Biol Invasions DOI 10.1007/s10530-015-0843-1 ORIGINAL PAPER Harmonia+ and Pandora+: risk screening tools for potentially invasive plants, animals and their pathogens Bram D’hondt • Sonia Vanderhoeven • Sophie Roelandt • Franc¸ois Mayer • Veerle Versteirt • Tim Adriaens • Els Ducheyne • Gilles San Martin • Jean-Claude Gre´goire • Iris Stiers • Sophie Quoilin • Julien Cigar • Andre´ Heughebaert • Etienne Branquart Received: 30 June 2014 / Accepted: 22 January 2015 Ó Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2015 Abstract Given the large number of alien species converting answers into scores, which are then that may potentially develop into invasives, there is a condensed into summary statistics, Harmonia? allows clear need for robust schemes that allow to screen for quantitative output on stage-specific and general species for such risks. The Harmonia? framework risks. Test assessments on five species emerging in presented here brings together 30 questions that refer Belgium showed the perceived environmental risks of to distinct components of invasion. Together, they Procambarus clarkii to be highest (0.72), and that of cover the stages of introduction, establishment, Threskiornis aethiopicus to be lowest (0.13). Given spread, and multiple kinds of impacts, viz. referring the considerable parallels that exist between invasive to the health of the environment (including wild alien species and emerging infectious diseases, we species), cultivated plants, domesticated animals and additionally created Pandora, which is a risk analysis man. In a complete assessment, input is provided by scheme for pathogens and parasites. It consists of 13 choosing among predefined ordinal answers and by key questions and has the same structure as Harmo- supplementing these with textual clarification. Uncer- nia?. Since diseases play a paramount role in biolog- tainty is covered by indicating levels of confidence. By ical invasions, results of Pandora assessments may feed into Harmonia? through a slightly adapted, host- specific version named Pandora?. Harmonia?, Pan- Electronic supplementary material The online version of dora and Pandora? may be used both for prioritization this article (doi:10.1007/s10530-015-0843-1) contains supple- mentary material, which is available to authorized users. purposes and for underpinning detailed risk analyses, B. D’hondt Á S. Vanderhoeven Á J. Cigar Á S. Roelandt A. Heughebaert Veterinary and Agrochemical Research Centre, Belgian Biodiversity Platform, Belgian Science Policy Groeselenberg 99, 1180 Brussels, Belgium Office, Avenue Louise 231, 1050 Brussels, Belgium e-mail: [email protected] F. Mayer Á J.-C. Gre´goire Biological Control and Spatial Ecology, Universite´ Libre B. D’hondt Á T. Adriaens de Bruxelles, Avenue F. Roosevelt 50, 1050 Brussels, Research Institute for Nature and Forest, Kliniekstraat 25, Belgium 1070 Brussels, Belgium V. Versteirt Á E. Ducheyne S. Vanderhoeven Á E. Branquart (&) Avia-GIS, Precision Pest Management Unit, Risschotlei De´partement d’E´ tude du Milieu Naturel et Agricole, 33, 2980 Zoersel, Belgium Service Public de Wallonie, Avenue Mare´chal Juin 23, 5030 Gembloux, Belgium e-mail: [email protected] 123 B. D’hondt et al. and can be consulted online through http://ias. to condense species information into their perceived biodiversity.be. risks according to a common framework. Several years ago, Branquart (2007) launched an Keywords Risk screening Á Risk assessment Á advisory quick-screening tool for invasive alien spe- Horizon scanning Á ISEIA Á Zoonoses Á Prioritisation cies in Belgium: the Invasive Species Environmental Impact Assessement (ISEIA). It consisted of a simple scheme to address the spread capacity and environ- mental impacts of alien species based on invasion Introduction histories in Belgium and neighbouring areas (instead of a life history approach, thereby classifying as a Species are termed ‘alien’ if they have become prioritization rather than a predictive system sensu transported outside of their natural range through Randall et al. 2008; Essl et al. 2011). It was human actions. If these species are subsequently subsequently applied by an expert panel to reach perceived as causing harm in their alien range, they consensus scores for the risk that 100 species from are further referred to as ‘invasive alien species’ (COP different taxonomic groups pose to the Belgian 2002; Simberloff et al. 2013). The costs that come with territory. The resulting list was incorporated in an invasive species damage and control are considerable: online database named Harmonia (Belgian Biodiver- e.g., for The Netherlands, European Union, and sity Platform 2014a). Outside of Belgium, the ISEIA globally, reported estimates are 1.3 billion (van der protocol