over time, comparing removal plots with invaded plots (Rawat et al., 2023;2024). Species composition in removal plots changed significantly more than in invaded plots, towards a plant community with a greater percent cover of endemic species. This study suggests that if invasive alien plant species are not removed, will resulted in the extinction of native species like Scalesia pedunculata from Santa Cruz Island, Galapagos. Hence, strategies, science and policy interface, areis imperative for integrated invasive alien plants management under global change scenarios for sustainable forest management. All manuscripts underscored that integrated efforts are needed to address ever expanding invasive alien plant species for sustainable forest management thereby contributinge to the ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation (van Wilgen and Wannenburgh, 2016;Rai and Singh, 2020). Hence, sustainability approach (such as inclusive, equitable and sustainable biodiversity stewardship) is required for invasive plant species management to protect the forest ecosystem (Rawat, 2017).The integration ofThe five research articles comprising under this Research Topic offer a comprehensive understanding on invasive alien plants management in forest ecosystems., We therefore, acknowledged is essential to acknowledge the tireless efforts of the authors, reviewers and handling editors for their contribution to accomplish this special issue.and expertise to this important collection on invasive alien plants management in forests. Their ideas, and commitment, addressing the gaps and exploreding future research opportunities wereas invaluable to advance our understanding and enhance the knowledge base onfor invasive alien plants management in forests thereby contributinge to to the ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation, is commendable and will undoubtedly inspire further investigation, science and policy development in the near future in the context of global change.Finally, the five papers comprising this Research Topic offer a comprehensive understanding on invasive alien plants management in forests for ecosystem services and biodiversity conservation.We, therefore, communicate five papers within this collection so as to encourage scholars, scientists and policy makers to build upon the findings presented in this special issue by addressing the gaps and explored future research opportunities for collaboration and knowledge sharing for integrated invasive alien plants management in forest in the context of global change.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".