4.5 Conservation implications
The two species differed regarding prominent constrains: both were limited climatically, avoiding cold, mountain climate, but S. canadensis with a still limited range was also related to proxies of human pressure. Based on the results, it can be hypothesized that recent dispersal of S. gigantea in the studied region has happened mostly spontaneously, while the spread ofS. canadensis could be related to trade and intentional introductions. Given the wide range of distribution of both species, their successful eradication in the region seems unlikely. However, local eradication in mountains, above 600–850 m a.s.l. where the species occur infrequently may still be feasible and could be considered as a management option. In the case of S. canadensis , proscription of its sale could restrict its further spread. Assuming the successful restriction of the trade, eradication in the eastern and central parts of the region, where the species is still uncommon, will be achievable. Similarly, the control of invasive plant species populations in human settlements and their surrounding area seems to be reasonable method. In contrast, the management of S. giganteashould focus on areas with a high value for nature conservation that are close to already existing populations of this species. The model outputs seem to be transferable into other areas with similar climate, land-use history, economy, and invasion history, including the Carpathian mountains and the surrounding regions in Slovakia, Ukraine, Hungary, and Romania.