Here are some useful links and pdf attachments for said query.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264492630_Impacts_of_invasive_alien_marine_species_on_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_A_pan-European_review

http://science.psu.edu/news-and-events/2011-news/Carlo2-2011

http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1614/IPSM-D-11-00095.1

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110211095555.htm

http://australianmuseum.net.au/blogpost/lifelong-learning/introduced-species-friend-or-foe

Article Impacts of invasive alien marine species on ecosystem servic...

Here are some useful links and pdf attachments for said query.

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/264492630_Impacts_of_invasive_alien_marine_species_on_ecosystem_services_and_biodiversity_A_pan-European_review

http://science.psu.edu/news-and-events/2011-news/Carlo2-2011

http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1614/IPSM-D-11-00095.1

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2011/02/110211095555.htm

http://australianmuseum.net.au/blogpost/lifelong-learning/introduced-species-friend-or-foe

Article Impacts of invasive alien marine species on ecosystem servic...

The beaver is known as a species which meliorates the natural environment and increases the Biodiversity. In Germany now the beaver spreads out to every habitat it can live in. Nevertheless it is difficult to call it an "invasive species", because beavers lived all over the country in former times and was wiped out nearly totally. I think, there will be several articles about the increasing of biodiversity.

On the other hand, the Canadian beaver was introduced in Tierra del Fuego (Cape Horn), and there are also some studies done by Kurt Jax et al.,

see:

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/286183563_About_beavers_and_humans_on_tierra_el_fuego

and others. In Terra del Fuego the beaver is really an invasive species and the invironment is very unaffected.

"Melioration" is a term with validation and surely subjective. But the increasing of the quantity of species may be a more objective criterion.

Article About beavers and humans on tierra el fuego

Hi Rafael,

In Spain we have the case of Procambarus clarckii, it appeared in the River Guadalquivir’s marshland at the middle of 70’s and quickly, in few years, it spread over the aquatic bodies from the half SW of Iberian Peninsula.

At the beginning it provoked a great impact, destroying many populations of aquatic macrophytes, aquatic macroinvertebrates, amphibians and caused a strong impact on the aquatic bird communities. But some lusters later, some animals learnt to use it a resource and Procambarus clarckii was converted into a prey and some bird populations, such as Ardeidae, otters and Milvus increased surprisingly their effectives. Besides in some places, people learnt to fish it and market, also making it an economic resource.

As a consequence, in protected natural areas, like Doñana National Park, the management of this species has created a big controversy and, on the other hand, the economic one, it has provoked a legal problem in Spain, due to this species has been recently labelled as Invasive species, which results that the marketing, selling, or collecting for economic purposes are forbidden in Spain.

Below you can see a couple of links that offer more information about that.

Un saludo

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/233642091_Reproductive_biology_and_life_cycle_of_the_invasive_crayfish_Procambarus_clarkii_Crustacea_Decapoda_in_diverse_aquatic_habitats_of_South-Western_Spain_Implications_for_population_control

http://www.eldiario.es/andalucia/enclave_rural/agricultura_y_pesca/Isla-Mayor-cangrejo-prohibicion-Supremo_0_497301233.html

http://www.eldiario.es/andalucia/enclave_rural/agricultura_y_pesca/Isla-Mayor-cangrejo-prohibicion-Supremo_0_497301233.html

Article Reproductive biology and life cycle of the invasive crayfish...

Dear Rafael

You will find here a link one an  example for ant: http://mollus.oxfordjournals.org/content/67/3/275.full.pdf

Ailanthus for honey (bees)

It's important how you define invasive.  Many authorities do not consider a non-native species invasive unless it has been documented that species negatively impacts the environment or economy.  So, to many, an organism that provides an economic benefit with no ecological consequences, would not be considered invasive.  Perhaps you might consider rewording your question using the term "non-native" instead of invasive.   

Yes, Albert  but I am asking about  invasive sp., principally about Casuarina tree and black rat (Rattus rattus) that are among the worst invasive species of the world and principally in islands

however any sample could be interestng to me

Again, it depends on the concept of invasive. Considering allocthonous species, in the Mar Menor lagoon (Western Mediterranean) in the mid1980´s, as consequence of enlarging works in the inlets, two species of jellyfish (Cotylorhiza tuberculata and Rhyzostoma pulmo) invaded the lagoon. They had strong proliferations since 1995 to present, mainly in summer. However, despite the negative effects on tourist perception and swimming activities, they were very positive as they controlled top-down the trophic webs maintaining a high water quality. (see attached paper)

Invasive apple snails have proven to be good food sources for avian species in Florida, even though at first appearance there was much panic concerning the Snail kite and Limpkins populations. However, now both species are experiencing a population hike due to the added food sources crawling about.

