paper format

I think a formal review will have the most impact, so that's what I vote for.  I think we might also consider having some boxes that included empirical data from single studies.  I we go that route than I'd be willing to put some of my data from California or Chile in a box figure that showed the similar way that native and exotic species are distributed across sites in a landscape.  Of course, we don't need to include these data; this is just a thought.

I have to admit I'm more in favour of a thought piece, largely for selfish reasons. The reason is simply that I'm pretty overcommitted at the moment (returning from a sabbatical can be ugly!) I don't at all object to a formal review, and agree it would have much greater impact, but if we go this route we'll have to adjust the timeframe accordingly.

Peter.

I am in favour of "formal review" that would be "easy/fast to write" There are quite a few coauthors on the board and if we split the work accordingly it may not be such a big job - I think one of the things we will find out will be that there are not many papers available that can provide soild indication of what we are after. So, part of it could a sort of suggesting what kind of research is needed to make progress in this respect. TREE seems to me as a good target journal. Petr