UNLABELLED: Community science (also often referred to as citizen science) provides a unique opportunity to address questions beyond the scope of other research methods whilst simultaneously engaging communities in the scientific process. This leads to broad educational benefits, empowers people, and can increase public awareness of societally relevant issues such as the biodiversity crisis. As such, community science has become a favourable framework for researching alien species where data on the presence, absence, abundance, phenology, and impact of species is important in informing management decisions. However, uncertainties arising at different stages can limit the interpretation of data and lead to projects failing to achieve their intended outcomes. Focusing on alien species centered community science projects, we identified key research questions and the relevant uncertainties that arise during the process of developing the study design, for example, when collecting the data and during the statistical analyses. Additionally, we assessed uncertainties from a linguistic perspective, and how the communication stages among project coordinators, participants and other stakeholders can alter the way in which information may be interpreted. We discuss existing methods for reducing uncertainty and suggest further solutions to improve data reliability. Further, we make suggestions to reduce the uncertainties that emerge at each project step and provide guidance and recommendations that can be readily applied in practice. Reducing uncertainties is essential and necessary to strengthen the scientific and community outcomes of community science, which is of particular importance to ensure the success of projects aimed at detecting novel alien species and monitoring their dynamics across space and time. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s10530-022-02858-8.

Belgian Biodiversity Platform Département du Milieu Naturel et Agricole Service Public de Wallonie Avenue Maréchal Juin 23 5030 Gembloux Belgium

Centre for Environmental Policy Imperial College London Silwood Park Campus Buckhurst Road Ascot SL5 7PY UK

Centre for Invasion Biology Department of Botany and Zoology Stellenbosch University Stellenbosch South Africa

CESAM Centre for Environmental and Marine Studies Department of Biology University of Aveiro Campus Universitário de Santiago 3810 193 Aveiro Portugal

Department of Biology University of Florence Sesto Fiorentino FI Italy

Department of Biology University of Fribourg Chemin du Musée 15 1700 Fribourg Switzerland

Department of Life Sciences and Systems Biology University of Turin 10123 Turin Italy

Faculty of Agriculture and Environment Department of Aquaculture and Fisheries Agricultural University of Tirana Koder Kamez Tirane Albania

Global Change Macroecology Group Department of Botany and Biodiversity Research University Vienna Rennweg 14 1030 Vienna Austria

Institute for Plant Protection and Environment Belgrade Serbia

Institute of Botany Czech Academy of Sciences 252 43 Průhonice Czech Republic

Institute of Ecology and Evolution University of Edinburgh Edinburgh EH9 3JT UK

IUCN SSC Invasive Species Specialist Group Rome Italy

Joint Research Centre European Commission Ispra Italy

Meise Botanic Garden Meise Belgium

Ovidius University of Constanta Al Universitatii nr 1 Corp B 900470 Constanta Romania

Research Institute for Nature and Forest Herman Teirlinckgebouw Havenlaan 88 bus 73 1000 Brussels Belgium

UK Centre for Ecology and Hydrology Benson Lane Crowmarsh Gifford OX10 8BB UK

Zobrazit více v PubMed

Aceves-Bueno E, Adeleye AS, Feraud M, Huang Y, Tao M, Yang Y, Anderson SE. The accuracy of citizen science data: a quantitative review. The Bull Ecol Soc Am. 2017;98(4):278–290. doi: 10.1002/bes2.1336. DOI

Adriaens T, Gomez G, Maes D. Invasion history, habitat preferences and phenology of the invasive ladybird Harmonia axyridis in Belgium. Biocontrol. 2008;53:69–88. doi: 10.1007/s10526-007-9137-6. DOI

Adriaens T, Sutton-Croft M, Owen K, Brosens D, van Valkenburg J, Kilbey D, Groom Q, Ehmig C, Thürkow F, Van Hende P, Schneider K. Trying to Engage the Crowd in Recording Invasive Alien Species in Europe: Experiences from Two Smartphone Applications in Northwest Europe. 2015 doi: 10.3391/mbi.2015.6.2.12. DOI

Aebischer T, Ibrahim T, Hickisch R, Furrer RD, Leuenberger C, Wegmann D. Apex predators decline after an influx of pastoralists in former Central African Republic hunting zones. Biol Cons. 2020;241:108326. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108326. DOI

Azzou AK, S., Singer, L., Aebischer, T., Caduff, M., Wolf, B., & Wegmann, D. A sparse observation model to quantify species distributions and their overlap in space and time. Ecography. 2021;44(6):928–940. doi: 10.1111/ecog.05411. DOI

Altwegg R, Nichols JD. Occupancy models for citizen-science data. Methods Ecol Evol. 2019;10(1):8–21. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13090. DOI

Austen GE, Bindemann M, Griffiths RA, Roberts DL. Species identification by experts and non-experts: comparing images from field guides. Sci Rep. 2016;6(1):33634. doi: 10.1038/srep33634. PubMed DOI PMC

Baker E, Jeger MJ, Mumford JD, Brown N. Enhancing plant biosecurity with citizen science monitoring: comparing methodologies using reports of acute oak decline. J Geogr Syst. 2019;21(1):111–131. doi: 10.1007/s10109-018-0285-2. DOI

Balázs B, Mooney P, Novákov E, Bastin L, Arsanjani JJ. Data quality in citizen science. In: Vohland K, Land-Zandstra A, Ceccaroni L, Lemmens R, Perelló J, Ponti M, Samson R, Wagenknecht K, editors. The science of citizen science. New York: Springer; 2021.

Bird TJ, Bates AE, Lefcheck JS, Hill NA, Thomson RJ, Edgar GJ, Stuart-Smith RD, Wotherspoon S, Krkosek M, Stuart-Smith JF, Pecl GT, Barrett N, Frusher S. Statistical solutions for error and bias in global citizen science datasets. Biol Cons. 2014;173:144–154. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2013.07.037. DOI

Boakes EH, Gliozzo G, Seymour V, Harvey M, Smith C, Roy DB, Haklay M. Patterns of contribution to citizen science biodiversity projects increase understanding of volunteers’ recording behaviour. Sci Rep. 2016;6(33051):2016. doi: 10.1038/srep33051. PubMed DOI PMC

Bois ST, Silander JA, Mehrhoff LJ. Invasive plant atlas of New England: the role of citizens in the science of invasive alien species detection. Bioscience. 2011;61(10):763–770. doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.10.6. DOI

Bradley BA, Allen JM, O’Neill MW, Wallace RD, Bargeron CT, Richburg JA, Stinson K. Invasive species risk assessments need more consistent spatial abundance data. Ecosphere. 2018;9(7):e02302. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2302. DOI

Bradter U, Mair L, Jönsson M, Knape J, Singer A, Snäll T. Can opportunistically collected Citizen Science data fill a data gap for habitat suitability models of less common species? Methods Ecol Evol. 2018;9(7):1667–1678. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13012. DOI

Brandon A, Spyreas GR, Molano-Flores B, Carroll C, Ellis J. Can volunteers provide reliable data for forest vegetation surveys? Nat Areas J. 2003;23(3):254–261.

Brown PMJ, Roy DB, Harrower C, Dean HJ, Rorke SL, Roy HE. Spread of a model invasive alien species, the harlequin ladybird Harmonia axyridis in Britain and Ireland. Scientific Data. 2018;5(1):1–8. doi: 10.1038/sdata.2018.239. PubMed DOI PMC

Byers JE. Impact of non-indigenous species on natives enhanced by anthropogenic alteration of selection regimes. Oikos. 2002;97(3):449–458. doi: 10.1034/j.1600-0706.2002.970316.x. DOI

Caley P, Welvaert M, Barry SC. Crowd surveillance: Estimating citizen science reporting probabilities for insects of biosecurity concern. J Pest Sci. 2020;93(1):543–550. doi: 10.1007/s10340-019-01115-7. DOI

Cardoso AC, Tsiamis K, Gervasini E, Schade S, Taucer F, Adriaens T, Copas K, Flevaris S, Galiay P, Jennings E, Josefsson M, López B, Magan J, Marchante E, Montani E, Roy H, von Schomberg R, See L, Quintas M. Citizen science and open data: a model for invasive alien species in Europe. Res Ideas Outcomes. 2017;3:e14811. doi: 10.3897/rio.3.e14811. DOI

Carvalho J, Hipólito D, Santarém F, Martins R, Gomes A, Carmo P, Rodrigues R, Grosso-Silva J, Fonseca C (2020) Patterns of Vespa velutina invasion in Portugal using crowdsourced data. Insect Conserv Diver 13(5):501–507. 10.1111/icad.12418

Chambert T, Miller DAW, Nichols JD. Modeling false positive detections in species occurrence data under different study designs. Ecology. 2015;96(2):332–339. doi: 10.1890/14-1507.1. PubMed DOI

Christie AP, Amano T, Martin PA, Shackelford GE, Simmons BI, Sutherland WJ. Simple study designs in ecology produce inaccurate estimates of biodiversity responses. J Appl Ecol. 2019;56(12):2742–2754. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.13499. DOI

Colléony A, Shwartz A. When the winners are the losers: Invasive alien bird species outcompete the native winners in the biotic homogenization process. Biol Cons. 2020;241:108314. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2019.108314. DOI

Crall AW, Jarnevich CS, Young NE, Panke BJ, Renz M, Stohlgren TJ. Citizen science contributes to our knowledge of invasive plant species distributions. Biol Invasions. 2015;17(8):2415–2427. doi: 10.1007/s10530-015-0885-4. DOI

Crall AW, Newman GJ, Stohlgren TJ, Holfelder KA, Graham J, Waller DM. Assessing citizen science data quality: An invasive species case study. Conserv Lett. 2011;4(6):433–442. doi: 10.1111/j.1755-263X.2011.00196.x. DOI

Crowley SL, Hinchliffe S, McDonald RA. The parakeet protectors: Understanding opposition to introduced species management. J Environ Manag. 2019;229:120–132. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2017.11.036. PubMed DOI

Dail D, Madsen L. Models for estimating abundance from repeated counts of an open metapopulation. Biometrics. 2011;67(2):577–587. doi: 10.1111/j.1541-0420.2010.01465.x. PubMed DOI

DasGupta A, Rubin H. Estimation of binomial parameters when both n, p are unknown. J Stat Plan Inference. 2005;130(1):391–404. doi: 10.1016/j.jspi.2004.02.019. DOI

Davis AJ, Hooten MB, Miller RS, Farnsworth ML, Lewis J, Moxcey M, Pepin KM. Inferring invasive species abundance using removal data from management actions. Ecol Appl. 2016;26(7):2339–2346. doi: 10.1002/eap.1383. PubMed DOI

de Vries M, Land-Zandstra A, Smeets I. Citizen scientists’ preferences for communication of scientific output: a literature review. Citizen Sci: Theory Pract. 2019;4(1):2. doi: 10.5334/cstp.136. DOI

Demertzis K, Iliadis L. Detecting invasive species with a bio-inspired semi-supervised neurocomputing approach: The case of Lagocephalus sceleratus. Neural Comput Appl. 2017;28(6):1225–1234. doi: 10.1007/s00521-016-2591-2. DOI

Demertzis K, Iliadis LS, Anezakis V-D. Extreme deep learning in biosecurity: The case of machine hearing for marine species identification. J Inform Telecommun. 2018;2(4):492–510. doi: 10.1080/24751839.2018.1501542. DOI

Dennis EB, Morgan BJT, Freeman SN, Ridout MS, Brereton TM, Fox R, Powney GD, Roy DB. Efficient occupancy model-fitting for extensive citizen-science data. PLoS ONE. 2017;12(3):e0174433. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0174433. PubMed DOI PMC

Diamond JM, Ross MS. Exotic parrots breeding in urban tree cavities: Nesting requirements, geographic distribution, and potential impacts on cavity nesting birds in southeast Florida. Avian Res. 2019;10(1):39. doi: 10.1186/s40657-019-0176-3. DOI

Dickinson JL, Shirk J, Bonter D, Bonney R, Crain RL, Martin J, Phillips T, Purcell K. The current state of citizen science as a tool for ecological research and public engagement. Front Ecol Environ. 2012;10(6):291–297. doi: 10.1890/110236. DOI

Druschke CG, Seltzer CE. Failures of engagement: lessons learned from a citizen science pilot study. Appl Environ Educ Commun. 2012;11(3–4):178–188. doi: 10.1080/1533015X.2012.777224. DOI

Epps MJ, Menninger HL, LaSala N, Dunn RR. Too big to be noticed: Cryptic invasion of Asian camel crickets in North American houses. PeerJ. 2014;2:e523. doi: 10.7717/peerj.523. PubMed DOI PMC

Eritja R, Ruiz-Arrondo I, Delacour-Estrella S, Schaffner F, Álvarez-Chachero J, Bengoa M, Puig M-Á, Melero-Alcíbar R, Oltra A, Bartumeus F. First detection of Aedes japonicus in Spain: An unexpected finding triggered by citizen science. Parasit Vectors. 2019;12(1):1–9. doi: 10.1186/s13071-019-3317-y. PubMed DOI PMC

Essl F, Dullinger S, Genovesi P, Hulme PE, Jeschke JM, Katsanevakis S, Kühn I, Lenzner B, Pauchard A, Pyšek P, Rabitsch W, Richardson DM, Seebens H, van Kleunen M, van der Putten WH, Vilà M, Bacher S. A conceptual framework for range-expanding species that track human-induced environmental change. Bioscience. 2019;69(11):908–919. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biz101. DOI

Falk BG, Snow RW, Reed RN. Prospects and limitations of citizen science in invasive species management: a case study with Burmese pythons in Everglades National Park. Southeast Nat. 2016;15(sp8):89–102. doi: 10.1656/058.015.sp806. DOI

Falk S, Foster G, Comont R, Conroy J, Bostock H, Salisbury A, Kilbey D, Bennett J, Smith B. Evaluating the ability of citizen scientists to identify bumblebee (Bombus) species. PLoS ONE. 2019;14(6):e0218614. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0218614. PubMed DOI PMC

Farmer RG, Leonard ML, Horn AG. Observer effects and avian-call-count survey quality: rare-species biases and overconfidence. Auk. 2012;129(1):76–86. doi: 10.1525/auk.2012.11129. DOI

Feldman RE, Žemaitė I, Miller-Rushing AJ. How training citizen scientists affects the accuracy and precision of phenological data. Int J Biometeorol. 2018;62(8):1421–1435. doi: 10.1007/s00484-018-1540-4. PubMed DOI

Fischhoff B, Davis AL. Communicating scientific uncertainty. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2014;111(Supplement 4):13664–13671. doi: 10.1073/pnas.1317504111. PubMed DOI PMC

Forrester G, Baily P, Conetta D, Forrester L, Kintzing E, Jarecki L. Comparing monitoring data collected by volunteers and professionals shows that citizen scientists can detect long-term change on coral reefs. J Nat Conserv. 2015;24:1–9. doi: 10.1016/j.jnc.2015.01.002. DOI

Friedel MH, Grice AC, Marshall NA, van Klinken RD. Reducing contention amongst organisations dealing with commercially valuable but invasive plants: The case of buffel grass. Environ Sci Policy. 2011;14(8):1205–1218. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2011.08.001. DOI

Gallo T, Waitt D. Creating a successful citizen science model to detect and report invasive species. Bioscience. 2011;61(6):459–465. doi: 10.1525/bio.2011.61.6.8. DOI

Galloway AWE, Tudor MT, Haegen WMV. The reliability of citizen science: a case study of Oregon White Oak stand surveys. Wildl Soc Bull. 2006;34(5):1425–1429. doi: 10.2193/0091-7648(2006)34[1425:TROCSA]2.0.CO;2. DOI

Ganzevoort W, van den Born RJG, Halffman W, Turnhout S. Sharing biodiversity data: Citizen scientists’ concerns and motivations. Biodivers Conserv. 2017;26(12):2821–2837. doi: 10.1007/s10531-017-1391-z. DOI

Garbarino J, Mason CE. The power of engaging citizen scientists for scientific progress. J Microbiol Biol Educ. 2016;17(1):7–12. doi: 10.1128/jmbe.v17i1.1052. PubMed DOI PMC

Gardiner MM, Allee LL, Brown PM, Losey JE, Roy HE, Smyth RR. Lessons from lady beetles: Accuracy of monitoring data from US and UK citizen-science programs. Front Ecol Environ. 2012;10(9):471–476. doi: 10.1890/110185. DOI

Geldmann J, Heilmann-Clausen J, Holm TE, Levinsky I, Markussen B, Olsen K, Rahbek C, Tøttrup AP. What determines spatial bias in citizen science? Exploring four recording schemes with different proficiency requirements. Divers Distrib. 2016;22(11):1139–1149. doi: 10.1111/ddi.12477. DOI

Giovos I, Kleitou P, Poursanidis D, Batjakas I, Bernardi G, Crocetta F, Doumpas N, Kalogirou S, Kampouris TE, Keramidas I, Langeneck J, Maximiadi M, Mitsou E, Stoilas V-O, Tiralongo F, Romanidis-Kyriakidis G, Xentidis N-J, Zenetos A, Katsanevakis S. Citizen-science for monitoring marine invasions and stimulating public engagement: A case project from the eastern Mediterranean. Biol Invas. 2019 doi: 10.1007/s10530-019-02083-w. DOI

Goldstein EA, Lawton C, Sheehy E, Butler F. Locating species range frontiers: A cost and efficiency comparison of citizen science and hair-tube survey methods for use in tracking an invasive squirrel. Wildl Res. 2014;41(1):64–75. doi: 10.1071/WR13197. DOI

Grason E, McDonald S, Adams J, Litle K, Apple J, Pleus A. Citizen science program detects range expansion of the globally invasive European green crab in Washington State (USA) Manag Biol Invas. 2018;9(1):39–47. doi: 10.3391/mbi.2018.9.1.04. DOI

Green SJ, Dulvy NK, Brooks AML, Akins JL, Cooper AB, Miller S, Côté IM. Linking removal targets to the ecological effects of invaders: a predictive model and field test. Ecol Appl. 2014;24(6):1311–1322. doi: 10.1890/13-0979.1. PubMed DOI

Groom QJ, Whild SJ. Characterisation of false-positive observations in botanical surveys. PeerJ. 2017;5:e3324. doi: 10.7717/peerj.3324. PubMed DOI PMC

Groom Q, Strubbe D, Adriaens T, Davis AJS, Desmet P, Oldoni D, Reyserhove L, Roy HE, Vanderhoeven S. Empowering citizens to inform decision-making as a way forward to support invasive alien species policy. Citizen Sci: Theory Pract. 2019;4(1):33. doi: 10.5334/cstp.238. DOI

Guisan A, Thuiller W, Zimmermann NE. Habitat suitability and distribution models: with applications in R. Cambridge University Press. 2017 doi: 10.1017/9781139028271. DOI

Guyot V, Castagneyrol B, Vialatte A, Deconchat M, Selvi F, Bussotti F, Jactel H. Tree diversity limits the impact of an invasive forest pest. PLoS ONE. 2015;10(9):e0136469. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0136469. PubMed DOI PMC

Haklay M (2013) Citizen science and volunteered geographic information: overview and typology of participation. In: Sui D, Elwood S, Goodchild M (eds) Crowdsourcing geographic knowledge: volunteered geographic information (VGI) in theory and practice. Springer, Dordechut, pp 105–122. 10.1007/978-94-007-4587-2_7

Harzing AW (2007) Publish or Perish. Available from https://harzing.com/resources/publish-or-perish

Hostetler JA, Chandler RB. Improved state-space models for inference about spatial and temporal variation in abundance from count data. Ecology. 2015;96(6):1713–1723. doi: 10.1890/14-1487.1. DOI

Hourston M, McDonald J, Hewitt M. Public engagement for the detection of the introduced marine species Charybdis japonica in Western Australia. Manag Biol Invas. 2015;6(3):243–252. doi: 10.3391/mbi.2015.6.3.03. DOI

Isaac NJB, Pocock MJO. Bias and information in biological records. Biol J Lin Soc. 2015;115(3):522–531. doi: 10.1111/bij.12532. DOI

Isaac NJB, van Strien AJ, August TA, de Zeeuw MP, Roy DB. Statistics for citizen science: Extracting signals of change from noisy ecological data. Methods Ecol Evol. 2014;5(10):1052–1060. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12254. DOI

Jennett C, Kloetzer L, Schneider D, Iacovides I, Cox A, Gold M, Fuchs B, Eveleigh A, Mathieu K, Ajani Z, Talsi Y. Motivations, learning and creativity in online citizen science. J Sci Commun. 2016;15(3):A05. doi: 10.22323/2.15030205. DOI

Jiménez M, Triguero I, John R. Handling uncertainty in citizen science data: Towards an improved amateur-based large-scale classification. Inf Sci. 2019;479:301–320. doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2018.12.011. DOI

Johnson BA, Mader AD, Dasgupta R, Kumar P. Citizen science and invasive alien species: An analysis of citizen science initiatives using information and communications technology (ICT) to collect invasive alien species observations. Glob Ecol Conserv. 2020;21:e00812. doi: 10.1016/j.gecco.2019.e00812. DOI

Johnston A, Fink D, Hochachka WM, Kelling S. Estimates of observer expertise improve species distributions from citizen science data. Methods Ecol Evol. 2018;9(1):88–97. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12838. DOI

Jordan R, Crall A, Gray S, Phillips T, Mellor D. Citizen science as a distinct field of inquiry. Bioscience. 2015;65(2):208–211. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biu217. DOI

Kallimanis AS, Panitsa M, Dimopoulos P. Quality of non-expert citizen science data collected for habitat type conservation status assessment in Natura 2000 protected areas. Sci Rep. 2017;7(1):8873. doi: 10.1038/s41598-017-09316-9. PubMed DOI PMC

Kampen H, Medlock JM, Vaux A, Koenraadt C, van Vliet A, Bartumeus F, Oltra A, Sousa CA, Chouin S, Werner D. Approaches to passive mosquito surveillance in the EU. Parasit Vectors. 2015;8(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s13071-014-0604-5. PubMed DOI PMC

Kapitza K, Zimmermann H, Martín-López B, von Wehrden H. Research on the social perception of invasive species: A systematic literature review. NeoBiota. 2019;43:47–68. doi: 10.3897/neobiota.43.31619. DOI

Kelling S, Fink D, La Sorte FA, Johnston A, Bruns NE, Hochachka WM. Taking a ‘Big Data’ approach to data quality in a citizen science project. Ambio. 2015;44(4):601–611. doi: 10.1007/s13280-015-0710-4. PubMed DOI PMC

Kelling S, Johnston A, Hochachka WM, Iliff M, Fink D, Gerbracht J, Lagoze C, Sorte FAL, Moore T, Wiggins A, Wong W-K, Wood C, Yu J. Can observation skills of citizen scientists be estimated using species accumulation curves? PLoS ONE. 2015;10(10):e0139600. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0139600. PubMed DOI PMC

Kenis M, Adriaens T, Brown PM, Katsanis A, San MG, Branquart E, Maes D, Eschen R, Zindel R, Van Vlaenderen J. Assessing the ecological risk posed by a recently established invasive alien predator: Harmonia axyridis as a case study. Biocontrol. 2017;62(3):341–354. doi: 10.1007/s10526-016-9764-x. DOI

Kganyago M, Odindi J, Adjorlolo C, Mhangara P. Evaluating the capability of Landsat 8 OLI and SPOT 6 for discriminating invasive alien species in the African Savanna landscape. Int J Appl Earth Obs Geoinf. 2018;67:10–19. doi: 10.1016/j.jag.2017.12.008. DOI

Kobori H, Dickinson JL, Washitani I, Sakurai R, Amano T, Komatsu N, Kitamura W, Takagawa S, Koyama K, Ogawara T, Miller-Rushing AJ. Citizen science: A new approach to advance ecology, education, and conservation. Ecol Res. 2016;31(1):1–19. doi: 10.1007/s11284-015-1314-y. DOI

Koenig WD, Liebhold AM, Bonter DN, Hochachka WM, Dickinson JL. Effects of the emerald ash borer invasion on four species of birds. Biol Invasions. 2013;15(9):2095–2103. doi: 10.1007/s10530-013-0435-x. DOI

Kress WJ, Garcia-Robledo C, Soares JVB, Jacobs D, Wilson K, Lopez IC, Belhumeur PN. Citizen science and climate change: mapping the range expansions of native and exotic plants with the mobile app Leafsnap. Bioscience. 2018;68(5):348–358. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biy019. DOI

Latombe G, Canavan S, Hirsch H, Hui C, Kumschick S, Nsikani MM, Potgieter LJ, Robinson TB, Saul W-C, Turner SC, Wilson JRU, Yannelli FA, Richardson DM. A four-component classification of uncertainties in biological invasions: Implications for management. Ecosphere. 2019;10(4):e02669. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2669. DOI

Latombe G, Pyšek P, Jeschke JM, Blackburn TM, Bacher S, Capinha C, Costello MJ, Fernández M, Gregory RD, Hobern D, Hui C, Jetz W, Kumschick S, McGrannachan C, Pergl J, Roy HE, Scalera R, Squires ZE, Wilson JRU, McGeoch MA, et al. A vision for global monitoring of biological invasions. Biol Cons. 2017;213:295–308. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2016.06.013. DOI

Lele SR, Moreno M, Bayne E. Dealing with detection error in site occupancy surveys: What can we do with a single survey? J Plant Ecol. 2012;5(1):22–31. doi: 10.1093/jpe/rtr042. DOI

Lepczyk CA. Integrating published data and citizen science to describe bird diversity across a landscape. J Appl Ecol. 2005;42(4):672–677. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2664.2005.01059.x. DOI

Lewandowski E, Specht H. Influence of volunteer and project characteristics on data quality of biological surveys. Conserv Biol. 2015;29(3):713–723. doi: 10.1111/cobi.12481. PubMed DOI

Link WA, Sauer JR. Estimation of population trajectories from count data. Biometrics. 1997;53(2):488–497. doi: 10.2307/2533952. DOI

Lioy S, Manino A, Porporato M, Laurino D, Romano A, Capello M, Bertolino S. Establishing surveillance areas for tackling the invasion of Vespa velutina in outbreaks and over the border of its expanding range. NeoBiota. 2019;46:51–69. doi: 10.3897/neobiota.46.33099. DOI

Lundgren RE, McMakin AH (2018) Risk communication: a handbook for communicating environmental, safety, and health risks. Wiley (6th ed.). Wiley. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Risk+Communication%3A+A+Handbook+for+Communicating+Environmental%2C+Safety%2C+and+Health+Risks%2C+6th+Edition-p-9781119456155

MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Hines JE, Knutson MG, Franklin AB. Estimating site occupancy, colonization, and local extinction when a species is detected imperfectly. Ecology. 2003;84(8):2200–2207. doi: 10.1890/02-3090. DOI

MacKenzie DI, Nichols JD, Lachman GB, Droege S, Royle JA, Langtimm CA. Estimating site occupancy rates when detection probabilities are less than one. Ecology. 2002;83(8):2248–2255. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2002)083[2248:ESORWD]2.0.CO;2. DOI

MacLeod CJ, Scott K. Mechanisms for enhancing public engagement with citizen science results. People Nature. 2021;3(1):32–50. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10152. DOI

