# Seven actions to improve European biosecurity policy on ants

Olivier Blight, Wolfgang Rabitsch

► To cite this version:

Olivier Blight, Wolfgang Rabitsch. Seven actions to improve European biosecurity policy on ants. Biological Conservation, 2024, 299, pp.110818. 10.1016/j.biocon.2024.110818. hal-04790874

HAL Id: hal-04790874

https://amu.hal.science/hal-04790874v1

Submitted on 9 Jan 2025

HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access
archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci-
entific research documents, whether they are pub-
lished or not. The documents may come from
teaching and research institutions in France or
abroad, or from public or private research centers.

L'archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est
destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents
scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non,
émanant des établissements d'enseignement et de
recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires
publics ou privés.

<figure><img src="image_1.png" /></figure>

Distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License
<figure><img src="image_2.png" /></figure>

# Seven actions to improve European biosecurity policy on ants

Olivier Blight<sup>a,*</sup>, Wolfgang Rabitsch<sup>b</sup>

## ABSTRACT

Invasive ants are among the alien species causing the greatest ecological, economic and health damage. The European Union has added four ant species to their list of alien species of Union concern in 2022, based on legislation in force since 2015. This Regulation constitutes a significant progress, but we believe that several actions are still needed to overcome and fill remaining policy and implementation gaps. Managing invasive ant species with efficient strategies can avert their severe ecological and economic impacts. Resulting from collaboration between ecologists, legislators, and practitioners, we propose seven actions that will enhance the prevention, surveillance, and management of invasive ants in the EU. We recommend: (1) prohibiting the intentional introduction of all alien ants for commercial and personal purposes, except in authorized cases; (2) establishing an Invasive Ants Prevention Plan; (3) cooperating with countries at points of exit; (4) establishing an Invasive Ants Management Plan; (5) building a network of ant taxonomists to ensure rapid identification; (6) raising awareness among the public and stakeholders; and (7) creating a dedicated and secure 'Emergency Fund for Invasive Alien Species' to support the rapid response mechanism. For all actions, we provide metrics to evaluate their implementation and success. By combining our own empirical experience, the situation in other countries, and expert consultations, we believe our recommendations offer a pragmatic and achievable path to improving the European Union's resilience to this growing threat. Although the actions are developed for ants, they can be extended to other invasive species.

## 1. Introduction

The evidence that we are facing a major biodiversity crisis, widely considered Earth's sixth mass extinction, appears overwhelming (Cowie et al., 2022). Biological invasions, defined as the process by which species are transported and introduced outside their natural range, either intentionally or unintentionally by human activities, to new regions where they may become established and spread (Roy et al., 2024), are one of the main drivers of this crisis. The recent IPBES report has confirmed the major challenges posed by invasive alien species and their control, noting that 60 % of global extinctions have been caused, either solely or in combination with other drivers, by invasive alien species (Roy et al., 2024). Invasive alien species are a subset of alien species that have become established, spread, and cause harmful impacts on ecosystems, and often on human populations as well. To mitigate their current and future environmental, economic and/or health impacts, the European Union (EU) adopted a regulation in 2014 to make the management of invasive alien species a priority for Member states, and particularly invasive ants, which are among the alien species causing the greatest ecological, economic, and health damage globally.

Invasive alien ant species have been recognized as a major threat to ecosystems worldwide, with significant and multifaceted ecological, economic, and social impacts (Gruber et al., 2022). One of the most

severe consequences of invasive ants is their effect on biodiversity (Siddiqui et al., 2021). These ants often establish dominant populations in new environments. They are highly competitive, outcompeting and often eliminating native ants and other invertebrates, causing harm to vertebrates and leading to cascading effects on ecosystems. The decline in native ant populations affects other organisms that depend on them for food or ecological functions, such as soil aeration and seed dispersal. Their ability to dominate new environments, displace native species, and disrupt ecological processes makes them a particularly challenging group of invasive species to manage. While the most severe impacts have been caused by a small number of species, a recent review emphasized a considerable number of lesser-known species that have had significant environmental impacts and may be overlooked in current prevention priorities (Gruber et al., 2022). Invasive ants thus represent a major challenge for the current and future conservation of biodiversity and the functioning of ecosystems.

