The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform: six years of lessons learned reporting non-native marine species

231 The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform: six years of lessons learned reporting non-native marine species Fernanda Araujo Casares1,2 , Vithória Rodrigues de Melo1, Marcio Loureiro3, Larissa Marques Pires-Teixeira1, Simone Siag Oigman-Pszczol2, Eduardo Pszczol2, Joel Christopher Creed1 1 Departamento de Ecologia, Instituto de Biologia Roberto Alcântara Gomes, Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 2 Instituto Brasileiro de Biodiversidade - BrBio, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil 3 Promodigital, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil Corresponding author: Fernanda Araujo Casares ([email protected]g.br) Copyright: © Fernanda Araujo Casares et al. This is an open access article distributed under terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (Attribution 4.0 International – CC BY 4.0). Research Article Abstract Considering the potential ecological, socioeconomic, and human health threats related to non-native species introduction, the management of biological invasions is a priority for biodiversity conservation and human welfare. Science-based databases that provide lists and records of non-native species are fundamental to supporting regional and local management actions and decision-making processes. When easily available and disseminated, they can also reach the broader public and foster societal engagement. Here, we describe our experience with the Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform, a portal launched in 2019 that compiles and reports records of estuarine and marine non-native species in Brazil. The system was developed by integrating the Application Programming Interface (API) from Google Maps. Data collation involves four steps: (i) taxon selection; (ii) searches for non-native species reported for Brazil in the scientific literature (including gray literature); (iii) data filtration and extraction to spreadsheets for each species—date, type of record, spatial coordinates, habitat, ecosystem, and source of information; and (iv) careful revision and data transfer to a general database. Finally, the records are uploaded to the platform. The website allows searches by species and by record, with different filters, which are displayed on a map. People and institutions can contribute recommendations, comments, and new records through an online form. The portal encompasses more than 188 non-native and 151 cryptogenic species, with over 6,200 georeferenced records of zooand phytoplankton, zooand phytobenthos, nekton, and bacteria. We discuss the decision-making process and lessons learned during the first years of the platform, highlighting its impact on management and science outreach, gaps, needs, and challenges, in addition to perspectives for the coming years. Sharing these experiences will contribute to other initiatives already in progress or under development, which constitute important tools to connect biological invasion science, policy, and social awareness. Key words: georeferenced records, management of biological invasions, non-indigenous species list, online portal, science communication, societal engagement Introduction Biological invasions are one of the greatest threats to biodiversity and ecosystem integrity, potentially causing environmental, socioeconomic, and human health impacts. For this reason, all international conventions, treaties, and national public policies aiming to ensure biodiversity conservation have specific goals associated Academic editor: Katelyn Faulkner Received: 27 April 2025 Accepted: 15 October 2025 Published: 31 October 2025 Citation: Casares FA, de Melo VR, Loureiro M, Pires-Teixeira LM, Oigman-Pszczol SS, Pszczol E, Creed JC (2025) The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform: six years of lessons learned reporting non-native marine species. NeoBiota 103: 231–248. https://doi.org/10.3897/ neobiota.103.157105 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025) DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 This article is part of: Developing lists of alien taxa in the Global South: workflows, protocols, processes, and experiences Edited by John Wilson, Michele Dechoum, Katelyn Faulkner, Barbara Langdon, Shyama Pagad, Aníbal Pauchard, Hanno Seebens, Tsungai Zengeya, Silvía Ziller Advancing research on alien species and biological invasions A peer-reviewed open-access journal NeoBiota 232 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform with the prevention, monitoring, control, and eradication of invasive non-native species. The Convention on Biological Diversity (Convention on Biological Diversity 2020), the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (United Nations 2015), and the National Biodiversity Policy (Brasil 2002) are examples that illustrate this concern about biological invasions. In Brazil, the National Strategy for Invasive Non-Native Species (MMA 2018a) establishes specific goals to be achieved by 2030. There are also national plans launched to combat non-native species with a higher invasive potential, such as the National Plan for Prevention, Control, and Monitoring of the Sun Coral (MMA 2018b), which includes 59 actions within nine objectives. Moreover, the goals of the National