Maistrello L, Dioli P, Bariselli M, Mazzoli GL, Giacalone-Forini I. Citizen science and early detection of invasive species: Phenology of first occurrences of Halyomorpha halys in Southern Europe. Biol Invasions. 2016;18(11):3109–3116. doi: 10.1007/s10530-016-1217-z. DOI

Milián-García Y, Young R, Madden M, Bullas-Appleton E, Hanner RH. Optimization and validation of a cost-effective protocol for biosurveillance of invasive alien species. Ecol Evol. 2021;11(5):1999–2014. doi: 10.1002/ece3.7139. PubMed DOI PMC

Ministry for Primary Industries (2016) Biosecurity 2025 Direction Statement for New Zealand’s biosecurity system (No. 978-1-77665-424-6; p 32). https://www.biosecurity.govt.nz/dmsdocument/14857-biosecurity-2025-direction-statement-for-new-zealands-biosecurity-system

Mori E, Menchetti M, Camporesi A, Cavigioli L, Tabarelli de Fatis K, Girardello M. License to kill? Domestic cats affect a wide range of native fauna in a highly biodiverse Mediterranean country. Front Ecol Evol. 2019;7:477. doi: 10.3389/fevo.2019.00477. DOI

Moulin N. When Citizen Science highlights alien invasive species in France: The case of Indochina mantis, Hierodula patellifera (Insecta, Mantodea, Mantidae) Biodivers Data J. 2020 doi: 10.3897/BDJ.8.e46989. PubMed DOI PMC

Newman G, Wiggins A, Crall A, Graham E, Newman S, Crowston K. The future of citizen science: emerging technologies and shifting paradigms. Front Ecol Environ. 2012;10(6):298–304. doi: 10.1890/110294. DOI

Padilla LMK, Kay M, Hullman J (2021) Uncertainty visualization. In Balakrishnan N, Colton T, Everitt B, Piegorsch W, Ruggeri F, Teugels JL (eds) Wiley StatsRef: Statistics reference online. John Wiley. 10.1002/9781118445112.stat08296

Parker IM, Simberloff D, Lonsdale WM, Goodell K, Wonham M, Kareiva PM, Williamson MH, Von Holle B, Moyle PB, Byers JE, Goldwasser L. Impact: Toward a framework for understanding the ecological effects of invaders. Biol Invasions. 1999;1(1):3–19. doi: 10.1023/A:1010034312781. DOI

Pearson JMN, Kidd JA, Knysh KM, Van den Heuvel MR, Gagnon J-M, Courtenay SC. Identification of native and non-native grass shrimps Palaemon spp. (Decapoda: Palaemonidae) by citizen science monitoring programs in Atlantic Canada. J Crustacean Biol. 2019;39(2):189–192. doi: 10.1093/jcbiol/ruy116. DOI

Perdikaris C, Konstantinidis E, Georgiadis C, Kouba A. Freshwater crayfish distribution update and maps for Greece: combining literature and citizen-science data. Knowl Manag Aquat Ecosyst. 2017;418:51. doi: 10.1051/kmae/2017042. DOI

Pergl J, Pyšek P, Essl F, Jeschke JM, Courchamp F, Geist J, Hejda M, Kowarik I, Mill A, Musseau C, Pipek P, Saul W-C, von Schmalensee M, Strayer D. Need for routine tracking of biological invasions. Conserv Biol. 2020;34(5):1311–1314. doi: 10.1111/cobi.13445. PubMed DOI

Peters MA, Hamilton D, Eames C, Innes J, Mason NWH. The current state of community-based environmental monitoring in New Zealand. N Z J Ecol. 2016;40(3):279–288.

Petersen TK, Speed JDM, Grøtan V, Austrheim G. Species data for understanding biodiversity dynamics: The what, where and when of species occurrence data collection. Ecol Solut Evid. 2021;2(1):e12048. doi: 10.1002/2688-8319.12048. DOI

Pluess T, Cannon R, Jarošík V, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Bacher S. When are eradication campaigns successful? A test of common assumptions. Biol Invas. 2012;14(7):1365–1378. doi: 10.1007/s10530-011-0160-2. DOI

Pocock MJO, Roy HE, Preston CD, Roy DB. The Biological Records Centre: a pioneer of citizen science. Biol J Lin Soc. 2015;115(3):475–493. doi: 10.1111/bij.12548. DOI

Preuss S, Low M, Cassel-Lundhagen A, Berggren Å. Evaluating range-expansion models for calculating nonnative species’ expansion rate. Ecol Evol. 2014;4(14):2812–2822. doi: 10.1002/ece3.1106. PubMed DOI PMC

Price-Jones V, Brown P, Adriaens T, Tricarico E, Farrow RA, Cardoso A-C, Gervasini E, Groom Q, Reyserhove L, Schade S, Tsinaraki C, Marchante E (2022) Half a billion eyes on the ground: citizen science contributes to research, policy and management of biological invasions in Europe. ARPHA Preprints. 10.3897/arphapreprints.e81567

Pusceddu M, Floris I, Mannu R, Cocco A, Satta A. Using verified citizen science as a tool for monitoring the European hornet (Vespa crabro) in the island of Sardinia (Italy) NeoBiota. 2019;50:97–108. doi: 10.3897/neobiota.50.37587. DOI

Reaser J (2001) Invasive alien species prevention and control: The art and science of managing people. In: The great reshuffling: human dimensions of invasive alien species

Regan HM, Colyvan M, Burgman MA. A taxonomy and treatment of uncertainty for ecology and conservation biology. Ecol Appl. 2002;12(2):618–628. doi: 10.2307/3060967. DOI