A recent study estimated total economic costs of $51.93 billion since 1930 for 12 ant species in 27 countries, of which more than 80 % were associated with just two species, *Solenopsis invicta* (the red imported fire ant) and *Wasmannia europunctata* (the little fire ant) (Angulo et al., 2022). However, the recent establishments and spread of these two notoriously problematic invasive ant species have demonstrated persistent biosecurity policy and implementation gaps in Europe. The

<footnote><sup>a</sup> IMBE, Avignon university, Aix Marseille university, CNRS, IRD, Avignon, France</footnote>

<footnote><sup>b</sup> Environment Agency Austria, Vienna, Austria</footnote>

<footnote>* Corresponding author.</footnote>

<footnote>E-mail addresses: olivier.blight@univ-avignon.fr (O. Blight), wolfgang.rabitsch@umweltbundesamt.at (W. Rabitsch).</footnote>
little fire ant was recently found to have established in multiple European locations, 2018 in Spain (Espadaler et al., 2018) and 2022 in Cyprus (Demetriou et al., 2022) and France (Blight et al., 2023). An established population of the red imported fire ant was found for the first time in Europe in Sicily in 2023 (Menchetti et al., 2023).

## 2. A recent regulation

In an attempt to prevent future invasive alien ant invasions and to mitigate impacts, the European Commission in 2022 added four ant species (Solenopsis invicta, S. geminata, S. richteri and Wasmannia auropunctata) to the list of alien species of concern for the European Union (the “Union list”), making them subject to strict legislation at the European scale (European Union, 2014). This Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014, in force since 2015, prohibits the intentional import, sale, purchase, use and release into the environment of listed species. Along with these prohibitions, within 18 months of the adoption of the Union list, Member States shall establish a surveillance system qualified to detect new incursions and within 36 months shall develop pathway action plans including measures to prevent the unintentional introduction and spread within a Member state. In case of a new detection, Member States shall attempt eradication within three months, or control if this rapid response fails.

The aim of this legislation is to prevent and mitigate the negative impacts of invasive alien species on the environment, economy, and health within the EU. The Regulation requires that a risk assessment be carried out to demonstrate the potential impact on the environment and economy and in doing so uses the concept of a prohibited list of species banned from trade and for which different management options, depending on their invasion status, apply. The Regulation emphasizes the cost-efficiency of prevention, early detection and rapid response to newly invasive alien species to restrict their arrival, establishment and spread in the EU.

## 3. Policy and implementation need progress

Although this legislation is a major step forward, there are some policy and implementation gaps that limit the effectiveness of preventing introduction, establishment and spread of invasive alien species. This has been demonstrated recently by the detection of, and subsequent responses to, multiple invasive alien ant incursions. The recent detection of *W. auropunctata* and *S. invicta* in Europe has exemplified the challenges in responding to invasions due to the absence of a clear strategy at the Member State level, particularly for details like who is responsible and who pays. How to improve detection and management are key points that still need to be improved. For example, although interception data may not provide an early warning system for invasive alien species because not all species are intercepted, higher interception rates have been correlated with a higher invasion probability, indicating that such data has informational value for biosecurity authorities and risk assessments (Caley et al., 2015). However, because ants are not subject to strict legislation, they rarely appear in national or international lists of intercepted harmful organisms in Europe. The absence of this information in Europe has consequences for prevention, including the identification of the origins of introduction, the means by which they are transported, and their points of entry.

No existing analysis has precisely evaluated the reasons why these two species went undetected for several years in Europe and why a rapid response was not established in the months following their official detection reducing chances for successful eradication. We assume this is partly due to a lack of awareness among the public and stakeholders and a lack of integrated governance. People reported stings of *W. auropunctata* for several years in France, mainly to their doctors, but because there was no reporting protocol, ant specialists were informed only at least 10 years after the species had established. The execution of the rapid response mechanism once the species is notified to the

European Commission, as stipulated in the EU legislation, also suffered from implementation gaps. More than two years passed between the official detection and the beginning of eradication measures for the little fire ant in France. A similar situation is occurring in Sicily for the management of the red imported fire ant. Proactive identification of relevant authorities, stakeholders, and sources of funding would have reduced the critically short window of opportunity to implement the mandatory rapid response. Moreover, scientists should notify their national authorities without delay once identification is confirmed, and national authorities should promptly inform the EU.

