L. Pertierra, P. Convey, P. Martinez, P. Tejedo, J. Benayas, M. A. Olalla‐Tárraga
{"title":"经典的生物入侵假说能否适用于已报道的南极海洋非本地陆生物种的案例?","authors":"L. Pertierra, P. Convey, P. Martinez, P. Tejedo, J. Benayas, M. A. Olalla‐Tárraga","doi":"10.1017/S0954102022000037","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Understanding the success factors underlying each step in the process of biological invasion provides a robust foundation upon which to develop appropriate biosecurity measures. Insights into the processes occurring can be gained through clarifying the circumstances applying to non-native species that have arrived, established and, in some cases, successfully spread in terrestrial Antarctica. To date, examples include a small number of vascular plants and a greater diversity of invertebrates (including Diptera, Collembola, Acari and Oligochaeta), which share features of pre-adaptation to the environmental stresses experienced in Antarctica. In this synthesis, we examine multiple classic invasion science hypotheses that are widely considered to have relevance in invasion ecology and assess their utility in understanding the different invasion histories so far documented in the continent. All of these existing hypotheses appear relevant to some degree in explaining invasion processes in Antarctica. They are also relevant in understanding failed invasions and identifying barriers to invasion. However, the limited number of cases currently available constrains the possibility of establishing patterns and processes. To conclude, we discuss several new and emerging confirmatory methods as relevant tools to test and compare these hypotheses given the availability of appropriate sample sizes in the future.","PeriodicalId":50972,"journal":{"name":"Antarctic Science","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.8000,"publicationDate":"2022-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"4","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Can classic biological invasion hypotheses be applied to reported cases of non-native terrestrial species in the Maritime Antarctic?\",\"authors\":\"L. Pertierra, P. Convey, P. Martinez, P. Tejedo, J. Benayas, M. A. Olalla‐Tárraga\",\"doi\":\"10.1017/S0954102022000037\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Understanding the success factors underlying each step in the process of biological invasion provides a robust foundation upon which to develop appropriate biosecurity measures. Insights into the processes occurring can be gained through clarifying the circumstances applying to non-native species that have arrived, established and, in some cases, successfully spread in terrestrial Antarctica. To date, examples include a small number of vascular plants and a greater diversity of invertebrates (including Diptera, Collembola, Acari and Oligochaeta), which share features of pre-adaptation to the environmental stresses experienced in Antarctica. In this synthesis, we examine multiple classic invasion science hypotheses that are widely considered to have relevance in invasion ecology and assess their utility in understanding the different invasion histories so far documented in the continent. All of these existing hypotheses appear relevant to some degree in explaining invasion processes in Antarctica. They are also relevant in understanding failed invasions and identifying barriers to invasion. However, the limited number of cases currently available constrains the possibility of establishing patterns and processes. To conclude, we discuss several new and emerging confirmatory methods as relevant tools to test and compare these hypotheses given the availability of appropriate sample sizes in the future.\",\"PeriodicalId\":50972,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Antarctic Science\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2022-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"4\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Antarctic Science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"89\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102022000037\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"地球科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antarctic Science","FirstCategoryId":"89","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954102022000037","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"地球科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCES","Score":null,"Total":0}
Can classic biological invasion hypotheses be applied to reported cases of non-native terrestrial species in the Maritime Antarctic?
Abstract Understanding the success factors underlying each step in the process of biological invasion provides a robust foundation upon which to develop appropriate biosecurity measures. Insights into the processes occurring can be gained through clarifying the circumstances applying to non-native species that have arrived, established and, in some cases, successfully spread in terrestrial Antarctica. To date, examples include a small number of vascular plants and a greater diversity of invertebrates (including Diptera, Collembola, Acari and Oligochaeta), which share features of pre-adaptation to the environmental stresses experienced in Antarctica. In this synthesis, we examine multiple classic invasion science hypotheses that are widely considered to have relevance in invasion ecology and assess their utility in understanding the different invasion histories so far documented in the continent. All of these existing hypotheses appear relevant to some degree in explaining invasion processes in Antarctica. They are also relevant in understanding failed invasions and identifying barriers to invasion. However, the limited number of cases currently available constrains the possibility of establishing patterns and processes. To conclude, we discuss several new and emerging confirmatory methods as relevant tools to test and compare these hypotheses given the availability of appropriate sample sizes in the future.
期刊介绍:
Antarctic Science provides a truly international forum for the broad spread of studies that increasingly characterise scientific research in the Antarctic. Whilst emphasising interdisciplinary work, the journal publishes papers from environmental management to biodiversity, from volcanoes to icebergs, and from oceanography to the upper atmosphere. No other journal covers such a wide range of Antarctic scientific studies. The journal attracts papers from all countries currently undertaking Antarctic research. It publishes both review and data papers with no limits on length, two-page short notes on technical developments and recent discoveries, and book reviews. These, together with an editorial discussing broader aspects of science, provide a rich and varied mixture of items to interest researchers in all areas of science. There are no page charges, or charges for colour, to authors publishing in the Journal. One issue each year is normally devoted to a specific theme or papers from a major meeting.