Renner IW, Elith J, Baddeley A, Fithian W, Hastie T, Phillips SJ, Popovic G, Warton DI. Point process models for presence-only analysis. Methods Ecol Evol. 2015;6(4):366–379. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.12352. DOI

Ressurreição A, Gibbons J, Kaiser M, Dentinho TP, Zarzycki T, Bentley C, Austen M, Burdon D, Atkins J, Santos RS, Edwards-Jones G. Different cultures, different values: The role of cultural variation in public’s WTP for marine species conservation. Biol Cons. 2012;145(1):148–159. doi: 10.1016/j.biocon.2011.10.026. DOI

Robertson PA, Mill A, Novoa A, Jeschke JM, Essl F, Gallardo B, Geist J, Jarić I, Lambin X, Musseau C, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Rabitsch W, von Schmalensee M, Shirley M, Strayer DL, Stefansson RA, Smith K, Booy O. A proposed unified framework to describe the management of biological invasions. Biol Invasions. 2020;22(9):2633–2645. doi: 10.1007/s10530-020-02298-2. DOI

Rowley JJL, Callaghan CT, CutajaR T. FrogID: Citizen scientists provide validated biodiversity data on frogs of Australia. Herpetol Conserv Biol. 2019;14(1):16.

Roy HE, Adriaens T, Agnello G, Antic M, Archambeau A-S, Bacher S, Bonn A, Brown P, Brundu G, López B, Cleary M, Cogălniceanu D, de Groot M, De Sousa T, Deidun A, Essl F, Fišer Pečnikar Ž, Gazda A, Gervasini E, Cardoso AC, et al. Increasing understanding of alien species through citizen science (Alien-CSI) Res Ideas Outcomes. 2018;4:e31412. doi: 10.3897/rio.4.e31412. DOI

Roy HE, Adriaens T, Isaac NJB, Kenis M, Onkelinx T, Martin GS, Brown PMJ, Hautier L, Poland R, Roy DB, Comont R, Eschen R, Frost R, Zindel R, Vlaenderen JV, Nedvěd O, Ravn HP, Grégoire J-C, de Biseau J-C, Maes D. Invasive alien predator causes rapid declines of native European ladybirds. Divers Distrib. 2012;18(7):717–725. doi: 10.1111/j.1472-4642.2012.00883.x. DOI

Roy HE, Brown PMJ. Ten years of invasion: Harmonia axyridis (Pallas) (Coleoptera: Coccinellidae) in Britain. Ecol Entomol. 2015;40(4):336–348. doi: 10.1111/een.12203. PubMed DOI PMC

Royle JA, Nichols JD. Estimating abundance from repeated presence–absence data or point counts. Ecology. 2003;84(3):777–790. doi: 10.1890/0012-9658(2003)084[0777:EAFRPA]2.0.CO;2. DOI

Santori C, Keith RJ, Whittington CM, Thompson MB, Dyke JUV, Spencer R-J. Changes in participant behaviour and attitudes are associated with knowledge and skills gained by using a turtle conservation citizen science app. People Nat. 2021;3(1):66–76. doi: 10.1002/pan3.10184. DOI

Schade S, Kotsev A, Cardoso AC, Tsiamis K, Gervasini E, Spinelli F, Mitton I, Sgnaolin R. Aliens in Europe. An open approach to involve more people in invasive species detection. Comput Environ Urban Syst. 2019;78:101384. doi: 10.1016/j.compenvurbsys.2019.101384. DOI

Seebens H, Bacher S, Blackburn TM, Capinha C, Dawson W, Dullinger S, Genovesi P, Hulme PE, van Kleunen M, Kühn I, Jeschke JM, Lenzner B, Liebhold AM, Pattison Z, Pergl J, Pyšek P, Winter M, Essl F. Projecting the continental accumulation of alien species through to 2050. Glob Change Biol. 2020 doi: 10.1111/gcb.15333. PubMed DOI

Shackleton RT, Adriaens T, Brundu G, Dehnen-Schmutz K, Estévez RA, Fried J, Larson BMH, Liu S, Marchante E, Marchante H, Moshobane MC, Novoa A, Reed M, Richardson DM. Stakeholder engagement in the study and management of invasive alien species. J Environ Manag. 2019;229:88–101. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2018.04.044. PubMed DOI

Shirk J, Ballard H, Wilderman C, Phillips T, Wiggins A, Jordan R, McCallie E, Minarchek M, Lewenstein B, Krasny M, Bonney R (2012). Public participation in scientific research: a framework for deliberate design. Ecol Soc 17(2). 10.5751/ES-04705-170229

Sofaer HR, Jarnevich CS, Pearse IS. The relationship between invader abundance and impact. Ecosphere. 2018;9(9):e02415. doi: 10.1002/ecs2.2415. DOI

Starr J, Schweik CM, Bush N, Fletcher L, Finn J, Fish J, Bargeron CT. Lights, camera…Citizen science: assessing the effectiveness of smartphone-based video training in invasive plant identification. PLoS ONE. 2014;9(11):e111433. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0111433. PubMed DOI PMC

Stuart-Smith RD, Edgar GJ, Barrett NS, Bates AE, Baker SC, Bax NJ, Becerro MA, Berkhout J, Blanchard JL, Brock DJ, Clark GF, Cooper AT, Davis TR, Day PB, Duffy JE, Holmes TH, Howe SA, Jordan A, Kininmonth S, Thomson R, et al. Assessing national biodiversity trends for rocky and coral reefs through the integration of citizen science and scientific monitoring programs. Bioscience. 2017;67(2):134–146. doi: 10.1093/biosci/biw180. PubMed DOI PMC