Facing the current situation, we believe that a series of actions at each stage of the invasion process would help to address and fill policy and implementation gaps. Resulting from collaboration between ecologists, legislators, and practitioners in the field of biodiversity conservation and ecosystem management, we here propose seven actions that will enhance the prevention, surveillance, and management of invasive alien ants in the EU (Fig. 1 – Table 1). These actions will provide tools for stakeholders to manage invasive alien ants more efficiently by reducing their introduction, establishment, spread, and ultimately impacts on EU biodiversity. The first three actions will help to minimize introduction of invasive alien ants while the remaining four actions will help to improve detection and to support the rapid response mechanism as stipulated in EU legislation. Moreover, some of these actions are not unique to invasive ants and offer potential improvements to existing policies for other invasive alien species.

(1) **Prohibiting the intentional introduction of all alien ants.** The intentional introduction of all alien ants for commercial and personal purposes should be completely prohibited, except for authorized cases (e.g. for research). Facing the major threat posed by a large variety of invasive alien ants in Europe, we recommend a zero-tolerance policy. This approach simplifies the administrative requirements – no risk assessment is needed for each species to be added to the list of Union concern – and provides clear guidelines for the public and businesses. This approach implies the shutdown of the ant trade from outside the EU, which may become one of the main future pathways of introduction in Europe (Gippet and Bertelsmeier, 2021). Ants are increasingly popular as pets, but we believe that native ants could serve this educational and fun hobby and business as well. In addition, however, we propose to prohibit the trade of ants outside their native range within Europe as well, to reduce risks of European ants to become invasive within the continent. The Regulation allows Member states to list species of concern for their territory. This creates two levels of legislation: one at the EU level, which bans all species not naturally present in Europe, and another at the Member state level, which allows for country-specific trade restrictions, e.g. for species not naturally present in their territory. Setting trade regulations in the EU may not impact other parts of the world that serve as sources of alien ant introductions. However, while completely avoiding the introduction of alien ants into the EU via the official online market is likely unrealistic, we believe it will help to prevent or reduce future introductions into the EU.

The success of this action could be evaluated by monitoring which species are for sale on the official online market. This evaluation is feasible, as the same methodology employed by Gippet and Bertelsmeier (2021) could be used. Success may be achieved if a significant number of alien ants are no longer for sale.

The current approach of listing prohibited species struggles with species-rich groups with identical (or similar) impacts, e.g. all American crayfish in Europe transmitting the crayfish plague, or invasive alien ants that have proved negative environmental, economic or health impacts outside Europe. On the other hand, a permitted list of species, including species that are approved for certain activities suffers from similar limitations. Although such a policy would enable authorities to oversee which species are allowed, creating and maintaining such a list requires significant effort, including risk assessments of single species and constant monitoring, not much different from current resource-intensive practices for a list of prohibited species (Kumschick et al.,
<figure><img src="image_3.png" /><figcaption>**Fig. 1.** The seven proposed actions to be implemented within the framework of current European regulations on invasive alien ant species along the invasion process from pre-border to species detection in the invaded area. In green and orange actions that can be partly or fully extended to other invasive species, respectively. (For interpretation of the references to colour in this figure legend, the reader is referred to the web version of this article.)</figcaption></figure>

<caption>**Table 1**</caption>

The seven proposed actions to be implemented within the framework of current EU legislation on invasive alien ant species, outlining the expected achievements, level of implementation, difficulty of implementation, potential for extension to other invasive species and metrics to evaluate action implementation and efficiency.

<table><thead><tr><td>Actions to be implemented</td><td>Expected achievements</td><td>Implementation level</td><td>Difficulty to implement</td><td>Extended to other species</td><td>Metrics to measure action implementation</td><td>Success achieved if</td></tr></thead><tbody><tr><td>(1) Prohibition of intentional introduction</td><td>Limit accidental release in the EU</td><td>EU</td><td>Moderate</td><td>Partly</td><td>Number of alien ants for sale</td><td>The number of alien ants for sale decreases</td></tr><tr><td>(2) Invasive Ants Prevention Plan</td><td>Identification of introduction patways to limit risks of incursions</td><td>EU and national</td><td>Easy</td><td>Partly</td><td>Plan elaboration</td><td>The number of interceptions and detections decreases</td></tr><tr><td>(3) Cooperation at points of exit</td><td>Limit risks of accidental transport</td><td>EU</td><td>Hard</td><td>Yes</td><td>Number of partnership with exporting countries</td><td>The number of interceptions at points of entry decreases</td></tr><tr><td>(4) Invasive Ants Management Plan</td><td>Allowing prompt action (eradication/control)</td><td>EU and national</td><td>Easy</td><td>Partly</td><td>Plan elaboration</td><td>The time lag between official detection and action decreases</td></tr><tr><td>(5) Network of ant taxonomists</td><td>Ensure a correct and rapid identification</td><td>EU and national</td><td>Easy</td><td>–</td><td>Number of experts</td><td>Expert consultation and contribution to new detections</td></tr><tr><td>(6) Raising awareness</td><td>Improve detection and reporting process</td><td>EU and national</td><td>Easy</td><td>Yes</td><td>Number of training courses, staff involved, media coverage</td><td>The time lag between detection and estimated establishment date decreases</td></tr><tr><td>(7) Emergency fund</td><td>Allowing prompt action for eradication</td><td>EU</td><td>Moderate</td><td>Yes</td><td>Amount of money allocated</td><td>The time lag between official detection and action decreases</td></tr></tbody></table>

