A conceptual map of invasion biology: Integrating hypotheses into a consensus network

Publikation: Beiträge in ZeitschriftenZeitschriftenaufsätzeForschungbegutachtet

Authors

  • Martin Enders
  • Frank Havemann
  • Florian Ruland
  • Maud Bernard-Verdier
  • Jane A. Catford
  • Lorena Gómez-Aparicio
  • Tina Heger
  • Christoph Kueffer
  • Ingolf Kühn
  • Laura A. Meyerson
  • Camille Musseau
  • Ana Novoa
  • Anthony Ricciardi
  • Alban Sagouis
  • Conrad Schittko
  • David L. Strayer
  • Montserrat Vilà
  • Franz Essl
  • Philip E. Hulme
  • Mark van Kleunen
  • Sabrina Kumschick
  • Julie L. Lockwood
  • Abigail L. Mabey
  • Melodie A. McGeoch
  • Estíbaliz Palma
  • Petr Pyšek
  • Wolf Christian Saul
  • Florencia A. Yannelli
  • Jonathan M. Jeschke
Background and aims

Since its emergence in the mid-20th century, invasion biology has matured into a productive research field addressing questions of fundamental and applied importance. Not only has the number of empirical studies increased through time, but also has the number of competing, overlapping and, in some cases, contradictory hypotheses about biological invasions. To make these contradictions and redundancies explicit, and to gain insight into the field’s current theoretical structure, we developed and applied a Delphi approach to create a consensus network of 39 existing invasion hypotheses.
Results

The resulting network was analysed with a link-clustering algorithm that revealed five concept clusters (resource availability, biotic interaction, propagule, trait and Darwin’s clusters) representing complementary areas in the theory of invasion biology. The network also displays hypotheses that link two or more clusters, called connecting hypotheses, which are important in determining network structure. The network indicates hypotheses that are logically linked either positively (77 connections of support) or negatively (that is, they contradict each other; 6 connections).
Significance

The network visually synthesizes how invasion biology’s predominant hypotheses are conceptually related to each other, and thus, reveals an emergent structure – a conceptual map – that can serve as a navigation tool for scholars, practitioners and students, both inside and outside of the field of invasion biology, and guide the development of a more coherent foundation of theory. Additionally, the outlined approach can be more widely applied to create a conceptual map for the larger fields of ecology and biogeography.
OriginalspracheEnglisch
ZeitschriftGlobal Ecology and Biogeography
Jahrgang29
Ausgabenummer6
Seiten (von - bis)978-991
Anzahl der Seiten14
ISSN1466-822X
DOIs
PublikationsstatusErschienen - 01.06.2020
Extern publiziertJa

Bibliographische Notiz

Funding Information:
Financial support was provided by the Foundation of German Business (sdw) to ME; by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the collaborative project ‘Bridging in Biodiversity Science—BIBS’ (funding number 01LC1501A‐H) to ME, AS, CM, CS, MB‐V and TH; and by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, JE 288/9‐2) to JMJ. SK, FAY and W‐CS acknowledge support from Stellenbosch University's DST‐NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology (C•I•B), MV from Belmont Forum‐BiodivERsA project InvasiBES (PCI2018‐092939) funded by the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades. SK acknowledges financial support from the South African National Department of Environment Affairs through its funding to the Invasive Species Programme of the South African National Biodiversity Institute. AN and PP were supported by EXPRO grant no. 19‐28807X (Czech Science Foundation) and the long‐term research development project RVO 67985939 (The Czech Academy of Sciences). LG‐A acknowledges support from the MICINN project INTERCAPA (CGL‐2014‐ 56739‐R), FE and JMJ from the BiodivERsA‐Belmont Forum Project ‘Alien Scenarios’ (FWF project no I 4011‐B32, BMBF project 01LC1807B), AM from the Natural Environmental Research Council (grant number NE/L002531/1) and AR from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Funding Information:
Financial support was provided by the Foundation of German Business (sdw) to ME; by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (BMBF) within the collaborative project ‘Bridging in Biodiversity Science—BIBS’ (funding number 01LC1501A-H) to ME, AS, CM, CS, MB-V and TH; and by the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG, JE 288/9-2) to JMJ. SK, FAY and W-CS acknowledge support from Stellenbosch University's DST-NRF Centre of Excellence for Invasion Biology (C•I•B), MV from Belmont Forum-BiodivERsA project InvasiBES (PCI2018-092939) funded by the Spanish Ministerio de Ciencia, Innovación y Universidades. SK acknowledges financial support from the South African National Department of Environment Affairs through its funding to the Invasive Species Programme of the South African National Biodiversity Institute. AN and PP were supported by EXPRO grant no. 19-28807X (Czech Science Foundation) and the long-term research development project RVO 67985939 (The Czech Academy of Sciences). LG-A acknowledges support from the MICINN project INTERCAPA (CGL-2014- 56739-R), FE and JMJ from the BiodivERsA-Belmont Forum Project ‘Alien Scenarios’ (FWF project no I 4011-B32, BMBF project 01LC1807B), AM from the Natural Environmental Research Council (grant number NE/L002531/1) and AR from the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.

Publisher Copyright:
© 2020 The Authors. Global Ecology and Biogeography published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd

    Fachgebiete

  • Biologie - biological invasions, concepts, consensus map, Delphi method, Invasion science, invasion theory, navigation tools, network analysis

DOI