Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36992943›Full record

ArticlePeerJ2023

Economic costs of invasive rodents worldwide: the tip of the iceberg.

Christophe Diagne, Liliana Ballesteros-Mejia, Ross N Cuthbert, Thomas W Bodey, Jean Fantle-Lepczyk, Elena Angulo, Alok Bang, Gauthier Dobigny, Franck Courchamp

Open access · goldFull text read
In one paragraph

Article in PeerJ, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
16citing papers in PubMed
12.2field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

16 citing papers in PubMed, 52 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Y-linked editors for invasive rodent control.Molecular biology and evolution · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. 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

9 authors at 5 institutions in 5 countries.

Christophe DiagneCBGP, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRD, Montferrier-sur-Lez, France.
Liliana Ballesteros-MejiaUniversité Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Orsay, France.
Ross N CuthbertInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, United Kingdom.
Thomas W BodeySchool of Biological Sciences, King's College, University of Aberdeen, Aberdeen, United Kingdom.
Jean Fantle-LepczykSchool of Forestry & Wildlife Sciences, Auburn University, Auburn, AL, USA.
Elena AnguloUniversité Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Orsay, France.
Alok BangSociety for Ecology Evolution and Development, Wardha, India.
Gauthier DobignyCBGP, Univ Montpellier, CIRAD, INRAE, Institut Agro, IRD, Montferrier-sur-Lez, France.
Franck CourchampUniversité Paris-Saclay, CNRS, AgroParisTech, Ecologie Systématique Evolution, Orsay, France.
Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique · FRAuburn University · USCentre de Coopération Internationale en Recherche Agronomique pour le Développement · FRQueen's University Belfast · GBUniversity of Aberdeen · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Background: Rodents are among the most notorious invasive alien species worldwide. These invaders have substantially impacted native ecosystems, food production and storage, local infrastructures, human health and well-being. However, the lack of standardized and understandable estimation of their impacts is a serious barrier to raising societal awareness, and hampers effective management interventions at relevant scales. Methods: Here, we assessed the economic costs of invasive alien rodents globally in order to help overcome these obstacles. For this purpose, we combined and analysed economic cost data from the Results: Our conservative analysis showed that reported costs of rodent invasions reached a conservative total of US$ 3.6 billion between 1930 and 2022 (annually US$ 87.5 million between 1980 and 2022), and were significantly increasing through time. The highest cost reported was for muskrat Conclusions: These findings strongly suggest that available information represents a substantial underestimation of the global costs incurred. We offer recommendations for improving estimates of costs to fill these knowledge gaps including: systematic distinction between native and invasive rodents' impacts; monetizing indirect impacts on human health; and greater integrative and concerted research effort between scientists and stakeholders. Finally, we discuss why and how this approach will stimulate and provide support for proactive and sustainable management strategies in the context of alien rodent invasions, for which biosecurity measures should be amplified globally.

Indexed as

EcosystemRodentiaAnimalsCost of IllnessEuropeHumansIntroduced SpeciesRatsReproducibility of ResultsDamage costsInvaCostManagement expendituresMonetary impactReporting biasRodents

Identifiers

PMID36992943
PMCPMC10042159
OpenAlexW4360859333

What OpenQuestion holds

Textfull text, public
LicenceCC BY
measurements read39
reference markers read7
identifiers read13
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.