2024). Moreover, once a species is included in a list, permitted or prohibited, it can be challenging to change its assignment, even if new scientific evidence suggests that the change is warranted. In practice, the effectiveness of any list for regulating invasive alien species depends on the quality of the list, its flexibility, and the ability to adapt to emerging threats. A combination of permitted and prohibited lists to create a more balanced and dynamic approach to invasive species management could also be adopted. This is the case for plants in New Zealand which has a list of unwanted organisms, which includes prohibited species, and a list of permitted species under its Biosecurity Act (Hulme, 2020).

(2) **Establishing an Invasive Ants Prevention Plan.** The unintentional introduction of ants should be minimized by developing a dedicated Invasive Ants Prevention Plan at the European or EU level, led by the European Commission or a competent authority, similar to the Biosecurity Plan for invasive ants in the Pacific (Pacific Ecological

Security Conference, 2022). Along with a Biosecurity plan, a dedicated website gathering all relevant information should be created on the basis of the Pacific Invasive Ant Toolkit (www.piat.org.nz). As part of this, Member States should adopt national biosecurity plans that describe measures to be taken at points of entry to prevent invasive ant introductions and permanent surveillance and monitoring activities in these areas (e.g. visual and lure inspections). Because alien ants are mainly introduced into Europe through the trade of live plants, and probably the transport of sea containers (Rabitsch and Blight, 2021), the role of biosecurity and border inspection authorities must be considered, although currently ants are not considered as “harmful organisms” within the European plant health legislation and regulations. One consequence of this current situation is that in the EU, we do not know much about the quantity or quality of ant interceptions, contrary to other continents, where such data are available and used for scientific
analyses to feedback into improvement of biosecurity measures (Bertelsmeier et al., 2018). The metrics to evaluate the implementation of this action are the elaboration of this plan at the EU level and its dissemination at the Member state level. Success may be achieved if a decrease of ant interceptions is observed.

In 2023, the European Food and Safety Authority (EFSA) provided a pest categorization for *S. invicta*, concluding that this species satisfies the criteria for it to be regarded as a potential Union quarantine pest (EFSA, 2023). There is no benefit and indeed no desire to generate redundancies or duplications in legislation, and we cannot recommend which policy is better suited to tackle invasive alien species that are introduced with plants or plant materials. Although synergies and redundancies need to be worked out in more detail, and may differ between Member States, particularly the legal basis of actions, we recommend a very close cooperation between the well-established plant health sector with nature conservation authorities. One basic requirement would be the obligatory documentation of intercepted and detected alien ants by border authorities, regardless if ants are officially declared “harmful” or not. We further recommend that all samples be sent to ant taxonomist for identification.

(3) **Cooperation at points of exit.** To reduce the risk of unintentional ant introductions as contaminants with plants and commodities, or as stowaways in containers and vehicles, increased cooperation with countries at points of exit is recommended. New Zealand is probably the most proactive jurisdiction in preventing alien species incursions, with collaboration extending to four ports in three surrounding countries. The system, equivalent to the quarantine activities carried out in New Zealand, involves the cleaning and treatment of containers in the country of origin to remove contaminants and exclude pests (Nendick, 2008). This system proved very effective, producing a 98.5 % reduction in ant contamination rates of incoming goods in its first 12 months of implementation. The system reduced the levels of biosecurity-related contaminants and pests, reduced inspection activities and freed up staff for other essential tasks. It also significantly reduced costs for importers, speeded up container clearance, eased congestion in New Zealand ports, with containers leaving port more quickly, and increased exports to the Pacific Islands. We do not know exactly which export countries are currently most relevant for the accidental transport of ants to the EU, and such an analysis could be part of the aforementioned European Invasive Ants Prevention Plan. But previous analyses demonstrated that the risk is directly related to volume of trade, so the highest trading countries have the highest risks. Trade via rail and road seems more difficult to control, as there is not always a specific point of entry into the EU. A specific evaluation of the potential for rail and road as a means of ant introduction is lacking and needs to be made. The metrics to evaluate the implementation of this action may be the number of partnerships established with exporting countries. As for action 2, success may be achieved if the number of interceptions decreases.