has, among others, been used to inform risk Weijden et al. 2007), 12.5 billion (Kettunen et al. analyses of particular species in the Netherlands (e.g. 2008) and 1.4 trillion euro per year (Pimentel et al. Gyimesi and Lensink 2010, van de Koppel et al. 2012), 2001). Attempts to counteract alien species invasions black lists of vascular plants in Luxembourg (Ries are therefore undertaken worldwide, and a great deal et al. 2013), and a horizon scan of potentially invasive of dialogue is needed between invasion biology species in Great Britain (Roy et al. 2014a). Although experts and policy makers for these attempts to be the field of risk analysis of invasive alien species has successful (Young et al. 2014). seen much progress in recent years, a considerable The sooner invasive alien species become tackled scope for improvement is still left (see reviews by during invasion, the more cost-effective measures Leung et al. 2012; Kumschick and Richardson 2013). against them will be (Keller et al. 2007). But before In particular, the following emerging issues were such prevention or early eradication measures can take found to be unsatisfactorily covered in ISEIA. First, place, it is essential to first identify those species that frameworks have been constructed that disentangle pose the highest risk. Given the huge and increasing and define invasion processes better. These frame- number of species that become transported and may works at minimum include stages of transport, estab- potentially develop into invasive species, such a lishment, spread and impact (Blackburn et al. 2011; prioritization must allow for a high number of species Leung et al. 2012). Second, impacts of invasive alien from different taxonomic groups to be assessed in a species range well beyond ecological issues alone, relatively short time (Hulme et al. 2009). In these referring also to economic activities or human health respects, it is helpful to have tools available that allow (European Environment Agency 2012). In fact, many infectious pests of cultivated plants and domesticated animals are alien organisms, and the same is true for G. San Martin several nuisance organisms of human health concern. Walloon Agricultural Research Centre, Rue de Liroux 9, Considering also potential impacts on infrastructure, 5030 Gembloux, Belgium recreation activities, aesthetics, and others, there is I. Stiers much room to improve the integration of these very Plant Biology and Nature Management, Vrije Universiteit diverse domains in a common risk analysis frame- Brussel, Pleinlaan 2, 1050 Brussels, Belgium work. Third, there has been an increasing awareness on the roles that parasites and pathogens play in S. Quoilin Belgian Scientific Institute for Public Health, Rue J. biological invasions. The infections they cause have Wytsman 14, 1050 Brussels, Belgium been identified as a key contributing factor to the 123 Harmonia? and Pandora? invasion success of many host species (Dunn and Second, a panel of 22 risk analysis experts, repre- Perkins 2012). In addition, infectious agents hosted by senting 21 different institutes from eight different alien species also directly contribute to the latter’s countries, joined a two-day workshop in the 11th month suite of impacts, potentially affecting the health of of the project, where a draft version of the protocol was plants, animals or humans (zoonoses; see Taylor et al. tested and commented on. Experts were divided into 2001). It is therefore critical that risk assessments of small groups according to their expertise (environmen- alien plants or animals consider the likelihood of tal, plant, or human and animal health), then applying entry, exposure and consequence of exotic pathogens the protocol to several test species. and parasites. Third, during the 16th month of the project, 30 On these grounds, we constructed a protocol that scientists were asked to individually complete an allows for a rapid screening of the diverse risks of updated version of the questionnaires for one or a few potentially invasive alien species, and prioritizes them selected organisms as a proof of concept. Concerning accordingly. The protocol consists of two tools, Harmonia?, these were five species for which the Harmonia? and Pandora. These are named after the environmental impacts in particular are currently notoriously invasive Harlequin ladybird Harmonia debated for Belgium: Lithobates catesbeianus (Amer- axyridis and the important entomopathogenic fungus ican bullfrog), Ludwigia grandiflora (Water prim- Pandora, the spread of which seems to be accelerated rose), Nyctereutes procyonoides (Raccoon dog), by H. axyridis (Roy et al. 2008). The Harmonia? Procambarus clarkii (Louisiana crayfish) and Thresk- protocol applies to any potentially invasive