Intraspecific behavioral variation is important in both deliberate and unintentional species introductions: Response to Carrete et al.

Trends in Ecology and Evolution

Volumn 27, Issue 2, 2012, Pages 68-69

  Chapple, David G ^a   Simmonds, Sarah M ^a   Wong, Bob B M ^a  

^a MONASH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

EID: 84856112732     PISSN: 01695347     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.tree.2011.11.008     Document Type: Letter

References (7)

1. Chapple D.G., et al. Can behavioral and personality traits influence the success of unintentional species introductions?. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2012, 27:57-64.
2. Blackburn T.M., et al. A proposed unified framework for biological invasions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2011, 26:333-339.
3. Carrete M., et al. Don't neglect pre-establishment individual selection in deliberate introductions. Trends Ecol. Evol. 2012, 27:67-68.
4. Fogarty S., et al. Social personality polymorphism and the spread of invasive species: a model. Am. Nat. 2011, 177:273-287.
5. Suarez A.V., et al. The role of opportunity in the unintentional introduction of nonnative ants. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 2005, 102:17032-17035.
6. Alpert P. The advantages and disadvantages of being introduced. Biol. Invas. 2006, 8:1523-1534.
7. Tingley R., et al. The frog filter: amphibian introduction bias driven by taxonomy, body size and biogeography. Global Ecol. Biogeogr. 2010, 19:496-503.