(4) **Establishing an Invasive Ants Management Plan.** Alongside an Invasive Ants Prevention Plan, a Management Plan should be established gathering measures to adopt during transport (e.g. decks of ships) and at points of entry. The easiest method that can be applied even by non-ant specialists is the use of lures to monitor the presence of ants. We recommend that ports of entry and exit, but also means of transport should be sterile zones, where every ant species detected are extirpated. A Management Plan is also needed to gather information on methods available to eradicate or control specific species or groups of species once they are established. Dedicated management notes have been written for *W. auropunctata* and fire ants for Europe and describe available techniques for their eradication and control. This approach should be extended to include other notorious invasive alien ants and incorporated into a comprehensive Management Plan. The fact that not all management options are available in all Member States, due to national legislations, e.g. on the use of certain insecticides, needs consideration. The metrics to evaluate the implementation of this action are the elaboration of this plan at the EU level and its dissemination at the

Member state level. Success of this action may be achieved if the time lag between official detection and action—whether it involves eradication or control—is reduced.

(5) **A network of ant taxonomists.** Ant identification can be difficult, but reliable diagnosis is essential from a legal and a scientific point of view. Similar to the European Reference Laboratories in Plant Health legislation (currently there are five such Reference Laboratories in place for different plant pest categories), a network of ant taxonomists should be created in the EU, supporting Member States to achieve the rapid identification of specimens. Responsibilities of such a Reference Laboratory could also include tasks described in the previous action. The metrics to evaluate the implementation of the action could be the number of experts identified and willing to be part of the network. Success could be achieved if the experts are consulted and if this contributes to the detection of new infested areas or species in the EU.

(6) **Raising awareness.** Raising awareness of the impacts of invasive ants to plant health inspectors and biosecurity staff of Member States, employees in botanical gardens and plant nurseries, to the public and tourists and other stakeholders is needed; as is support and training of biosecurity staff in surveillance and monitoring at points of exit and entry. This could be done by an accredited, new or existing (see previous point) European institution and by Member States, the latter maybe allowing to resolve the challenges of 24 different official languages in the EU. Online e-learning is a promising way to provide environmental training, and may constitute an efficient tool to increase awareness, risk perception and biosecurity behavior (Shannon et al., 2020). The media has also a role to play in raising awareness and, therefore, needs to be rigorous in the quality of the information it delivers to the public (Wong, 2024). The metrics to evaluate the implementation of the action could include the number of training courses, the number of staff involved, media coverage, or social media analytics. Success may be achieved if the time lag between detection and the estimated establishment date decreases.

(7) **Emergency fund.** The purpose of this fund is to overcome administrative barriers and provide rapid support for prompt action. To support the rapid response mechanism as stipulated in the EU legislation and to guarantee immediate action against species on the Union list, a dedicated and secured “Emergency Fund for Invasive Alien Species” is needed. Money can be devoted from the EU Solidarity Fund, which is set up to respond to natural disasters and public health emergencies, and which has mobilized over 7b € since 2002. It has been demonstrated recently that biological invasions are as costly as natural hazards (Turbelin et al., 2023). While large-scale and long-term management of invasive species can become truly expensive (Angulo et al., 2022), the aim of such an emergency fund is to cover immediate expenses only, e.g. within the three-month period after the early detection notification as foreseen in the Regulation. The success and benefits of rapid response has been repeatedly proven (Hoffmann et al., 2016). We believe that the availability of a dedicated “Emergency Fund for Invasive Alien Species”, open for all rapid response activities against invasive alien species on the “Union list”, would greatly benefit the efforts to reduce impacts from invasive species as required by policy goals in Europe and worldwide (Roy et al., 2024).

