Impact assessment with different scoring tools: How well do alien amphibian assessments match?

By

Kumschick, Sabrina, 1985-
Vimercati, Giovanni
de Villiers, F. Andre
Mokhatla, Mohlamatsane M.
Davies, Sarah J.
Thorp, Corey J.
Rebelo, Alexander D.
Measey, G. John

Type

Article

Date of Publication

2017

Original Publication

NeoBiota : advancing research on alien species and biological invasions

Volume

33

Pages

53-66

Subjects

Alien species , Biological invasions , Environmental Impact Classification for Alien Taxa , Generic Impact Scoring System (GISS) , listing , prioritisation

Contributed by

Pensoft Publishers

Language

English

Published by

Sophia, Bulgaria Pensoft Publishers

Identifiers

DOI: https://doi.org/10.3897/neobiota.33.10376

 

Abstract

Classification of alien species’ impacts can aid policy making through evidence based listing and management recommendations. We highlight differences and a number of potential difficulties with two scoring tools, the Environmental Impact Classification of Alien Taxa (EICAT) and the Generic Impact Scoring System (GISS) using amphibians as a case study. Generally, GISS and EICAT assessments lead to very similar impact levels, but scores from the schemes are not equivalent. Small differences are attributable to discrepancies in the verbal descriptions for scores. Differences were found in several impact categories. While the issue of disease appears to be related to uncertainties in both schemes, hybridisation might be inflated in EICAT. We conclude that GISS scores cannot directly be translated into EICAT classifications, but they give very similar outcomes and the same literature base can be used for both schemes.