USGS Science⌕ Search

Geology topics

Bethany A. Bradley

Publications and source records attributed to Bethany A. Bradley.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
USGS2025

Relationship-centered engagement bridges the divide between science and management, and enhances climate adaptation

The rapid pace of climate change demands changes in management practices. Despite abundant climate adaptation research, the implementation of climate adaptation can lag in the management space. In the present article, we argue that relationship-centered engagement—establishing and maintaining relationships among researchers and natural resource managers—is critical for bridging the research–management gap. We evaluated researcher–manager partnerships within the US Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center and identified three cultural shifts that institutions, funders, researchers, and managers could adopt to boost the odds of translating findings into action: acknowledging and supporting the central role of relationships in creating and implementing actionable science, lengthening funding timelines to better support establishing and maintaining relationships, and aligning institutional rewards to support relationship building. A renewed focus on relationships can lead to more diverse and effective partnerships that bridge knowledge to practice and hasten adaptation to climate change.

BioScience↗
USGS2025

A quantitative classification of the geography of non-native flora in the United States

Aim Non-native plants have the potential to harm ecosystems. Harm is classically related to their distribution and abundance, but this geographical information is often unknown. Here, we assess geographical commonness as a potential indicator of invasive status for non-native flora in the United States. Geographical commonness could inform invasion risk assessments across species and ecoregions. Location Conterminous United States. Time Period Through 2022. Major Taxa Studied Plants. Methods We compiled and standardised occurrence and abundance data from 14 spatial datasets and used this information to categorise non-native species as uncommon or common based on three dimensions of commonness: area of occupancy, habitat breadth and local abundance. To assess consistency in existing categorizations, we compared commonness to invasive status in the United States. We identified species with higher-than-expected abundance relative to their occupancy, habitat breadth or residence time. We calculated non-native plant richness within United States ecoregions and estimated unreported species based on rarefaction/extrapolation curves. Results This comprehensive database identified 1874 non-native plant species recorded in 4,844,963 locations. Of these, 1221 species were locally abundant (> 10% cover) in 797,759 unique locations. One thousand one hundred one non-native species (59%) achieved at least one dimension of commonness, including 565 species that achieved all three. Species with longer residence times tended to meet more dimensions of commonness. We identified 132 species with higher-than-expected abundance. Ecoregions in the central United States have the largest estimated numbers of unreported, abundant non-native plants. Main Conclusions A high proportion of non-native species have become common in the United States. However, existing categorizations of invasive species are not always consistent with species' abundance and distribution, even after considering residence time. Considering geographical commonness and higher-than-expected abundance revealed in this new dataset could support more consistent and proactive identification of invasive plants and lead to more efficient management practices.

Conterminous United States↗
USGS2025

Using plant invasions to compare occurrence- and abundance-based calculations of biotic homogenisation: Are results complementary or contradictory?

Aim Beta diversity quantifies the similarity of ecological assemblages. Its increase, known as biotic homogenisation, can be a consequence of biological invasions. However, species occurrence (presence/absence) and abundance-based analyses can produce contradictory assessments of the magnitude and direction of changes in beta diversity. Previous work indicates these contradictions should be less frequent in nature than in theory, but a growing number of empirical studies report discrepancies between occurrence- and abundance-based approaches. Understanding if these discrepancies represent a few isolated cases or are systematic across a diversity of ecosystems would allow us to better understand the general patterns, mechanisms and impacts of biotic homogenisation. Location United States. Time Period 1963–2020. Major Taxa Studied Vascular plants. Methods We used a dataset of more than 70,000 vegetation survey plots to assess differences in biotic homogenisation with and without invasion using both occurrence- and abundance-based metrics of beta diversity. We estimated taxonomic biotic homogenisation by comparing beta diversity of invaded and uninvaded plots with both classes of metrics and investigated the characteristics of the non-native species pool that influenced the likelihood that these metrics disagree. Results In 78% of plot comparisons, occurrence- and abundance-based calculations agreed in direction, and the two metrics were generally well correlated. Our empirical results are consistent with previous theory. Discrepancies between the metrics were more likely when the same non-native species was at high cover at both plots compared for beta diversity, and when these plots were spatially distant. Main Conclusions In about 20% of cases, our calculations revealed differences in direction (homogenisation vs. differentiation) when comparing occurrence- and abundance-based metrics, indicating that the metrics are not interchangeable, especially when distances between plots are high and invader diversity is low. When data permit, combining the two approaches can offer insights into the role of invasions and extirpations in driving biotic homogenisation/differentiation.