The metrics to evaluate the implementation of the action could include the amount of money allocated to this fund and its trend—ideally increasing or stable—and the money used for rapid response, with the trend ideally decreasing. Success may be achieved if the time lag between official detection and action, as stated in Action 4, decreases.

## 4. Conclusion

Managing invasive ant species with prevention, early-detection and management strategies can avert severe ecological and economic impacts. In the face of the global threat posed by invasive alien species, enhancing biosecurity is becoming increasingly important, as it is
directly tied to a country's ability to prevent invasions (Faulkner et al., 2020). This can be achieved by Horizon scanning that has become a valuable tool for prioritizing invasive species management and prevention (e.g. Lieurance et al., 2023; Hulme, 2024), but also by implementing new measures to existing policies. Biosecurity must be addressed at least on a regional scale (Faulkner et al., 2020) and ideally on a global scale (Hulme, 2021). Strengthening European biosecurity is therefore a crucial first step toward a more comprehensive global approach to managing invasive alien species. We here suggest seven actions to improve biosecurity and counteract the potentially significant negative impacts of invasive ants on biodiversity, human health and the economy in the EU. We are aware that policies that work in other parts of the world may not be effective in the EU, but they can certainly serve as examples to help develop a cost-efficient European biosecurity strategy that takes into account the specificities of the EU. Although this framework was designed for invasive alien ants, most of the actions apply for other taxonomic groups as well. For example, even if its implementation may be challenging, cooperation with countries that export to Europe should not be limited to ants but should apply to all invasive organisms. Similarly, an emergency fund would be relevant for all invasive alien organisms. By combining our own empirical experience, recent developments in other countries, and expert consultations, we believe that our recommendations offer a pragmatic and achievable path to improving resilience to this growing threat on biodiversity in the EU.

## Funding

This work was partly funded by the European Commission through the contract with IUCN No 07.0202/2020/834681/SER/ENV.D.2 "Technical and scientific support in relation to the implementation of Regulation 1143/20147 on invasive alien species". The views expressed in the paper belong to the authors.

## CRediT authorship contribution statement

**Olivier Blight:** Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Conceptualization.
**Wolfgang Rabitsch:** Writing – review & editing, Writing – original draft, Methodology, Investigation, Conceptualization.

## Declaration of competing interest

Authors declare that they have no competing interests.

## Acknowledgments

We thank Franck Courchamp, Ben Hoffmann, Bea Maas and John Wilson for their valuable comments on an early version of the paper.

## Data availability

No data was used for the research described in the article.

## References

Angulo, E., Hoffmann, B.D., Ballesteros-Mejia, L., Taheri, A., Balzani, P., Bang, A., Renault, D., Cordonnier, M., Bellard, C., Diagne, C., Ahmed, D.A., Watari, Y., Courchamp, F., 2022. Economic costs of invasive alien ants worldwide. Biol. Invasions 2022, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10530-022-02791-W.

Bertelsmeier, C., Liebhold, A.M., Brockerhoff, E.G., Ward, D., Keller, L., States, U., Zealand, N., 2018. Recurrent bridgehead effects accelerate global alien ant spread. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A. 11-6. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1801990115.

Blight, O., Thomas, T., Jourdan, H., Bichaton, J.Y., Colindre, L., Galkowski, C., 2023. Detection and early impacts of France's first established population of the little fire ant, *Wasmannia auropunctata*. Biol. Invasions. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10530-023-03218-W.

Caley, P., Ingram, R., De Barro, P., 2015. Entry of exotic insects into Australia: does border interception count match incursion risk? Biol. Invasions 17, 1087–1094.

Cowie, R.H., Bouchet, P., Fontaine, B., 2022. The sixth mass extinction: fact, fiction or speculation? Biol. Rev. 97, 640–663. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.12816.

Demetriou, J., Georgiadis, C., Roy, H., Martinou, A., Borowiec, L., Salata, S., 2022. One of the World's worst invasive alien species *Wasmannia auropunctata* (Hymenoptera: Formicidae) detected in Cyprus. Sociobiology 69 (4), e8536.

EFSA (EFSA Panel on Plant Health), 2023. Scientific opinion on the pest categorisation of *Solenopsis invicta*. EFSA J. 21 (5), 7998.

Espadaler, X., Pradera, C., Santana, J.A., 2018. The first outdoor-nesting population of *Wasmannia auropunctata* in continental Europe (Hymenoptera, Formicidae). *Iberomyrmex* 10, 5–12.

