When is eradication of exotic pest plants a realistic goal

By M. Rejmánek, M. Pitcairn. 2003

377 citations recorded by the source corpus.

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/de8f867f52533bca55cc8fd8668300093fbfeec9

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

Citations in the corpus

Non-native plant invasions of United States National Parks (2009, background): “Control should be implemented quickly before these species become more extensive in cover and biomass and increasingly difficult to manage (Rejmánek 1996a; Rejmánek and Pitcairn 2002).”
When are eradication campaigns successful? A test of common assumptions (2012, background): “2000; Genovesi 2007; Bomford and O’Brien 1995), or assessing taxonomic groups separately, such as plants (Mack and Lonsdale 2002; Rejmánek and Pitcairn 2002; Simberloff 2003a), mammals (Courchamp et al.”
Eradications of invasive alien species in Europe: a review (2005, background): “Most of these eradications have involved vertebrates, but there are also examples of successful eradications of plants (Rejmanek and Pitcairn 2002) and invertebrates, including fruit flies from Nauru (Allwood et al. 2002) and Anopheles gambiae from over 30,000 kmq of Brazil in the 1950s (Davis and…”
Black, Grey and Watch Lists of alien species in the Czech Republic based on environmental impacts and management strategy (2016, background): “A knowledge-based and region-specific differentiated approach is much more suitable than efforts aimed at complete eradication, regardless of circumstances, which is in most cases hardly possible anyway (Rejmánek and Pitcairn 2002, Pluess et al. 2012a, b).”
Invasive alien species on islands: impacts, distribution, interactions and management (2017, background): “For most IASs, once they have become established on an island (i.e. are self-sustaining and breeding), elimination is no longer feasible and management must move towards control and mitigation (Rejmánek & Pitcairn 2002).”
Distribution of alien vs. native plant species in roadside communities along an altitudinal gradient in Tenerife and Gran Canaria (Canary Islands) (2005, background): “Therefore, identifying the factors that influence the distribution of alien species across a landscape is fundamental for evaluating the present and future extent of plant invasions and for development of eradication programs (Wace, 1977; Alpert et al., 2000; Rejmánek and Pitcairn, 2002).”
Evaluation of weed eradication programs: the delimitation of extent (2005, background): “For weeds, the absence of documentation is a major obstacle to the development of procedures that could provide estimates of eradication feasibility (Rejmánek & Pitcairn, 2002; Cunningham et al ., 2003; Panetta & Timmins, 2004) and thereby help focus the eradication approach where it has the best…”
Different climatic envelopes among invasive populations may lead to underestimations of current and future biological invasions (2009, background): “…Diversity calls for preventing the introduction of invasive species (http://www.cbd.int/convention/ convention.shtml), and this is certainly preferable and more cost effective than implementing post-establishment control and eradication procedures (Curnutt, 2000; Rejmánek & Pitcairn, 2000).”
When does invasive species removal lead to ecological recovery? Implications for management success (2018, background): “We synthesize our results with results from other reviews that have evaluated eradication success (Rejmánek and Pitcairn 2002; Kiett et al. 2011; Pluess et al. 2012; Tobin et al. 2014) to provide guidance into when post-removal management activities will likely be necessary to achieve both proximate”