Optimal eradication: when to stop looking for an invasive plant

被引:154
作者
Regan, TJ [1 ]
McCarthy, MA
Baxter, PWJ
Panetta, FD
Possingham, HP
机构
[1] Univ Queensland, Ctr Ecol, Sch Integrat Biol, St Lucia, Qld 4072, Australia
[2] Univ Melbourne, Australian Res Ctr Urban Ecol, Royal Bot Gardens Melbourne cl Sch Bot, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
[3] Univ Melbourne, Sch Bot, Melbourne, Vic 3010, Australia
[4] Dept Nat Resources & Mines, Sherwood, Qld 4075, Australia
[5] CRC Australian Weed Management, Glen Osmond, SA 5064, Australia
关键词
decision theory; detectability; economic costs; eradication; invasive plants; stochastic dynamic programming; rule of thumb; weed;
D O I
10.1111/j.1461-0248.2006.00920.x
中图分类号
Q14 [生态学(生物生态学)];
学科分类号
071012 ; 0713 ;
摘要
The notion of being sure that you have completely eradicated an invasive species is fanciful because of imperfect detection and persistent seed banks. Eradication is commonly declared either on an ad hoc basis, on notions of seed bank longevity, or on setting arbitrary thresholds of 1% or 5% confidence that the species is not present. Rather than declaring eradication at some arbitrary level of confidence, we take an economic approach in which we stop looking when the expected costs outweigh the expected benefits. We develop theory that determines the number of years of absent surveys required to minimize the net expected cost. Given detection of a species is imperfect, the optimal stopping time is a trade-off between the cost of continued surveying and the cost of escape and damage if eradication is declared too soon. A simple rule of thumb compares well to the exact optimal solution using stochastic dynamic programming. Application of the approach to the eradication programme of Helenium amarum reveals that the actual stopping time was a precautionary one given the ranges for each parameter.
引用
收藏
页码:759 / 766
页数:8
相关论文
共 34 条
[1]  
[Anonymous], 1988, Dynamic Modeling in Behavioral Ecology. Monographs in Behavior and Ecology
[2]   Probability models to facilitate a declaration of pest-free status, with special reference to tsetse (Diptera: Glossinidae) [J].
Barclay, HJ ;
Hargrove, JW .
BULLETIN OF ENTOMOLOGICAL RESEARCH, 2005, 95 (01) :1-11
[3]   ECOLOGICAL LIFE-CYCLE OF HELENIUM-AMARUM IN CENTRAL TENNESSEE [J].
BASKIN, JM ;
BASKIN, CC .
BULLETIN OF THE TORREY BOTANICAL CLUB, 1973, 100 (02) :117-124
[4]   INFERRING THREAT FROM SCIENTIFIC COLLECTIONS [J].
BURGMAN, MA ;
GRIMSON, RC ;
FERSON, S .
CONSERVATION BIOLOGY, 1995, 9 (04) :923-928
[5]   Minimizing the cost of environmental management decisions by optimizing statistical thresholds [J].
Field, SA ;
Tyre, AJ ;
Jonzén, N ;
Rhodes, JR ;
Possingham, HP .
ECOLOGY LETTERS, 2004, 7 (08) :669-675
[6]   SAMPLING TO DETECT RARE SPECIES [J].
GREEN, RH ;
YOUNG, RC .
ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 1993, 3 (02) :351-356
[7]   Inferring the absence of a species -: A case study of snakes [J].
Kéry, M .
JOURNAL OF WILDLIFE MANAGEMENT, 2002, 66 (02) :330-338
[8]   Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one [J].
MacKenzie, DI ;
Nichols, JD ;
Lachman, GB ;
Droege, S ;
Royle, JA ;
Langtimm, CA .
ECOLOGY, 2002, 83 (08) :2248-2255
[9]   What can decision analysis do for invasive species management? [J].
Maguire, LA .
RISK ANALYSIS, 2004, 24 (04) :859-868
[10]   SCALABLE DECISION RULES FOR ENVIRONMENTAL-IMPACT STUDIES - EFFECT SIZE, TYPE-I, AND TYPE-II ERRORS [J].
MAPSTONE, BD .
ECOLOGICAL APPLICATIONS, 1995, 5 (02) :401-410