Strategy for Invasive Non-Native Species and the objectives of national plans guide the development and implementation of management plans for invasive non-native species in specific territories (e.g., states) and protected areas. These plans include actions for preventing the arrival and establishment of new species, as well as surveying non-native species already present and controlling them. Given the limitation of human and financial resources, it is essential to prioritize non-native species to be controlled and eradicated (McGeoch et al. 2009). Thus, a key step in combating biological invasions is the elaboration of lists of non-native species and their categorization by status—whether the species is already present in the natural environment, whether its distribution is restricted or expanding, and whether negative impacts have already been described. In this study, we use the criteria adopted by Lopes and colleagues (2009) for the classification of non-native species. First, we generally categorize species as either native, non-native, or cryptogenic. Native species are those that occur in their area of evolutionary or historical origin; non-native species are those that occur outside their natural geographic distribution range as a result of anthropogenic activities; and cryptogenic species are those with evolutionary and biogeographic origins poorly described or unknown, which cannot be distinguished as non-native or native (Carlton 1996). In turn, non-native species are classified as confined, detected, established, or invasive (Lopes et al. 2009). A non-native species is termed confined when it occurs only in controlled artificial environments, totally or partially isolated from the natural environment. Species termed “detected” are those recorded in the natural environment but without a subsequent increase in their abundance or dispersion. This category is also used for cases of isolated records. Established non-native species are those detected recurrently, with a complete life cycle in nature and signs of population growth over time in a restricted or broad region, but without presenting apparent ecological or socioeconomic impacts. Finally, invasive species are those established species whose abundance or geographic expansion interferes with the survival of other species or causes measurable impacts on socioeconomic activities or human health. Lists of non-native species are prepared based on the best available knowledge at a given time. Over time, new scientific evidence regarding the occurrence, distribution, and taxonomy of non-native species accumulates—either due to the increase in the number of researchers and research groups studying the subject or due to the actual arrival or expansion of the distribution range of non-native species in the territory. Therefore, it is essential to constantly review the lists of non-native species, updating the status and area of occurrence of already known species and including new species when applicable (Teixeira and Creed 2020). Another important, and sometimes neglected, aspect is that non-native species lists 233 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform must be communicated to a diverse audience, including environmental managers, researchers, students, educators, nature observers, and others. Compared to terrestrial environments, species introductions in marine ecosystems are often more difficult to identify, detect, and monitor, considering uncertainty in taxonomic knowledge, the larger scale of dispersal, and fewer physical barriers and limitations that the marine environment offers to direct observation (Kinlan and Gaines 2003; Ojaveer et al. 2015). Yet global trade has been spreading marine species through biofouling on ship hulls and transportation within ballast water at ever-increasing rates that are predicted to rise even higher over the next few decades (Sardain et al. 2019). Aquaculture and the aquarium trade are other vectors that have contributed to the transport of non-native marine species worldwide. Therefore, databases that collate and make records of invasive non-native species available—especially marine and estuarine ones—and that are constantly maintained and updated are essential to support management actions and decision-making, as well as to bring society closer to the issue. Such databases should be freely accessible, user-friendly, and scientifically grounded. Here, we detail the process of conception, development, structuring, and content of the Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform, highlighting its impacts on management and science outreach. We also discuss the identified knowledge gaps, needs, and challenges during this first implementation phase, as well as the perspectives for the coming years. Building the platform The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform (Bioinvasão Brasil), a portal that compiles and reports records of estuarine and marine non-native species in Brazil, was launched in 2019 (Casares et al. 2025—https://bioinvasaobrasil.org.br/). It was conceived as one of the objectives of a larger project carried out by the Brazilian Institute for Biodiversity (BrBio) and Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (UERJ): to transform the National Database of Records and Management of Sun Coral (created and maintained by the Sun Coral Project in 2013; see Creed