Global Ecology and Biogeography↗
USGS2025

Centering voices of scientists from marginalized backgrounds to understand experiences in climate adaptation science and inform action

Identifying and building solutions to help people and ecosystems adapt to climate change requires participation of all people; however, Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) fields, including environmental sciences, continue to lack diversity. To address this issue, many institutions have increased programming to recruit and retain people from historically marginalized backgrounds in STEM fields. Institutions use surveys to evaluate the experiences of community members and identify areas for improvement; however, surveys often summarize and reflect majority perspectives and disregard voices of historically marginalized individuals. In June 2021, a survey of graduate students, postdocs, faculty, staff, and researchers affiliated with the Northeast Climate Adaptation Science Center (NE CASC) evaluated their experiences of diversity, equity, inclusion, and justice (DEIJ) using Likert-based and long-answer questions. We analyzed the results as a whole, but also focused on the responses of people who self-identified as members of a marginalized group (“marginalized respondents”) in climate adaptation science to center their voices. Marginalized respondents reported being motivated to enter climate adaptation science to improve society and the environment rather than for intellectual curiosity, which motivated one third of non-marginalized respondents. Once in science, marginalized respondents reported feeling less supported and comfortable at work and were more likely to have considered leaving science and academia in the last year. Long-answer responses of marginalized respondents indicated distrust in the ability of leadership and existing DEIJ initiatives to effectively tackle systemic issues and emphasized the importance of focusing on equity and inclusion before recruitment. Marginalized respondents identified additional funding to support existing DEIJ efforts and undergraduates as priorities. By allowing participants to self-identify as part of a marginalized group, we were able to highlight experiences and needs without risking exposure based on race, gender, disability status, or sexual orientation. This approach can be applied to other small organizations with limited demographic diversity.

PLoS ONE↗
USGS2024

Boundary spanning increases knowledge and action on invasive species in a changing climate

Challenges associated with global change stressors on ecosystems have prompted calls to improve actionable science, including through boundary-spanning activities, which aim to build connections and communication between researchers and natural resource practitioners. By synthesizing and translating research and practitioner knowledge, boundary-spanning activities could support proactive, research-informed conservation practice, but the success of these efforts is rarely evaluated. Using repeat survey data from the Northeast Regional Invasive Species and Climate Change (NE RISCC) Management Network, a boundary-spanning organization, we evaluate whether participating in NE RISCC affected practitioners' knowledge, actions and priorities related to invasive species management under a changing climate. Our survey results suggest that practitioners who participate in NE RISCC have greater knowledge about invasive species and climate change and are incorporating climate change in more ways into their invasive species management. We also found NE RISCC membership affected the perceived usefulness of informational resources, with NE RISCC members more frequently identifying research syntheses and targeted workshops (both are common products used by NE RISCC to translate science into practice and share manager knowledge) as useful compared to non-members. Practitioners who participate in NE RISCC also identified somewhat different research priorities, with non-members and short-term members more frequently identifying range-shifting neonative species and their impacts on native communities as higher priorities compared to long-term NE RISCC members. NE RISCC research activities and outreach materials have consistently framed range-shifting neonative species as comparatively low risk, suggesting that this information has influenced practitioner's perception of risk. Practical implication : Although real-world impacts of applied ecology are notoriously difficult to quantify, this analysis illustrates that if research results are actively translated, they can affect the knowledge and actions of natural resource practitioners. These impacts illustrate the potential for boundary-spanning efforts to address other global change challenges to conservation.