Szabo JK, Vesk PA, Baxter PWJ, Possingham HP. Regional avian species declines estimated from volunteer-collected long-term data using List Length Analysis. Ecol Appl. 2010;20(8):2157–2169. doi: 10.1890/09-0877.1. PubMed DOI

Terry JCD, Roy HE, August TA. Thinking like a naturalist: enhancing computer vision of citizen science images by harnessing contextual data. Methods Ecol Evol. 2020;11(2):303–315. doi: 10.1111/2041-210X.13335. DOI

Thiel M, Penna-Díaz M, Luna-Jorquera G, Salas S, Sellanes J, Stotz W. Citizen scientists and marine research: volunteer participants, their contributions, and projection for the future. Oceanogr Mar Biol Annu Rev. 2014;52:257–314. doi: 10.1201/b17143-6. DOI

Thomas ML, Gunawardene N, Horton K, Williams A, O’Connor S, McKirdy S, van der Merwe J. Many eyes on the ground: Citizen science is an effective early detection tool for biosecurity. Biol Invasions. 2017;19(9):2751–2765. doi: 10.1007/s10530-017-1481-6. DOI

Tuler SP, Kasperson RE. Social distrust and its implications for risk communication: An example from high level radioactive waste management. In: Arvai J, Rivers L, editors. Effective Risk Communication. Routledge; 2013. pp. 91–107.

Tye CA, McCleery RA, Fletcher RJ, Greene DU, Butryn RS. Evaluating citizen vs. Professional data for modelling distributions of a rare squirrel. J Appl Ecol. 2017;54(2):628–637. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12682. DOI

van der Bles AM, Freeman ALJ, Mitchell J, Galvao AB, Zaval L, Spiegelhalter DJ. Communicating uncertainty about facts, numbers and science. R Soc Open Sci. 2019;6(5):181870. doi: 10.1098/rsos.181870. PubMed DOI PMC

van Strien AJ, van Swaay CAM, Termaat T. Opportunistic citizen science data of animal species produce reliable estimates of distribution trends if analysed with occupancy models. J Appl Ecol. 2013;50(6):1450–1458. doi: 10.1111/1365-2664.12158. DOI

Vander Zanden MJ, Hansen GJA, Higgins SN, Kornis MS. A pound of prevention, plus a pound of cure: Early detection and eradication of invasive species in the Laurentian Great Lakes. J Great Lakes Res. 2010;36(1):199–205. doi: 10.1016/j.jglr.2009.11.002. DOI

Vanderhoeven S, Branquart E, Casaer J, D’hondt B, Hulme PE, Shwartz A, Strubbe D, Turbé A, Verreycken H, Adriaens T Beyond protocols: improving the reliability of expert-based risk analysis underpinning invasive species policies. Biol Invasions. 2017;19(9):2507–2517. doi: 10.1007/s10530-017-1434-0. DOI

Vantieghem P, Maes D, Kaiser A, Merckx T. Quality of citizen science data and its consequences for the conservation of skipper butterflies (Hesperiidae) in Flanders (northern Belgium) J Insect Conserv. 2017;21(3):451–463. doi: 10.1007/s10841-016-9924-4. DOI

Veeckman C, Talboom S, Gijsel L, Devoghel H, Duerinckx A (2019. Communication in Citizen Science. A practical guide to communication and engagement in citizen science. SCIVIL https://www.scivil.be/sites/default/files/paragraph/files/2020-01/Scivil%20Communication%20Guide.pdf

Verbrugge LNH, Leuven RSEW, Zwart HAE. Metaphors in invasion biology: implications for risk assessment and management of non-native species. Ethics Policy Environ. 2016;19(3):273–284. doi: 10.1080/21550085.2016.1226234. DOI

Wiggins A, Newman G, Stevenson RD, Crowston K (2011) Mechanisms for data quality and validation in citizen science. In: Proceedings—7th IEEE international conference on e-Science Workshops, EScienceW 2011, 14–19. 10.1109/eScienceW.2011.27

Wotton DM, O’Brien C, Stuart MD, Fergus DJ. Eradication success down under: Heat treatment of a sunken trawler to kill the invasive seaweed Undaria pinnatifida. Mar Pollut Bull. 2004;49(9):844–849. doi: 10.1016/j.marpolbul.2004.05.001. PubMed DOI

Wright DR, Underhill LG, Keene M, Knight AT. Understanding the motivations and satisfactions of volunteers to improve the effectiveness of citizen science programs. Soc Nat Resour. 2015;28(9):1013–1029. doi: 10.1080/08941920.2015.1054976. DOI

Zengeya T, Ivey P, Woodford DJ, Weyl O, Novoa A, Shackleton R, Richardson D, van Wilgen B. Managing conflict-generating invasive species in South Africa: Challenges and trade-offs. Bothalia – Afr Biodivers Conserv. 2017;47(2):1–11. doi: 10.4102/abc.v47i2.2160. DOI

Zippin C. The removal method of population estimation. J Wildl Manag. 1958;22(1):82–90. doi: 10.2307/3797301. DOI

Zurell D, Berger U, Cabral JS, Jeltsch F, Meynard CN, Münkemüller T, Nehrbass N, Pagel J, Reineking B, Schröder B, Grimm V. The virtual ecologist approach: Simulating data and observers. Oikos. 2010;119(4):622–635. doi: 10.1111/j.1600-0706.2009.18284.x. DOI

Emerging technologies in citizen science and potential for insect monitoring