et al. 2017) into an online platform. Originally, it was intended to include only the records of Tubastraea coccinea and T. tagusensis. However, given the structure already created for each species and the recent review of the list of non-native marine species in Brazil— prepared at that time by Dr. Larissa Pires-Teixeira (Teixeira and Creed 2020) from the Marine Benthic Ecology Laboratory at UERJ, the technical team responsible for database development—we took the opportunity to create a portal that encompassed all non-native marine and estuarine species. The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform is a digital portal that aims to make records of non-native species in Brazil freely available, disseminate the issue of biological invasions to society, and provide information to support the management of invasive species. System development The platform was developed using a hybrid methodology of systems analysis, blending characteristics of the waterfall project model with a defined scope (a project with sequential steps carried out one after another) and agile methodologies (dividing product deliveries into short cycles to speed up project delivery). This approach focused on continuous collaboration through incremental 234 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform deliveries, incorporating constant suggestions and changes proposed by those involved—the system developer and project managers, who were researchers from the Laboratório de Ecologia Marinha Bêntica, UERJ, and the BrBio team. Systems analysis, together with product discovery techniques (methods used to understand a given problem or context, such as interviews), was fundamental to the platform’s development, helping us understand the users’ needs and requirements to create an effective and functional platform for the entire community. The process was divided into eight stages, detailed in Table 1. To enhance the interaction and usability of the platform, the Google Maps Application Programming Interface (API) was used, enabling navigation of occurrence records of non-native species on maps. The displayed occurrence records are clickable, showing images and detailed data about the geographic location. All occurrence records and details are registered in an online administrative system integrated into the platform by the management team, with restricted access through user credentials and data encryption for security. Database structure The platform’s database contains two sets of information. The first set (Fig. 1) gathers important data about the species: the authorship of the species (author’s name and date of description), the type of organism, the year it was first recorded in Brazil as non-native or cryptogenic, its current situation or status (cryptogenic, confined, detected, established, or invasive), and whether the record of the species has been validated by external specialists. The names of the species entered into the database are always checked through the World Register of Marine Species platform (WoRMS—WoRMS Editorial Board 2025), ensuring alignment with the most recent taxonomic revisions and incorporating the best available scientific knowledge. Periodically, or when a publication is identified that modifies the name of a species already included in the system, a new consultation with WoRMS is conducted to check whether changes are necessary in the portal. Table 1. Detailed description of the steps followed to develop the platform. Step Description 1. Identifying main objectives and problems to be solved · Identification of the platform’s objectives and the opportunities it would offer for exploration. · Development of several interviews and questionnaires. 2. Determine requirements of platform · Collection of details about the functional and non-functional requirements of the platform (characteristics the portal should have, how it should behave, and what constraints it should meet). · Documentation of these requirements as specifications that served as the basis for development. 3. Requirements modeling · Creation of visual models or diagrams to represent the required system’s interaction flow (e.g., use case diagrams, process flows, and sequence diagrams). 4. Analysis and documentation · Evaluation of the consistency, completeness, and feasibility of the required system. · Resolution of discrepancies or ambiguities and refinement of the requirements. · Documentation of all processes to serve as a reference throughout the development cycle. 5. System design · Development of the system design, including architecture diagrams, user interface designs, and database designs. 6. Prototyping · Development of parts of the system as prototypes using an iterative and incremental model for validation and refinement through user feedback. 7. Development · Incremental programming based on prototyping, validating, and testing each development step and module until achieving a usable project in a production environment. 8. Deployment and Adjustments · Official launch of the project at the URL, with cyclical and ongoing adjustments and optimizations made to improve performance and security. 