Ecological Solutions and Evidence↗
USGS2024

Human activity drives establishment, but not invasion, of non-native plants on islands

Island ecosystems are particularly susceptible to the impacts of invasive species. Many rare and endangered species that are endemic to islands are negatively affected by invasions. Past studies have shown that the establishment of non-native species on islands is related to native plant richness, habitat heterogeneity, island age, human activity, and climate. However, it is unclear whether the factors promoting establishment (i.e. the formation of self-sustaining populations) also promote subsequent invasion (i.e. spread and negative impacts). Using data from 4308 non-native plant species across 46 islands and archipelagos globally, we examined which biogeographic characteristics influence established and invasive plant richness using generalized linear models nested within piecewise structural equation models. Our results indicate that anthropogenic land use (i.e. human modification) is strongly associated with establishment but not invasion, that climate (maximum monthly temperature) is strongly associated with invasion but not establishment, and that habitat heterogeneity (represented by maximum elevation and island area) is strongly associated with both establishment and invasion. Island isolation explains native plant richness well, but is not associated with established and invasive plant richness, likely due to anthropogenic introductions. We conclude that anthropogenic land use on islands is likely to be a proxy for the number of introductions (i.e. propagule pressure), which is more important for establishment than invasion. Conversely, islands with more diverse habitats and favorable (warm) climate conditions are likely to contain more available niche space (i.e. ‘vacant niches’) which create opportunities for both establishment and invasion. By evaluating multiple stages of the invasion process, we differentiate between the biogeographic characteristics that influence plant establishment (which does not necessarily lead to ecological impacts) versus those that influence subsequent plant invasion (which does lead to negative impacts).

Ecography↗
USGS2024

Observed and potential range shifts of native and non-native species with climate change

There is broad concern that the range shifts of global flora and fauna will not keep up with climate change, increasing the likelihood of population declines and extinctions. Many populations of nonnative species already have advantages over native species, including widespread human-aided dispersal and release from natural enemies. But do nonnative species also have an advantage with climate change? Here, we review observed and potential range shifts for native and nonnative species globally. We show that nonnative species are expanding their ranges orders of magnitude faster than native species, reflecting both traits that enable rapid spread and ongoing human-mediated introduction. We further show that nonnative species have large potential ranges and range expansions with climate change, likely due to a combination of widespread introduction and broader climatic tolerances. With faster spread rates and larger potential to persist or expand, nonnative populations have a decided advantage in a changing climate.

Annual Review of Ecology, Evolution, and Systemati↗
USGS2023

Shifting hotspots: Climate change projected to drive contractions and expansions of invasive plant abundance habitats

Aim Preventing the spread of range-shifting invasive species is a top priority for mitigating the impacts of climate change. Invasive plants become abundant and cause negative impacts in only a fraction of their introduced ranges, yet projections of invasion risk are almost exclusively derived from models built using all non-native occurrences and neglect abundance information. Location Eastern USA. Methods We compiled abundance records for 144 invasive plant species from five major growth forms. We fit over 600 species distribution models based on occurrences of abundant plant populations, thus projecting which areas in the eastern United States (U.S.) will be most susceptible to invasion under current and +2°C climate change. Results We identified current invasive plant hotspots in the Great Lakes region, mid-Atlantic region, and along the northeast coast of Florida and Georgia, each climatically suitable for abundant populations of over 30 invasive plant species. Under a +2°C climate change scenario, hotspots will shift an average of 213 km, predominantly towards the northeast U.S., where some areas are projected to become suitable for up to 21 new invasive plant species. Range shifting species could exacerbate impacts of up to 40 invasive species projected to sustain populations within existing hotspots. On the other hand, within the eastern U.S., 62% of species will experience decreased suitability for abundant populations with climate change. This trend is consistent across five plant growth forms. Main Conclusions We produced species range maps and state-specific watch lists from these analyses, which can inform proactive regulation, monitoring, and management of invasive plants most likely to cause future ecological impacts. Additionally, areas we identify as becoming less suitable for abundant populations could be prioritized for restoration of climate-adapted native species. This research provides a first comprehensive assessment of risk from abundant plant invasions across the eastern U.S.

