On average, invasive species were 7.4 times more frequent in trade than in the global species pool (mammals, 4.2–7.2 birds, 2.5–7.4 reptiles, 4.0–12.7 amphibians, 8.0–9.0 and fish, 7.2–13.1 χ 2 tests for each of the 14 datasets, P < 0.0001 Fig. We found that across all taxa and datasets, invasive species were strongly overrepresented in trade ( Fig. Invasive species (see Table 1 for definition) represent 12.6% of all traded species. To address this, we compiled a dataset of 7,522 terrestrial and aquatic vertebrate species traded as pets and compared it to the global vertebrate species pool. Previous research has suggested that invasive plant species are overrepresented in the horticultural online trade ( 20), but it remains unknown whether this overrepresentation is a general phenomenon also found in animals. However, even though it is undisputed that the trade in pets and ornamentals contributes to the global movement of invasive animals ( 16– 19), it is still unclear whether this trade specifically favors invasive species. Some invasive species can have severe impacts on global biodiversity ( 10– 13) and impose tremendous costs on society by damaging physical infrastructure, agriculture, forestry, and human health ( 14, 15). Species with populations that have established outside of their native range are referred to as invasive species hereafter (see Table 1 for terminology). These species are sometimes released into the wild or escape and may survive and reproduce ( 2, 7– 9). In particular, the demand for nontraditional (also known as “exotic”) ornamentals and pets, i.e., organisms without a long history of domestication, has grown ( 2). In the last decade alone, billions of plants and animals comprising thousands of species were traded annually, fueling a multibillion-dollar global business ( 2, 3, 5, 6). Today, however, the trade in live organisms for nonutilitarian reasons has rocketed ( 2– 4). Humans have deliberately introduced a diverse range of species, in particular domesticated crops and animals that have contributed to our success ( 1). The extraordinary movement of our own species through migration, colonization, and travel has driven the geographic expansion of countless other species since prehistoric times ( 1). Our findings call for an increased risk awareness regarding the international trade of wildlife species as pets. We show that ant species with the greatest commercial success tend to have larger spatial distributions and more generalist habitat requirements, both of which are also associated with invasiveness. Nevertheless, invasive ants were similarly overrepresented, demonstrating that the pet trade specifically favors invasive species. ![]() To test this, we focused on the emergent pet trade in ants, which is too recent to be responsible for any invasions so far. However, it is unclear whether this occurs because, over time, pet species had more opportunities to become invasive, or because invasive species have a greater commercial success. Here, using a unique dataset of 7,522 traded vertebrate species, we show that invasive species are strongly overrepresented in trade across mammals, birds, reptiles, amphibians, and fish. So far, a comprehensive analysis of invasive species traded as pets is lacking. Pets are sometimes released by their owners or escape, and can become introduced outside of their native range, threatening biodiversity, agriculture, and health. The pet trade has become a multibillion-dollar global business, with tens of millions of animals traded annually.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |