Cited by 175Wildlife Ecology and ConservationAnimal Ecology and Behavior StudiesEcology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies

Predator control promotes invasive dominated ecological states

Open access
Wallach, Arian D., Johnson, Christopher N., Ritchie, Euan G., O’Neill, Adam J.·2010·Ecology Letters

Abstract

Invasive species are regarded as one of the top five drivers of the global extinction crisis. In response, extreme measures have been applied in an attempt to control or eradicate invasives, with little success overall. We tested the idea that state shifts to invasive dominance are symptomatic of losses in ecosystem resilience, due to the suppression of apex predators. This concept was investigated in Australia where the high rate of mammalian extinctions is largely attributed to the destructive influence of invasive species. Intensive pest control is widely applied across the continent, simultaneously eliminating Australia's apex predator, the dingo (Canis lupus dingo). We show that predator management accounts for shifts between two main ecosystem states. Lethal control fractures dingo social structure and leads to bottom-up driven increases in invasive mesopredators and herbivores. Where control is relaxed, dingoes re-establish top-down regulation of ecosystems, allowing for the recovery of biodiversity and productivity.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1111/j.1461-0248.2010.01492.x

Cites

5 of 5 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • If management lowers dingo numbers, suppression from above may become weaker.

    “This suggests that when control programs reduce dingo abundance, top-down suppression may be weakened (see also Wallach et al. 2010).”

    From A continental scale trophic cascade from wolves through coyotes to foxes (2015) · cites this paper as Wallach et al. 2010

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Wallach, A. D., Johnson, C. N., Ritchie, E. G., & O’Neill, A. J.
Affiliations
  • The University of Adelaide (AU)
  • James Cook University (AU)
Corresponding author
Wallach, Arian D.
Venue
Ecology Letters
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2010-07-14
Volume
13
Issue
8
Pages
1008-1018
ISSN
  • 1461-023X (ISSN-L)
  • 1461-0248
OpenAlex
W2152438126
Cited by
175
References
5
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 7 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 9 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 7 · 2020: 17 · 2019: 13 · 2018: 13 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 13 · 2015: 9 · 2014: 21 · 2013: 9 · 2012: 11
FWCI
8.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Ecology Letters (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • ResearchOnline - JCU (James Cook University) (submittedVersion)
  • eCite Digital Repository (University of Tasmania) (submittedVersion)
  • Adelaide Research & Scholarship (AR&S) (University of Adelaide) (submittedVersion)
  • Figshare (submittedVersion, cc-by)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Wildlife Ecology and Conservation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Animal Ecology and Behavior Studies
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Nature and Landscape Conservation › Ecology and Vegetation Dynamics Studies
Keywords
invasive species, dingo, Canis lupus dingo, predator control, ecosystem resilience, state shifts, top-down control, bottom-up control, mesopredators, herbivores, biodiversity recovery, Australia
MeSH terms
Animals, Australia, Mammals, Models, Biological, Population Density, Population Dynamics, Predatory Behavior, Wolves, Food Chain, Biodiversity

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