Diversity and Distributions↗
USGS2023

Macroscale analyses suggest invasive plant impacts depend more on the composition of invading plants than on environmental context

Aim Native biodiversity is threatened by the spread of non-native invasive species. Many studies demonstrate that invasions reduce local biodiversity but we lack an understanding of how impacts vary across environments at the macroscale. Using ~11,500 vegetation surveys from ecosystems across the United States, we quantified how the relationship between non-native plant cover and native plant diversity varied across different compositions of invading plants (measured by non-native plant richness and evenness) and environmental contexts (measured by productivity and human activity). Location Continental United States. Time Period Surveys from 1990s-present. Major Taxa Studied Terrestrial plant communities. Methods We fit mixed effects models to understand how native plant richness, diversity and evenness varied with non-native cover. We tested how this relationship varied when non-native cover interacted with non-native plant richness and evenness, and with productivity and human activity. Results Across the United States, communities with greater cover of non-native plants had lower native plant richness and diversity but higher evenness, suggesting rare native plants can be lost while dominant plants decline in abundance. The relationship between non-native cover and native community diversity varied with non-native plant richness and evenness but was not associated with productivity and human activity. Negative associations were strongest in areas with low non-native richness and evenness, characterizing plant communities that were invaded by a dominant non-native plant. Main Conclusions Non-native plant cover provides a first approximation of invasion impacts on native community diversity, but the magnitude of impact depended on non-native plant richness and evenness. Relationships between non-native cover and native diversity were consistent in strength across continental scale gradients of productivity and human activity. Therefore, at the macroscale, invasive plant impacts on native plant communities likely depend more on the characteristics of the invading plants, that is the presence of a dominant invader, than on the environmental context.

Global Ecology and Biogeography↗
USGS2023

Modeling habitat suitability across different levels of invasive plant abundance

Predicting where invasive plants are likely to spread and become abundant is critical for informing invasive plant management. Species distribution models are a key tool for informing the geography of invasion risk, but most distribution models are limited by their use of presence data, including no information on invader population abundance. In this study, we ask how habitat suitability varies for different levels of abundance for three invasive plants: stiltgrass ( Microstegium vimineum ), sericea lespedeza ( Lespedeza cuneata ), and privet ( Ligustrum sinense ). For each species, we used an ensemble distribution modeling approach to compare suitability for invasion estimated from subsets of point location data: all presences vs. locations with percent cover ≥ 1%, ≥ 5%, ≥ 10%, ≥ 25%, and ≥ 50%. For all species, the total area predicted as suitable for abundant populations was 32%–68% less than the area predicted as suitable for presence. For stiltgrass and sericea lespedeza, the area suitable for invasion decreased when predicted from higher levels of abundance, whereas for privet, suitable area was similar across abundance levels. Stiltgrass and sericea lespedeza are therefore likely to become highly abundant in a smaller portion of their ranges, while privet could become highly abundant anywhere it can establish at low abundance. Different environmental predictors explained suitability for presence versus abundance, suggesting the environmental niche associated with presence differs from that associated with high population abundance. Analyses of more species and growth forms are still needed, but our results combined with previous studies consistently show that fitting distribution models to point locations with ≥ 5–10% cover refines range maps and can produce a more targeted assessment of invasion risk.