235 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform The second set of data includes information about the records (Fig. 2). Each record must be associated with a species, record type (e.g., presence record, absence, research, monitoring, or environmental education), a specific date, a pair of geographic coordinates, and a particular environment (artificial, natural, or urban, each with its subdivisions). Each record is also linked to a source of information. Therefore, we aimed to encompass the widest possible variety of record types, going beyond traditional presence records to include others, while always giving due credit to the source of information, which may be a scientific publication, report, or personal communication. For instance, absence records (when available) are important since they provide baseline data that may support valuable inferences, such as estimating the date of a species’ introduction at a given place, identifying potential biological resistance by native communities, or assessing effective management (for example, providing data on the success of Figure 1. Representative scheme of the information associated with the species included in the database. BR = Brazil. Figure 2. Representative scheme of the information associated with each record inserted into the database. 236 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform eradication strategies). For marine species, records associated with the urban environment may, for example, relate to areas where there are training activities, environmental education and public awareness initiatives, research, or expert availability. In contrast, records of presence, absence, management, and monitoring are always associated with natural or artificial environments and their corresponding subdivisions (Fig. 2). Data gathering and upload We started our species list with the non-native species compiled by Teixeira and Creed (2020) and species considered cryptogenic in Lopes et al. (2009) and Rocha et al. (2013). Following this preliminary species list, we proceeded to collate records for each species through a series of steps: (i) taxon selection; (ii) literature search; (iii) data filtration and extraction; and (iv) revision. The first step involves choosing a taxonomic group (phylum or class, usually) to direct the search effort. Then, we conduct a literature search to compile a list of all non-native species of the group listed in more specific studies (e.g., Ajala-Batista et al. 2020) and annotate those present in Brazil. The second step involves searching for records of non-native species in Brazil within the scientific literature, which includes articles published in national and international journals, doctoral theses, master’s and graduate dissertations, technical reports, and books. For this, searches are conducted mainly on the Google Scholar portal (https://scholar.google.com.br/), using specific keyword combinations in English and Portuguese for better results, such as the taxonomic group name and species name followed by AND exotic/exótica or non-native/não nativa or non-indigenous/não indígena and AND Brazil/Brasil. During the third step, the studies displayed in the search are then filtered to include only those referring to the occurrence of species in marine (including estuarine) environments in Brazil. An initial survey of the listed studies is carried out, and references of interest cited within them are also added to the list of publications of interest. The first two pieces of information to be found are the year of the species’ first record in Brazil and its status. These pieces of information allow for the species’ inclusion in the system via the “admin” mode. Each species is assigned an identification number (ID). Next, data associated with each species’ records are obtained from the selected studies, such as location (geographic coordinates), record date, type of record, environment, habitat, and source of information. These data are stored in Excel spreadsheets created for each species, where each row represents a record with its respective information. Only georeferenced records (with associated geographic coordinates) are included in the database. We use decimal degree coordinates, which must be converted if not available in this format in the referenced literature. In cases where the source of information contains only a map with sampling points or only the name of the species’ location, or when the provided coordinates result in visibly incorrect locations, the coordinates are estimated using Google Earth (https:// earth.google.com/). When the provided coordinates fall on terrestrial locations close to marine environments, new coordinates are estimated based on the closest body of water, as well as the description of the species’ habitat of occurrence (if available) or species life-history characteristics. When references do not provide all the information about the species’ occurrence, direct contact with the author(s) of the study or the person responsible for the biological or scientific collection is necessary—for example, in cases of specimen material from museum or herbarium collections—to obtain missing data. This email contact is made by 237 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform the person responsible for searching the records of the species of a given taxonomic group, usually an undergraduate or graduate biologist or oceanographer, who identifies himself or herself as part of the platform’s team. Subsequently, the records for all species are entered into the main database and carefully reviewed by other members