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.