SUMMARY: Invasive alien species (IASs) on islands have broad impacts across biodiversity, agriculture, economy, health and culture, which tend to be stronger than on continents. Across small-island developing states (SIDSs), although only a small number of IASs are widely distributed, many more, including those with greatest impact, are found on only a small number of islands. Patterns of island invasion are not consistent across SIDS geographic regions, with differences attributable to correlated patterns in island biogeography and human development. We identify 15 of the most globally prevalent IASs on islands. IAS impacts on islands are exacerbated through interactions with a number of other global change threats, including over-exploitation, agricultural intensification, urban development and climate change. Biosecurity is critical in preventing IAS invasion of islands. Eradication of IASs on islands is possible at early stages of invasion, but otherwise is largely restricted to invasive mammals, or otherwise control is the only option. Future directions in IAS management and research on islands must consider IASs within a broader portfolio of threats to species, ecosystems and people's livelihoods on islands. We advocate for stronger collaborations among island countries and territories faced with the same IASs in similar socio-ecological environments.

Eradications of invasive species from over 1000 small islands around the world have created conservation arks, but to truly address the threat of invasive species to islands, eradications must be scaled by orders of magnitude. New Zealand has eradicated invasive predators from 10% of its offshore island area and now proposes a vision to eliminate them from the entire country. We review current knowledge of invasive predator ecology and control technologies in New Zealand and the biological research, technological advances, social capacity and enabling policy required. We discuss the economic costs and benefits and conclude with a 50-year strategy for a predator-free New Zealand that is shown to be ecologically obtainable, socially desirable, and economically viable. The proposal includes invasive predator eradication from the two largest offshore islands, mammal-free mainland peninsulas, very large ecosanctuaries, plus thousands of small projects that will together merge eradication and control concepts on landscape scales.

Background: There is an increasing demand for rapid biodiversity assessment tools that have a broad taxonomic coverage. Here we evaluate a suite of environmental DNA (eDNA) markers coupled with next generation sequencing (NGS) that span the tree of life, comparing them with traditional biodiversity monitoring tools within ten 20 × 20 meter plots along a 700 meter elevational gradient. Results: From six eDNA datasets (one from each of 16S, 18S, ITS, trnL and two from COI) we identified sequences from 109 NCBI taxonomy-defined phyla or equivalent, ranging from 31 to 60 for a given eDNA marker. Estimates of alpha and gamma diversity were sensitive to the number of sequence reads, whereas beta diversity estimates were less sensitive. The average within-plot beta diversity was lower than between plots for all markers. The soil beta diversity of COI and 18S markers showed the strongest response to the elevational variation of the eDNA markers (COI: r = 0.49, p < 0.001; 18S: r = 0.48, p < 0.001). Furthermore pairwise beta diversities for these two markers were strongly correlated with those calculated from traditional vegetation and invertebrate biodiversity measures. Conclusions: Using a soil-based eDNA approach, we demonstrate that standard phylogenetic markers are capable of recovering sequences from a broad diversity of eukaryotes, in addition to prokaryotes by 16S. The COI and 18S eDNA markers are the best proxies for aboveground biodiversity based on the high correlation between the pairwise beta diversities of these markers and those obtained using traditional methods.

Scientific consensus on the negative impacts of invasive alien species (IAS) is increasingly being challenged. Whereas informed scepticism of impacts is important, science denialism is counterproductive. Such denialism arises when uncertainty on impacts is confounded by differences in values. Debates on impacts must take into account both the evidence presented and motivations.

Biological invasions are one of the major drivers of biodiversity decline and have been shown to have far‐reaching consequences for society and the economy. Preventing the introduction and spread of alien species represents the most effective solution to reducing their impacts on nature and human well‐being. However, implementing effective solutions requires a good understanding of where the species are established and how biological invasions develop over time. Knowledge of the status and trends of biological invasions is thus key for guiding research efforts, informing stakeholders and policymakers, for targeted management efforts, and preparing for the future. However, information about the status and trends of alien species is scattered, patchy, and highly incomplete, making it difficult to assess. Published reports for individual regions and taxonomic groups are available, but large‐scale overviews are scarce. A global assessment therefore requires a review of available knowledge with careful consideration of sampling and reporting biases. This paper provides a comprehensive global assessment of the status and trends of alien species for major taxonomic groups [Bacteria, Protozoa, Stramenopila, Alveolata, and Rhizaria (SAR), fungi, plants, and animals] for Intergovernmental Panel of Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES) regions. The review provides irrefutable evidence that alien species have been introduced to all regions worldwide including Antarctica and have spread to even the most remote islands. The numbers of alien species are increasing within all taxa and across all regions, and are often even accelerating. Large knowledge gaps exist, particularly for taxonomic groups other than vascular plants and vertebrates, for regions in Africa and Central Asia, and for aquatic realms. In fact, for inconspicuous species, such as Bacteria, Protozoa, and to some degree SAR and fungi, we found records for very few species and regions. Observed status and trends are thus highly influenced by research effort. More generally, it is likely that all lists for alien species of any taxonomic group and region are incomplete. The reported species numbers therefore represent minima, and we can expect additions to all lists in the near future. We identified six key challenges which need to be addressed to reduce knowledge gaps and to improve our ability to assess trends and status of biological invasions.