ReviewGlobal change biology2024
A Review of Theory: Comparing Invasion Ecology and Climate Change-Induced Range Shifting.
Review in Global change biology, 2024. 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.
- A general framework for predicting the ecological effects of range expansions in marine systems.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026Article
- Climate-Driven Prediction of the Future Distribution ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Invasive Alien Species of European Union Concern: A Systematic Review of High-Priority Pathogens in 22 Species in a One Health Framework.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Review
- METRIN-KG: A knowledge graph integrating plant metabolites, traits, and biotic interactions.GigaScience · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Human actions have led to large-scale shifts in the distributions of species, which have accelerated over recent decades. Two contributing factors include the introduction of non-native species to new regions, and more recently, the shift of species into new ranges to track a human-altered climate. While the context of these species redistributions is different, we argue here that scientists studying the effects of either invasion or range shifting are interested in the same underlying mechanistic questions: (1) What traits make a species likely to survive in a new location? and (2) Which recipient ecosystems are likely to support a newly arrived species? A survey of the theoretical literature surrounding these topics demonstrates the usefulness of this comparison and highlights key differences between range shifting and invasion in factors including genetic diversity, climatic tolerance, local adaptation, and coevolutionary history. This review does not support the blanket application of an invasion framework to climate change-induced range shifts. However, we suggest the use of modified invasion theories, experimental designs, and risk assessments could aid in predicting outcomes and prioritizing management resources for climate-threatened species.
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.