Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42403068›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2026

Projecting future damage costs of non-native species using combined dynamical and cost-density equations.

Danish A Ahmed, Corey J A Bradshaw, Noor Tahat, Emma J Hudgins, Pierre Courtois, Philip E Hulme, Yuya Watari, Ali Serhan Tarkan, Ismael Soto, Phillip J Haubrock and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society 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.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. Projecting future damage costs of non-native species using combined dynamical and cost-density equations.Ecological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America · 2026
    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

12 authors.

Danish A AhmedDepartment of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-2490-1546
Corey J A BradshawGlobal Ecology, Partuyarta Ngadluku Wardli Kuu, College of Science and Engineering, Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-5328-7741
Noor TahatDepartment of Mathematics and Natural Sciences, Gulf University for Science and Technology, Hawally, Kuwait.ORCID https://orcid.org/0009-0002-9109-5860
Emma J HudginsSchool of Agriculture, Food, and Ecosystem Sciences, The University of Melbourne, Parkville, Victoria, Australia.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8402-5111
Pierre CourtoisCentre for Environmental Economics, Montpellier University, CNRS, INRAE, Montpellier, France.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3997-828X
Philip E HulmeThe Centre for One Biosecurity Research, Analysis and Synthesis, Department of Pest-Management and Conservation, Lincoln University, Canterbury, New Zealand.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5712-0474
Yuya WatariForestry and Forest Products Research Institute, Tsukuba, Japan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8630-5459
Ali Serhan TarkanFaculty of Biology and Environmental Protection, Department of Ecology and Vertebrate Zoology, University of Lodz, Lodz, Poland.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-8628-0514
Ismael SotoFaculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7288-6336
Phillip J HaubrockFaculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2154-4341
Paride BalzaniFaculty of Fisheries and Protection of Waters, South Bohemian Research Center of Aquaculture and Biodiversity of Hydrocenoses, University of South Bohemia in České Budějovice, Vodňany, Czech Republic.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1549-7139
Ross N CuthbertInstitute for Global Food Security, School of Biological Sciences, Queen's University Belfast, Belfast, UK.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2770-254X

Funding

DIMI-DRIEnvironmental Restoration and Conservation Agency JPMEERF20254M01European Union's Horizon 2024 research and innovation programmeExcelencia Severo Ochoa CEX2024-001498-SGulf University for Science and TechnologyINRAE MP BiosefairMarie Skłodowska-Curie Postdoctoral Fellowship HORIZON-MSCA-2024-PF-01 101203662MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033Research Center CAMB
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Biological invasions threaten biodiversity, economic stability, and public health, exacerbated by intensive global trade and transport. The economic costs of these invasions have exceeded US$2 trillion globally and continue to increase. Although past invasion costs have been described across various contexts, there are few robust projections of future costs, limiting effective management planning. We developed a mathematical framework to project future economic damage caused by biological invasions, combining cost-density relationships with a density-time function based on logistic population growth. We tested the model on five well-documented non-native mammal species in Japan, a country with long-term, high-resolution invasion cost records and a well-characterized history of mammal introductions: Pallas' squirrel Callosciurus erythraeus, small Indian mongoose Herpestes javanicus, nutria Myocastor coypus, masked palm civet Paguma larvata, and raccoon Procyon lotor. Species-level cost-density relationships were characterized by two distinct forms: a high-density curve for M. coypus and P. lotor, where costs increase progressively with density but the rate of escalation slows at higher densities, and a high-threshold curve for C. erythraeus, H. javanicus, and P. larvata, where costs remain minimal until populations exceed a density threshold, after which they rise steeply. Our model projected accumulated costs to 2050 varying over several orders of magnitude, from US$0.43 million (H. javanicus) to US$88 million (P. larvata), with proportional increases ranging from ~15% (M. coypus) to ~78% (H. javanicus). Under business-as-usual management, we explicitly model damage-only costs, assuming a historically observed management trend. These projections should therefore be interpreted as maximum estimates. Our approach identifies thresholds beyond which damages escalate rapidly-costs begin to surge 40-80 years after the first record, with 90% of expected long-term damages incurred typically within 10-20 years. For managers, these results highlight the importance of timely interventions, underscoring the need for tailored management strategies considering species-specific dynamics, socioeconomic contexts, and the speed of cost escalation. Early-stage cost dynamics can project future trajectories of existing and emerging invasions, helping guide proactive management prioritization. Our projections equip policymakers and resource managers with improved foresight to anticipate and mitigate future economic burdens of non-native species across spatial scales and for different taxa.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesIntroduced SpeciesMammalsAnimalsJapanModels, BiologicalPopulation DensityPopulation Dynamicsbiological invasionsdamage modelingeconomic costsimpact projectionsInvaCostinvasion managementlogistic growthnon‐native species

Identifiers

PMID42403068
PMCPMC13334257

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.