of the team, in this case postdoctoral researchers, to minimize errors (fourth step). Finally, the records are inserted into the platform via the “admin” mode. Each record is assigned an ID number to facilitate its identification, search, and potential editing. The species list has been updated until April 2025. Not all species have occurrence records included in the platform yet. The platform General interface The portal features an interface that provides information about the platform’s objectives and origin, criteria for species status categorization, how the platform works, search options (by species and by records), data summaries (graphs summarizing part of the data), how to collaborate (via an electronic form), credits, and how to cite the obtained information (Fig. 3). There are two search possibilities: by species and by records. When the species topic is selected from the search menu (Busca), a search box opens and allows the user to filter by species name, common name, status, or type of organism (e.g., phytobenthos). At the same time, the system displays a table with an alphabetical list of all the species (taxa) included on the platform. Each species is listed with an ID number, common name, status, type of organism, validation status, date of first record in Brazil, and the total number of records for that species on the platform. The data can be consulted by sorting each column in ascending/ descending or alphabetical/reverse-alphabetical order. Similarly, when the “record” item is selected from the search menu (Busca), a search tool appears. This tool allows users to search using combinations of filters, such as species, type of organism, environment, record dates, status, record type, and habitat. It is also possible to select the order of the search results by species, type of organism, record date, record type, environment, or habitat. Search results are displayed on the map as points, and the records are listed below in a table. Figure 3. Interface of the Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform showing the main menu. 238 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform Selecting a point on the map opens an information box about the record. We are currently working on a search tutorial that will soon be displayed on the portal. Part of the data included in the portal is summarized as graphs and tables in the section of the menu labeled Números, which means “Numbers.” This section provides information on the proportion of species by status category, by type of organism, number of records per year, number of records per type of organism, and number of presence records in natural and artificial environments per type of organism. The platform includes an online form for users willing to collaborate. People may send comments, criticisms, compliments, questions, and suggestions regarding the platform, as well as records and photographs of non-native species. When someone expresses interest in submitting records, we send them a more detailed spreadsheet via email to collect additional information related to the record in question. The information, along with photographic evidence, is analyzed, and if validated, the record is included in the system. Moreover, an email address is provided for further contact or inquiries. Content The platform currently includes 339 marine species found in Brazil (April 2025). Among them, 151 are considered cryptogenic, 13 confined, 62 detected, 87 established, and 26 invasive (Fig. 4A). Of the 339 species, there are seven phytoplanktonic species included (Fig. 4B): one invasive diatom (Coscinodiscus wailesii), five dinoflagellates (three cryptogenic and two invasive—Alexandrium tamarense and Gymnodinium catenatum), and one cryptogenic microalga. The portal includes 17 zooplankton species (Fig. 4B), of which two are cryptogenic, four confined, three detected, and eight established. Twenty-one of the species belong to the phytobenthos (Fig. 4B), of which four are cryptogenic, six confined, four detected, six established, and one invasive (Caulerpa scalpelliformis). The group with the largest number of species included in the platform is the zoobenthos (Fig. 4B). The system includes 275 species, of which 139 are cryptogenic, two are confined, 44 are detected, 69 are established, and 21 are invasive. The nektonic organisms comprise 19 species (Fig. 4B), of which one is cryptogenic, two are confined, 11 are detected, four are established, and one is invasive (lionfish—Pterois volitans). The platform has a total of 6,191 records (April 2025) and is currently in the phase of data collection, review, and inclusion, species by species. Most of the included records refer to zoobenthic species (5,543), mainly due to records related to sun coral species Tubastraea coccinea and T. tagusensis (4,823). This predominance results from the first major effort to systematize and include data—based on the database of the Sun Coral Project—and the considerable research effort devoted to these species (Dutra et al. 2023). In addition to the records of sun coral, the platform has already collated and included records for one species of diatom (25 records), 15 species of mollusks (490 records), one species of cladoceran crustacean (9 records), two species of echinoderms (193 records), one species of hydrozoan (37 records), and 17 species of non-native fish (614 records). Many