Biological Invasions↗
USGS2023

The invasive plant data landscape: A synthesis of spatial data and applications for research and management in the United States

Context An increase in the number and availability of datasets cataloging invasive plant distributions offers opportunities to expand our understanding, monitoring, and management of invasives across spatial scales. These datasets, created using on-the-ground observations and modeling techniques, are made both for and by researchers and managers. Objectives The large number and variety of data types and associated datasets can be difficult to navigate, require high levels of data literacy, and can overwhelm the intended end-users. By providing a synthesis of available data types and datasets, this work may facilitate data understanding and use among researchers and managers. Methods We synthesize types of invasive plant distribution data sources, highlighting publicly available datasets and their potential applications and limitations for research and management. Results Eight data types and their potential applications for research and management are described. We also describe gaps in current invasive species distribution data usability and outline a path forward for improving the use of invasive plant data in future research and management. Conclusions Accessible and usable invasive plant spatial data are needed for developing landscape scale analysis and management plans. By synthesizing the invasive plant data available, with examples and limitations for application, this work will serve as a guide to facilitate appropriate and efficient data choices in current and future research and management.

Nevada↗
USGS2023

Combining local, landscape, and regional geographies to assess plant community vulnerability to invasion impact

Invasive species science has focused heavily on the invasive agent. However, management to protect native species also requires a proactive approach focused on resident communities and the features affecting their vulnerability to invasion impacts. Vulnerability is likely the result of factors acting across spatial scales, from local to regional, and it is the combined effects of these factors that will determine the magnitude of vulnerability. Here, we introduce an analytical framework that quantifies the scale-dependent impact of biological invasions on native richness from the shape of the native species–area relationship (SAR). We leveraged newly available, biogeographically extensive vegetation data from the U.S. National Ecological Observatory Network to assess plant community vulnerability to invasion impact as a function of factors acting across scales. We analyzed more than 1000 SARs widely distributed across the USA along environmental gradients and under different levels of non-native plant cover. Decreases in native richness were consistently associated with non-native species cover, but native richness was compromised only at relatively high levels of non-native cover. After accounting for variation in baseline ecosystem diversity, net primary productivity, and human modification, ecoregions that were colder and wetter were most vulnerable to losses of native plant species at the local level, while warmer and wetter areas were most susceptible at the landscape level. We also document how the combined effects of cross-scale factors result in a heterogeneous spatial pattern of vulnerability. This pattern could not be predicted by analyses at any single scale, underscoring the importance of accounting for factors acting across scales. Simultaneously assessing differences in vulnerability between distinct plant communities at local, landscape, and regional scales provided outputs that can be used to inform policy and management aimed at reducing vulnerability to the impact of plant invasions.

Ecological Applications↗
USGS2023

SPCIS: Standardized Plant Community with Introduced Status database

The movement of plant species across the globe exposes native communities to new species introductions. While introductions are pervasive, two aspects of variability underlie patterns and processes of biological invasions at macroecological scales. First, only a portion of introduced species become invaders capable of substantially impacting ecosystems. Second, species that do become invasive at one location may not be invasive in others; impacts depend on invader abundance and recipient species and conditions. Accounting for these phenomena is essential to accurately understand the patterns of plant invasion and explain the idiosyncratic results reflected in the literature on biological invasions. The lack of community-level richness and the abundance of data spanning broad scales and environmental conditions have until now hindered our understanding of invasions at a macroecological scale. To address this limitation, we leveraged quantitative surveys of plant communities in the USA and integrated and harmonized nine datasets into the Standardized Plant Community with Introduced Status (SPCIS) database. The database contains 14,056 unique taxa identified within 83,391 sampling units, of which 52.6% have at least one introduced species. The SPCIS database includes comparable information on plant species occurrence, abundance, and native status across the 50 U.S. States and Puerto Rico. SPCIS can be used to answer macro-scale questions about native plant communities and interactions with invasive plants. There are no copyright restrictions on the data, and we ask the users of this dataset to cite this paper, the respective paper(s) corresponding to the dataset sampling design (all references are provided in Data S1: Metadata S1: Class II-B-2), and the references described in Data S1: Metadata S1: Class III-B-4 as applicable to the dataset being utilized.

