Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36072892›Full record

ArticleManagement of biological invasions : international journal of applied research on biological invasions2020

A Framework for Aquatic Invasive Species Surveillance Site Selection and Prioritization in the US waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes.

Andrew J Tucker, W Lindsay Chadderton, Gust Annis, Alisha D Davidson, Jon Bossenbroek, Stephen Hensler, Michael Hoff, Joel Hoffman, Erika Jensen, Donna Kashian and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Management of biological invasions : international journal of applied research on biological invasions, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

4 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Towards a framework for invasive aquatic plant survey design in Great Lakes coastal areas.Management of biological invasions : international journal of applied research on biological invasions · 2022
    Article
  3. Article
  4. A Framework for Aquatic Invasive Species Surveillance Site Selection and Prioritization in the US waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes.Management of biological invasions : international journal of applied research on biological invasions · 2020
    Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

12 authors.

Andrew J TuckerThe Nature Conservancy, 721 Flanner Hall, University of Notre Dame, IN, 46556.
W Lindsay ChaddertonThe Nature Conservancy, 721 Flanner Hall, University of Notre Dame, IN, 46556.
Gust AnnisThe Nature Conservancy, 101 E. Cesar Chavez Ave, Lansing, MI 48906.
Alisha D DavidsonWayne State University, Department of Biological Sciences, Detroit, MI 48202.
Jon BossenbroekUniversity of Toledo, Department of Environmental Sciences, Toledo, OH 43606.
Stephen HenslerUS Fish & Wildlife Service, Waterford, MI 48327.
Michael HoffUS Fish & Wildlife Service, Bloomington, MN 55437 (Retired).
Joel HoffmanUS Environmental Protection Agency, Mid-Continent Ecology Division, Duluth, MN 55804.
Erika JensenGreat Lakes Commission, Ann Arbor, MI 48108.
Donna KashianWayne State University, Department of Biological Sciences, Detroit, MI 48202.
Sarah LeSageMichigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes, and Energy, Lansing, MI 48909.
Timothy StrakoshUS Fish & Wildlife Service, New Franken, WI 54229.

Funding

Intramural EPA EPA999999
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Risk-based prioritization for early detection monitoring is of utmost importance to prevent and mitigate invasive species impacts. The Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement, a binational commitment between the United States and Canada to restore and protect the waters of the Laurentian Great Lakes, identifies aquatic invasive species (AIS) as one of ten priority issues (annexes) that must be addressed to ensure the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Great Lakes. The Agreement calls out the need for a comprehensive strategy for detecting and tracking new and potentially invasive species. Yet, with a surface water area of 95, 000 square miles (246, 049 square km) and shoreline length of 10, 210 miles (16, 431 km), the Great Lakes represent a daunting challenge for prioritizing where AIS surveillance activities should occur. Our goal was to develop a spatially-explicit and quantitative approach for identifying the highest risk sites for AIS introduction into the US waters of the Great Lakes based on the cumulative risk of new introductions (including range expansions) from a range of pathways and associated taxa. We estimate "invasion risk" scores for nearly 6,000 sites (9 km x 9 km) across the Great Lakes basin using proxy measures for propagule pressure weighted by the proportion of taxa associated with each proxy variable. Proxy variables include human population, number of ship visits, marina size, number of ponds, and number of natural or artificial aquatic connections. In total, we identify more than 1,800 sites with invasion risk scores >0. A small subset of these 1,800+ sites accounts for a majority of predicted propagule pressure and are therefore logical targets for future surveillance and AIS prevention efforts. Many of the highest risk sites are located in western Lake Erie, southern Lake Michigan, and the St. Clair-Detroit River System.

Indexed as

aquatic invasive speciesrisk assessmentsurveillance

Identifiers

PMID36072892
PMCPMC9447411

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.