European Union (EU), 2014. Regulation (EU) No 1143/2014 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 October 2014 on the Prevention and Management of the Introduction and Spread of Invasive Alien Species.

Faulkner, K.T., Robertson, M.P., Wilson, J.R.U., 2020. Stronger regional biosecurity is essential to prevent hundreds of harmful biological invasions. Glob. Chang. Biol. 26, 2449–2462. https://doi.org/10.1111/gcb.15006.

Gippet, J.M.W., Bertelsmeier, C., 2021. Invasiveness is linked to greater commercial success in the global pet trade. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. 118. https://doi.org/10.1073/PNAS.2016337118.

Gruber, M.A.M., Santoro, D., Cooling, M., Lester, P.L., Hoffmann, B.D., Boser, C., Lach, L., 2022. A global review of socioeconomic and environmental impacts of ants reveals new insights for risk assessment. Ecol. Appl. 32, e2577. https://doi.org/10.1002/eap.2577.

Hoffmann, B.D., Luque, G.M., Bellard, C., Holmes, N.D., Donlan, C.J., 2016. Improving invasive ant eradication as a conservation tool: a review. Biol. Conserv. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biocon.2016.03.036.

Hulme, P.E., 2020. Plant invasions in New Zealand: global lessons in prevention, eradication and control. Biol. Invasions 22, 1539–1562. https://doi.org/10.1007/S10530-020-02224-6/FIGURES/8.

Hulme, P.E., 2021. Advancing one biosecurity to address the pandemic risks of biological invasions. BioScience 71, 708–721. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biab019.

Hulme, P.E., 2024. Trouble on the Horizon: Anticipating Biological Invasions through Futures Thinking. Reviews, Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13149.

Kumschick, S., Fernandez Winzer, L., McCulloch-Jones, E.J., Chetty, D., Fried, J., Govender, T., Potgieter, L.J., Rapetsoa, M.C., Richardson, D.M., van Velden, J., Van der Colff, D., Miza, S., U Wilson, J.R., U, J.R., 2024. Considerations for developing and implementing a safe list for alien taxa. Bioscience 74, 97–108. https://doi.org/10.1093/biosci/biad118.

Lieurance, D., Canavan, S., Behringer, D.C., et al., 2023. Identifying invasive speices threats, pathways, and impacts to improve biosecurity. Ecosphere. https://doi.org/10.1002/ecs2.4711.

Menchetti, M., Schifani, E., Alicata, A., Cardador, L., Sbrega, E., Toro-Delgado, E., Vila, R., 2023. The invasive ant *Solenopsis invicta* is established in Europe. Curr. Biol. 33, R896–R897. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.CUB.2023.07.036.

Nendick, D., 2008. Win-win from offshore container management programme. *Biosecurity* 84, 12.

Pacific Ecological Security Conference, 2022. Biosecurity plan for invasive ants in the Pacific. In: Pacific Ecological Security Conference (PESC). Zenodo, Koror, Palau. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7683199.

Rabitsch, W., Blight, O., 2021. The Threat Posed by Alien Ants to EU Agriculture and the Potential for Phytosanitary Measures to Prevent Importation (Technical note prepared by IUCN for the European Commission).

Roy, H.E., Pauchard, A., Stoett, P.J., et al., 2024. Curbing the major and growing threats from invasive alien species is urgent and achievable. Nat. Ecol. Evol. 8, 1216–1223. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-024-02412-w.

Shannon, C., Stebbing, P.D., Quinn, C.H., Warren, D.A., Dunn, A.M., 2020. The effectiveness of e-learning on biosecurity practice to slow the spread of invasive alien species. Biol. Invasions 22, 2559–2571. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-022-0271-z.

Siddiqui, A., Bamisile, B.S., Khan, M.M., et al., 2021. Impact of invasive ant species on native fauna across similar habitats under global environmental changes. Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res. 28, 54362–54382. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11356-021-15961-5.

Turbelin, A.J., Cuthbert, R.N., Essl, F., Haubrock, P.J., Ricciardi, A., Courchamp, F., 2023. Biological invasions are as costly as natural hazards. Perspect. Ecol. Conserv. 21, 143–150. https://doi.org/10.1016/J.PECON.2023.03.002.

Wong, K.L., 2024. Misrepresentation of invasive species in the mass media with images of unrelated organisms. Conserv. Biol. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.14382.