ArticleConservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology2025
Global drivers of the conservation-invasion paradox.
Article in Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- The rarest invaders: systematic global evidence for the conservation-invasion paradox in plants.npj biodiversity · 2026Article
- Global drivers of the conservation-invasion paradox.Conservation biology : the journal of the Society for Conservation Biology · 2025Article
- Harms of introduced large herbivores outweigh benefits to native biodiversity.Nature communications · 2025Article
- Muskrat Island: Behavioral Shifts of an Insular Muskrat (Ecology and evolution · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
The conservation-invasion paradox (CIP) refers to a long-term phenomenon wherein species threatened in their native range can sustain viable populations when introduced to other regions. Understanding the drivers of CIP is helpful for conserving threatened species and managing invasive species, which is unfortunately still lacking. We compiled a global data set of 1071 introduction events, including 960 CIP events (successful establishment of threatened species outside its native range) and 111 non-CIP events (unsuccessful establishment of threatened species outside its native range after introduction), involving 174 terrestrial vertebrates. We then tested the relative importance of various predictors at the location, event, and species levels with generalized linear mixed models and model averaging. Successful CIP events occurred across taxonomic groups and biogeographic realms, especially for the mammal group in the Palearctic and Australia. Locations of successful CIP events had fewer native threat factors, especially less climate warming in invaded regions. The probability of a successful CIP event was highest when species introduction efforts were great and there were more local congeners and fewer natural enemies. These results can inform threatened species ex situ conservation and non-native invasive species mitigation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.