Ecology↗
USGS2022

Global environmental changes more frequently offset than intensify detrimental effects of biological invasions

Human-induced abiotic global environmental changes (GECs) and the spread of nonnative invasive species are rapidly altering ecosystems. Understanding the relative and interactive effects of invasion and GECs is critical for informing ecosystem adaptation and management, but this information has not been synthesized. We conducted a meta-analysis to investigate effects of invasions, GECs, and their combined influences on native ecosystems. We found 458 cases from 95 published studies that reported individual and combined effects of invasions and a GEC stressor, which was most commonly warming, drought, or nitrogen addition. We calculated standardized effect sizes (Hedges’ d ) for individual and combined treatments and classified interactions as additive (sum of individual treatment effects), antagonistic (smaller than expected), or synergistic (outside the expected range). The ecological effects of GECs varied, with detrimental effects more likely with drought than the other GECs. Invasions were more strongly detrimental, on average, than GECs. Invasion and GEC interactions were mostly antagonistic, but synergistic interactions occurred in >25% of cases and mostly led to more detrimental outcomes for ecosystems. While interactive effects were most often smaller than expected from individual invasion and GEC effects, synergisms were not rare and occurred across ecological responses from the individual to the ecosystem scale. Overall, interactions between invasions and GECs were typically no worse than the effects of invasions alone, highlighting the importance of managing invasions locally as a crucial step toward reducing harm from multiple global changes.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences↗
USGS2021

Translational invasion ecology: Bridging research and practice to address one of the greatest threats to biodiversity

Effective natural resource management and policy is contingent on information generated by research. Conversely, the applicability of research depends on whether it is responsive to the needs and constraints of resource managers and policy makers. However, many scientific fields including invasion ecology suffer from a disconnect between research and practice. Despite strong socio-political imperatives, evidenced by extensive funding dedicated to addressing invasive species, the pairing of invasion ecology with stakeholder needs to support effective management and policy is lacking. As a potential solution, we propose translational invasion ecology (TIE). As an extension of translational ecology, as a framework to increase collaboration among scientists, practitioners, and policy makers to reduce negative impacts of invasive species. As an extension of translational ecology, TIE is an approach that embodies an intentional and inclusive process in which researchers, stakeholders, and decision makers collaborate to develop and implement ecological research via joint consideration of the ecological, sociological, economic, and/or political contexts in order to improve invasive species management. TIE ideally results in improved outcomes as well as shared benefits between researchers and managers. We delineate the steps of our proposed TIE approach and describe successful examples of ongoing TIE projects from the US and internationally. We suggest practical ways to begin incorporating TIE into research and management practices, including supporting boundary-spanning organizations and activities, expanding networks, sharing translational experiences, and measuring outcomes. We find that there is a need for strengthened boundary spanning, as well as funding and recognition for advancing translational approaches. As climate change and globalization exacerbate invasive species impacts, TIE provides a promising approach to generate actionable ecological research while improving outcomes of invasive species management and policy decisions.

Biological Invasions↗
USGS2020

Adjusting the lens of invasion biology to focus on the impacts of climate-driven range shifts

As Earth’s climate rapidly changes, species range shifts are considered key to species persistence. However, some range-shifting species will alter community structure and ecosystem processes. By adapting existing invasion risk assessment frameworks, we can identify characteristics shared with high-impact introductions and thus predict potential impacts. There are fundamental differences between introduced and range-shifting species, primarily shared evolutionary histories between range shifters and their new community. Nevertheless, impacts can occur via analogous mechanisms, such as wide dispersal, community disturbance and low biotic resistance. As ranges shift in response to climate change, we have an opportunity to develop plans to facilitate advantageous movements and limit those that are problematic.

Nature Climate Change↗
USGS2020

Nuisance Neonatives Guidelines for Assessing Range-Shifting Species

Native species will need to shift their ranges northward and upslope to keep pace with climate change in the Northeast U.S. However, this may cause some range-shifting species to have undesirable consequences in their expanded range. We provide a framework to identify the likelihood that a range-shifting species will become problematic and offer suggestions to minimize impacts from these species in the recipient habitat.

Report↗