Will climate change drive alien invasive plants into areas of high protection value? An improved model-based regional assessment to prioritise the management of invasions.

Species distribution models (SDMs) studies suggest that, without control measures, the distribution of many alien invasive plant species (AIS) will increase under climate and land-use changes. Due to limited resources and large areas colonised by invaders, management and monitoring resources must be prioritised. Choices depend on the conservation value of the invaded areas and can be guided by SDM predictions. Here, we use a hierarchical SDM framework, complemented by connectivity analysis of AIS distributions, to evaluate current and future conflicts between AIS and high conservation value areas. We illustrate the framework with three Australian wattle (Acacia) species and patterns of conservation value in Northern Portugal. Results show that protected areas will likely suffer higher pressure from all three Acacia species under future climatic conditions. Due to this higher predicted conflict in protected areas, management might be prioritised for Acacia dealbata and Acacia melanoxylon. Connectivity of AIS suitable areas inside protected areas is currently lower than across the full study area, but this would change under future environmental conditions. Coupled SDM and connectivity analysis can support resource prioritisation for anticipation and monitoring of AIS impacts. However, further tests of this framework over a wide range of regions and organisms are still required before wide application.

Permanent Genetic Resources added to Molecular Ecology Resources Database 1 August 2010-30 September 2010

This article documents the addition of 229 microsatellite marker loci to the Molecular Ecology Resources Database. Loci were developed for the following species: Acacia auriculiformis x Acacia mangium hybrid, Alabama argillacea, Anoplopoma fimbria, Aplochiton zebra, Brevicoryne brassicae, Bruguiera gymnorhiza, Bucorvus leadbeateri, Delphacodes detecta, Tumidagena minuta, Dictyostelium giganteum, Echinogammarus berilloni, Epimedium sagittatum, Fraxinus excelsior, Labeo chrysophekadion, Oncorhynchus clarki lewisi, Paratrechina longicornis, Phaeocystis antarctica, Pinus roxburghii and Potamilus capax. These loci were cross-tested on the following species: Acacia peregrinalis, Acacia crassicarpa, Bruguiera cylindrica, Delphacodes detecta, Tumidagena minuta, Dictyostelium macrocephalum, Dictyostelium discoideum, Dictyostelium purpureum, Dictyostelium mucoroides, Dictyostelium rosarium, Polysphondylium pallidum, Epimedium brevicornum, Epimedium koreanum, Epimedium pubescens, Epimedium wushanese and Fraxinus angustifolia.

The political ecology of weeds : a scalar approach to landscape transformations

How do plants that move and spread across landscapes become branded as weeds and thereby objects of contention and control? We outline a political ecology approach that builds on a Lefebvrian understanding of the production of space, identifying three scalar moments that make plants into 'weeds' in different spatial contexts and landscapes. The three moments are: the operational scale, which relates to empirical phenomena in nature and society; the observational scale, which defines formal concepts of these phenomena and their implicit or explicit 'biopower' across institutional and spatial categories; and the interpretive scale, which is communicated through stories and actions expressing human feelings or concerns regarding the phenomena and processes of socio-spatial change. Together, these three scalar moments interact to produce a political ecology of landscape transformation, where biophysical and socio-cultural processes of daily life encounter formal categories and modes of control as well as emotive and normative expectations in shaping landscapes. Using three exemplar 'weeds' - acacia, lantana and ambrosia - our political ecology approach to landscape transformations shows that weeds do not act alone and that invasives are not inherently bad organisms. Humans and weeds go together; plants take advantage of spaces and opportunities that we create. Human desires for preserving certain social values in landscapes in contradiction to actual transformations is often at the heart of definitions of and conflicts over weeds or invasives.

Areas of high conservation value in Georgia: present and future threats by invasive alien plants

Georgia is known for its extraordinary rich biodiversity of plants, which may now be threatened due to the spread of invasive alien plants (IAP). We aimed to identify (i) the most prominent IAP out of 9 selected potentially invasive and harmful IAP IAP by predicting thetheir distribution of 9 selected IAP under current and future climate conditions in Georgia as well as in its 43 Protected Areas, as a proxy for areas of high conservation value and (ii) the Protected Areas most at risk due to these IAP. We used species distribution models based on 6 climate variables and then filtered the obtained distributions based on maps of soil and vegetation types, and on recorded occurrences, resulting into the predicted ecological distribution of the 9 IAP's at a resolution of 1km2. We foundOur habitat suitability analysis showed that Ambrosia artemisiifolia, (24% and 40%) Robinia pseudoacaia (14% and 19%) and Ailanthus altissima (9% and 11%) have the largest potential distribution are the most abundant (predicted % area covered)d) IAP, with Ailanthus altissima the potentially most increasing one over the next fifty years (from 9% to 13% and from 11% to 25%), for Georgia and the Protected Areas, respectively. Furthermore, our results show indicate two areas in Georgia that are under specifically high threat, i.e. the area around Tbilisi and an area in the western part of Georgia (Adjara), both at lower altitudes. Our procedure to identify areas of high conservation value most at risk by IAP has been applied for the first time. It will help national authorities in prioritizing their measures to protect Georgia's outstanding biodiversity from the negative impact of IAP.