Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42543868›Full record

ArticleEcological applications : a publication of the Ecological Society of America2026

State lines and species divides: Inconsistencies and opportunities in invasive species policies across the eastern United States.

Joseph Drake, E M X Reed, David Haak, Bryan Brown, Meryl C Mims, Michael G Sorice, Haldre Rogers, Scott Salom, Todd Schenk, Jacob N Barney

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. 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

10 authors.

Joseph DrakeInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0458-3533
E M X ReedInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4047-8941
David HaakInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3692-3152
Bryan BrownInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4837-7117
Meryl C MimsInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0570-988X
Michael G SoriceInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9865-0965
Haldre RogersInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4763-5006
Scott SalomInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-8950-3442
Todd SchenkInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3434-1319
Jacob N BarneyInvasive Species Collaborative, Virginia Tech, Blacksburg, Virginia, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2949-5003

Funding

Fralin Life Science Institute, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityGlobal Change CenterU.S. Geological Survey G23AC00647Virginia Tech Invasive Species Collaborative
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Invasive species are a threat to ecological and anthropogenic systems. In the United States, policies to coordinate funding and precipitate management action have been slow to emerge at the federal level, and there is a patchwork of regulation and legislation at the state level. This means that managers and policymakers, already facing limited budgets and evolving goals for action on invasive species, also face detrimental policy inconsistencies across states. Although previous research has explored state-level invasive plant policy, policy relating to invasive invertebrate and vertebrate taxa (and across all three) is understudied. We expand upon previous taxa-limited examinations of public policy related to invasives, looking across all taxonomic groups, including plants, to explore coherency of state regulations. We expanded the taxonomicscope of a database of policies in 21 contiguous eastern US states and used it to examine (in)consistencies in spatial trends for invasive species listed in policies across and within taxonomic groups. We examined the coherency of neighboring states and regional overlap of named species. We also analyzed correlations between distances among states and the species listed in the policy to examine regional trends. We found 1117 policy segments relevant to invasive species with 448 naming at least one taxon at the genus or species level. Of these, 35.3% were plants, 19.9% were invertebrates, and 44.8% were vertebrates. The distribution of taxa contained within policies varied across states, underscoring high variability in the proportion of taxa listed in the policies of neighboring states. Even lower policy coherency existed at the regional scale, particularly for invertebrate and vertebrate taxa. Our results indicate that policy inconsistency exists across all taxonomic groups, and the lack of attention to invasive invertebrates and vertebrates across state policies is particularly concerning. Policy inconsistency means that proactive states are susceptible to invasion from neighboring states where invasives are not similarly regulated. There is an opportunity to improve coordination between states to reduce vulnerability to invasives due to policy inconsistency.

Indexed as

Conservation of Natural ResourcesEnvironmental PolicyIntroduced SpeciesAnimalsInvertebratesUnited StatesVertebratesbiological invasionsinvasive specieslegislationmanagementpublic policyregulationtransdisciplinary research

Identifiers

PMID42543868
PMCPMC13430114

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.