ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2026
A general framework for predicting the ecological effects of range expansions in marine systems.
Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper 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
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
Abstract
Warming global temperatures are driving species to shift beyond their historical geographic ranges into novel, expanded ranges, where they may have both positive and negative effects on recipient populations. Although no framework currently exists to anticipate these effects, invasion biology theory suggests expanders' effects may be predictable from expanders' historical roles and trophic positions. We conducted a global synthesis of over 1,200 population-level effects of marine range-expanding species reported across 1,075 studies. We hypothesized that, similar to invasive species, expanding species' impacts could be predicted by (H1) their ecological roles in their historical ranges and (H2) their trophic levels. We found that effects in these species' historical ranges reliably predict their impacts in expanded ranges, but that, overall, marine range expanders tend to be more detrimental-or less beneficial-in novel communities. Higher trophic level expanders tend to have stronger effects (both positive and negative) on resident species than lower trophic level expanders. Effect magnitudes were further modulated by the type of interaction (e.g., predation, competition, physical disturbance, etc.), with the strongest effects arising from indirect interactions. Finally, we found that native producers experienced some of the strongest effects when compared to humans, vertebrates, or invertebrates. Together, our results indicate that existing knowledge of species' roles are key to anticipating which climate-driven range expansions are likely to have the largest effects on recipient communities.
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.