Which calibrated threshold is appropriate for ranking non-native species using scores generated by WRA-type screening toolkits that assess risks under both current and future climate conditions?

Abstract

Score-based decision-support tools are increasingly used to identify potentially invasive non-native species as part of the risk screening (initial risk identification) component of non-native species risk analysis. Amongst these tools are the Weed Risk Assessment (WRA) and its derivatives, e.g. the Aquatic Species Invasiveness Screening Kit (AS-ISK), which have been extensively used on a large variety of terrestrial and aquatic plants and of aquatic animals worldwide. In this paper, a correction is made to the previous guidance on the use of two separate thresholds to risk-rank species, i.e. one for current climate conditions (basic risk assessment: BRA threshold) and one for future climate conditions (BRA + climate change assessment: BRA+CCA threshold). Re-evaluation of this practice reveals that, to avoid the incorrect risk-ranking of species, only the BRA threshold should be used in all future applications of WRAtype toolkits that include a separate set of climate-change questions -at present, this involves the AS-ISK and the newly released Terrestrial Animal Species Invasiveness Screening Kit (TAS-ISK). As a result of this revised guidance, all published studies containing AS-ISK applications to date are reviewed here, and where approrpiate corrected risk ranks are provided for species that were risk-ranked using a BRA+CCA threshold. Corrections are also made whenever applicable to published errors or incorrect risk ranks based on the BRA threshold in the AS-ISK applications reviewed.

Topics & Concepts