Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 266

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Global trade networks determine the distribution of invasive non‐native species

Chapman, Daniel, Purse, Bethan V., Roy, Helen E., Bullock, James M.·2017·Global Ecology and Biogeography

Abstract

Aim: Although global trade is implicated in biological invasions, the assumption that trade networks explain the large‐scale distributions of non‐native species remains largely untested. We addressed this by analysing relationships between global trade networks and plant pest invasion. Location: Forty‐eight countries in Europe and the Mediterranean. Time period: Current. Major taxa studied: Four hundred and twenty‐two non‐native plant pests (173 invertebrates, 166 pathogens, 83 plants). Methods: Ten types of connectivity index were developed, representing potential roles of trade networks, air transport links, geographical proximity, climatic similarity and source country wealth in facilitating invasion. Generalized linear mixed models (GLMMs) identified the connectivity index that best explained both historical and recent invasion. Then, more complex GLMMs were developed including connectivity through trade networks for multiple commodities relevant for pests (live plants, forest products, fruit and vegetables and seeds) and species’ transport associations with those commodities. Results: Total import volumes, species’ global prevalence and connectivity measures based on air transport, geographical distance or climate did not explain invasion as well as connectivity through global trade networks. Invasion was strongly promoted by agricultural imports from countries in which the focal species was present and that were climatically similar to the importing country. However, live plant imports from nearby countries provided a better explanation of the most recent invasions. Connectivity through multiple trade networks predicted invasion better than total agricultural trade, and there was support for our hypothesis that species known to be transported with a particular network had greater sensitivity to its connectivity. Main conclusions: Our findings show that patterns of invasion are governed to a large extent by global trade networks connecting source areas for non‐native species and the dispersal of those species through multiple trade networks. This enhances potential for developing a predictive framework to improve risk assessment, biosecurity and surveillance for invasions.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/geb.12599

Cites

35 of 35 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Show all 35 references

Cited by

See all 266

Metadata

Authors
Chapman, D., Purse, B. V., Roy, H. E., & Bullock, J. M.
Venue
Global Ecology and Biogeography
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-06-20
Volume
26
Issue
8
Pages
907-917
ISSN
  • 1466-822X (ISSN-L)
  • 1466-8238
OpenAlex
W2705972027
Cited by
266
References
35
FWCI
12.49
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Global trade networks determine the distribution of invasive non‐native species. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/geb.12599
The paper
Chapman, D., Purse, B. V., Roy, H. E., & Bullock, J. M. (2017). Global trade networks determine the distribution of invasive non‐native species. Global Ecology and Biogeography. https://doi.org/10.1111/geb.12599

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.