other records (more than 7,000) related to dozens of species have already been compiled and are under review to be subsequently uploaded to the system, such as anthozoan cnidarians (1,398 records from 16 species), scyphozoan cnidarians (25 records from two species), hydrozoan 239 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform cnidarians (899 records from 23 species), polychaetes (710 records from 17 species), decapod crustaceans (151 records from six species), non-decapod crustaceans (866 records from 23 species), bryozoans (665 records from 32 species), one species of echinoderm (Tropiometra carinata—184 records), ascidians (2,404 records from 42 species), and fish (196 records from 27 species). There are also records currently being compiled, such as those associated with species of sponges and macroalgae. Finally, there are groups for which searches for records need to be further refined, such as non-decapod crustaceans, or have not yet begun, such as the remaining microalgae. Considering that biological invasion is a highly dynamic process, the data mentioned here will be continuously updated as more records are added to the database, uploaded to the portal, and received from contributors, and as scientific knowledge advances. User profile To understand the profile of the portal users, we use the Google Analytics 4 platform. Through this tool, we can obtain information on the number of users and visitors during a determined period of time, as well as more detailed information such as users’ country and state of origin, session duration, and whether they are new or returning users. This informs us about the platform’s public outreach, and the results help guide necessary actions to improve its impact. According to the report obtained from the Google Analytics platform from April 2024 to April 2025, Bioinvasão Brasil attained 1,224 users (almost all new), who spent nearly 2,000 sessions on the portal. In Google Analytics 4, a session is a group of user interactions (events) with a website or app within a specific time frame. A new session begins when a user opens the app or views a page and ends after a period of inactivity (defaulting to 30 minutes or at midnight). One user can have multiple sessions, and each session includes all the actions taken during that visit, such as page views, events, or transactions. Most users were from Brazil (n = 813), as expected. Nonetheless, there were users and visitors from other countries, including the United States, France, China, the United Kingdom, and the Figure 4. Number of species included in the platform per category. A. status; B. type of organism/ functional group. 246 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform Additional information Conflict of interest The authors have declared that no competing interests exist. Ethical statement No ethical statement was reported. Use of AI No use of AI was reported. Funding The platform and this study were supported by internships from the Universidade do Estado do Rio de Janeiro and funded by Fundação Carlos Chagas Filho de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado do Rio de Janeiro (JCC, FAPERJ E-26/010.003031/2014 and E-26/203.002/2017–PensaRio; FAC, FAPERJ E-26/202.334/2021–postdoctoral scholarship) and Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (JCC, CNPq 305924/2018-4 and 313698/2021-0), as well as the Brazilian National Institute of Science and Technology (INCT) Biodiversidade da Amazônia Azul (CNPq proc. 405999/2022-4) and the Coral-Sol Project (Brazilian Institute for Biodiversity, BrBio) through the compensatory measure established by the Conduct Adjustment Agreement signed by the company PetroRio (PRIO) with the Brazilian Federal Prosecution Service (MPF/RJ), with the implementation of the Brazilian Fund for Biodiversity (FUNBIO), as part of the project “Pesquisa Marinha e Pesqueira”. Author contributions FAC conceptualized the study, carried out the formal analysis, was responsible for visualization, and wrote the original draft of the manuscript. VRM contributed to visualization and reviewed and edited the manuscript. ML contributed with software and reviewed and edited the manuscript. LMPT reviewed and edited the manuscript. SSOP aided in conceptualization, acquired funding, and reviewed and edited the manuscript. EP contributed with software and reviewed and edited the manuscript. JCC conceptualized, supervised, acquired funding, and reviewed and edited the manuscript. Author ORCIDs Fernanda Araujo Casares https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6099-2695 Larissa Marques Pires-Teixeira https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5885-7777 Simone Siag Oigman-Pszczol https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9340-8384 Joel Christopher Creed https://orcid.org/0000-0002-1722-0806 Data availability All of the data that support the findings of this study are available in the main text. References Ajala-Batista L, Lins DM, Haddad MA (2020) Diversity of estuarine and marine hydroids (Cnidaria, Hydrozoa) from subtropical ecosystems of Brazil. Marine Biodiversity 50: 97. https://doi. org/10.1007/s12526-020-01133-0 Brasil (2002) Decreto no 4.339, de 22 de agosto de 2002. https://www.planalto.gov.br/ccivil_03/ decreto/2002/d4339.htm [Accessed 04-13-2025] 247 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform Carlton JT (1996) Biological invasions and cryptogenic species. Ecology 77: 1653–1655. https:// doi.org/10.2307/2265767 Carlton JT, Schwindt E (2024) The assessment of marine bioinvasion diversity and history. Biological Invasions 26: 237–298. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-023-03172-7 Casares FA, Creed JC, Oigman-Pszczol SS (2025) Plataforma Brasileira de Bioinvasão - Bioinvasão Brasil, Instituto Brasileiro de Biodiversidade, Rio de Janeiro – RJ. www.bioinvasaobrasil.org.br [Accessed 2025-04-13] Convention on Biological Diversity (2020) Update of the zero draft of the post-2020 global biodiversity framework. https://www.cbd.int/doc/c/3064/749a/0f65ac7f9def86707f4eaefa/post2020prep-02-01-en.pdf Creed JC, Junqueira AOR, Fleury BG, Mantelatto MC, Oigman-Pszczol SS (2017) The Sun-Coral Project: The first social-environmental initiative to manage the biological invasion of Tubastraea spp. in Brazil. Management of Biological Invasions 8: 181–195. https://doi.org/10.3391/mbi.2017.8.2.06 Dutra BSVM, Carlos-Júnior LA, Creed JC (2023) When species become invasive research becomes problem oriented: A synthesis of knowledge of the stony coral Tubastraea. Biological Invasions 25: 2069–2088. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-023-03032-4 Franco ACS, Azevedo-Santos VM, Nogueira MAMdP, Giarrizzo T, Hauser-Davis RA, Guimarães EC, Dalcin RH, Soeth M, Freitas MO, Bertoncini ÁA, Abilhoa V, Cunico AM, Adelir-Alves J, Bentes B, Novaes JLC, Hostim-Silva M, Leite JR, dos Santos VLM, Vitule JRS (2023) Tilapia venturing into high-salinity environments: A cause for concern? Aquatic Ecology 58: 47–55. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10452-023-10069-z Joyeux JC, Floeter SR, Ferreira CE, Gasparini JL (2001) Biogeography of tropical reef fishes: The South Atlantic puzzle. Journal of Biogeography 28: 831–841. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.13652699.2001.00602.x Kinlan BP, Gaines SD (2003) Propagule dispersal in marine and terrestrial environments: A community perspective. Ecology 84: 2007–2020. https://doi.org/10.1890/01-0622 Lopes RMC, Pombo L, Cunha VB, Rimoldi D (2009) Informe sobre as espécies exóticas invasoras marinhas no Brasil. Ministério do Meio Ambiente/Secretaria de Biodiversidade e Florestas, Brasília, 1-440. https://www.gov.br/mma/pt-br/assuntos/biodiversidade-e-biomas/fauna-e-flora/ lopes-et-al-2009_informe-sobre-as-especies-exoticas-invasoras-marinha-no-brasil.pdf McGeoch MA, Genovesi P, Bellingham PJ, Costello MJ, McGrannachan C, Sheppard A (2009) Prioritizing species, pathways, and sites to achieve conservation targets for biological invasion. Biological Invasions 18: 299–314. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10530-015-1013-1 MMA (2018a) Resolução nº 7 da Comissão Nacional de Biodiversidade — Conabio, de 29 de maio de 2018. https://pesquisa.in.gov.br/imprensa/jsp/visualiza/index.jsp?jornal=515&pagina=69&- data=13/06/2018 MMA (2018b) Plano Nacional de Prevenção, Controle e Monitoramento do Coral-sol (Tubastraea spp.) no Brasil. Book 1. Ministério do Meio Ambiente - MMA, Brasilia: 1–102. https://www. ibama.gov.br/phocadownload/biodiversidade/coral-sol/2019-08-02-Plano-Nacional-de-Prevencao-Controle-e-Monitoramento-do-Coral-sol-Tubastraea-spp-no-Brasil.pdf Ojaveer H, Galil BS, Campbell ML, Carlton JT, Canning-Clode J, Cook EJ, Davidson AD, Hewitt CL, Anders Jelmert A, Marchini A, McKenzie CH, Minchin D, Occhipinti-Ambrogi A, Olenin S, Gregory Ruiz G (2015) Classification of Non-Indigenous Species Based on Their Impacts: Considerations for Application in Marine Management. PLoS Biology 13: e1002130. https:// doi.org/10.1371/journal.pbio.1002130 Rocha RMD, Vieira LM, Migotto AE, Amaral ACZ, Ventura CRR, Serejo CS, Pitombo FB, Santos KC, Lopes RM, Pinheiro U, Marques AC (2013) The need of more rigorous assessments of marine species introductions: A counter example from the Brazilian coast. Marine Pollution Bulletin 67: 241–243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.marpolbul.2012.12.009 248 NeoBiota 103: 231–248 (2025), DOI: 10.3897/neobiota.103.157105 Fernanda Araujo Casares et al.: The Brazilian Biological Invasion Platform Sardain A, Sardain E, Leung B (2019) Global forecasts of shipping traffic and biological invasions to 2050. Nature Sustainability 2: 274–282. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41893-019-0245-y Schwindt E, Bortolus A (2017) Aquatic invasion biology research in South America: Geographic patterns, advances and perspectives. Aquatic Ecosystem Health & Management 20: 322–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/14634988.2017.1404413 Schwindt E, Battini N, Bortolus A, Junqueira AOR, Scarabino F (2022) 20 years of marine bioinvasions research: Achievements and challenges for the Southwestern Atlantic. Ecología Austral 32: 734–748. https://doi.org/10.25260/EA.22.32.2.1.1889 Teixeira LMP, Creed JC (2020) A decade on: An updated assessment of the status of marine non-indigenous species in Brazil. Aquatic Invasions 15: 30–43. https://doi.org/10.3391/ai.2020.15.1.03 United Nations (2015) Transforming our world: the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. In: Resolution adopted by the general assembly on 25 September 2015, A/RES/70/1. United Nations General Assembly. WoRMS Editorial Board (2025) World Register of Marine Species. https://doi.org/10.14284/170 [Accessed 04-13-2025]