ArticleBioscience2025
Conceptual and ethical considerations in invasion science.
Article in Bioscience, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- The impacts of biological invasions.Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society · 2026Review
- Investigating the Causes of an Extinction Catastrophe: Controlling Introduced Predators Remains Essential for Conserving Australia's Mammals.Bioscience · 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
19 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Invasion science addresses interconnected ecological, economic, and social challenges posed by the introduction of nonnative species. Therefore, invasion scientists have to consider and reconcile interdisciplinary needs while addressing the potential implications of their findings. Navigating diverse disciplines, including environmental sciences, ecology, economics, and the humanities, invasion scientists seek to arrive at informed decisions on invasion risk, impact, and management. Individual biases, uncertainties, and systemic pressures influence the ability to maintain objectivity and resist pressures that might otherwise distort their findings or applications. In the present commentary, we examine conceptual and ethical dilemmas within the field of invasion science, particularly reputational and the risks of the discipline perpetuating its own relevance by framing invasions as insurmountable challenges. In the discussion, we highlight how incentive structures, biased assessments and framing, and conflicts of interest may compromise the discipline's integrity. We also explore questions surrounding human responsibility to animal welfare and highlight ethical conundrums in the management of invasive 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.