Also Brazilian Pepper (Schinus terebinthifolius) is a very aggressive invasive species here in Florida. However in some cases it has provided excellent nesting trees for many bird species in rookeries.

And a third example from here in Florida, the aquatic plant hydrilla is a problem invasive in many of the lakes and water ways. However, it does improve water quality by uptake of nutrients. In some areas it is being allowed to grow and then harvested as a way to remove nutrients from the water bodies. It also provides good cover for young largemouth bass and helps to improve sport fishing catch rates. Ask a water skier or swimmer about it though and it is still an incredible bain to them.  

It is truly a matter of how you look at these "invasives" and what aspect you are studying.

NO I don't know of any, the invasive species tht I have worked on has no beneficial attributes apart from shade

Judy Nugent Davies

The Mediterranean shores of Israel are home to over 60 invading fish species and hundreds of invading invertebrates coming through the Suez canal. some of these species replaced commercial species and are now more than 50% of the catch.

if this is good or bad depends on your view.

You may find this interesting/relevant 

https://news.brown.edu/articles/2013/04/crabs

Cheers 

John 

zebra mussels (Dreissena polymorpha) can reduce the biovolume of  phytoplankton, so this might be a seen as positive effect in some situations.

Heath, Robert T. et al. 1995: Ecosystem-Level Effects of Zebra Mussels (Dreissena polymorpha): An Enclosure Experiment in Saginaw Bay, Lake Hudson J. Great Lakes Res.21(4): 501-516

Gardner, W. S. et al. 1995: Effects of the zebra mussel, Dreissena polymorpha, on Community Nitrogen Dynamics in Saginaw Gay, Lake Hudson. J. Great Lakes Res.21(4):529-544

kind regards

Irene

No matter how you define a species along the gradient from non-native to naturalized to invasive to noxious, it will provide some "beneficial service". In fact, many invasive species were brought in precisely to provide such a service (i.e. ammophila  and ice plant for dune stabilization, mongooses for rodent control, annual grasses for post-fire erosion control). Secondary benefits include tamarisk harbouring endangered bird species. But the real problem here is that lists of  'ecosystem services' can be expanded to include such a wide range of species effects (like post-fire cover) that virtually any invasive species is likely to provide at least one of them. In fact, I suspect that most lists of ecosystem services (other than native biodiversity itself as a service) can be achieved with a relatively species-poor combination made up entirely of non-native species.  Needless to say, I am not a fan of the concept of ecosystem services as a stand-alone justification for conservation and restoration.

I was pulling invasive Japanese barberry from a private forest in Michigan severely impacted by overpopulated deer.  Hence, the barberry was unusually dense and abundant, since it was about the only plant the deer would not eat even when starving.  I stopped killing barberry, however, when I encountered a third trillium living under a barberry. Nowhere else in this damaged forest had I encountered a trillium.  Apparently, the only place they could survive was in the protective thorny shelter of a barberry. My hope is that the economy contracts to the point that residents will regard the deer as food once again, and the trilliums will then be able to creep out from their exotic refuges and regain their rightful place in the forest.

The non-native seaweed Caulerpa taxifolia is considered a pest species in the Mediterranean when invading highly diverse habitats (such as rocky shores or seagrass meadows) since it negatively affects the resident biota. The same alga is compared to an ecosystem engeneer when growing on soft bottoms (mud, sand) since it creates suitable conditions for the establishment of rich benthic communities. This last should be considered a positive effect, but questionable I guess.

Many of the invasives in forest ecosystems have negative impacts. They carry little ecological values. They affect the germination of indigenous species especiallyu herbaceous ones. In certain cases endemics are severely affected by invasives. In Eastern Ghats of India, Lantana camara, Cassia auriculata, Partenium hysterophorous, Mikania micrantha, Ageratina adenophora are important invasives affecting the native species. Except fruits of the first species as food for birds and other animals, all other species carry no use values

Introduced species are not good for local biodiversity. They impact the ecosystem both in biotic and abiotic aspects. One example is the Eucalyptus sp trees introduced in the Andes. There are evidence showing that communities of native birds are clearly different both in abundance and composition close to these introduced forests. In the other hand, leaves of this tree affects the soil, killing the bacterias, so reduces the natural productivy. Eucaliptus forests reduce the amount of sun light and radiation available for the soil as well as water from rainfalls.

However since these forests were introduced long time ago, local people use to relate ecosystem healthy with the ocurrence of Eucalyptus forests, since they are part of their known landscape and provide them with resources like firewood and medicine (leaves). 

Some exotic species have been intentionally introduced to either combat other invasives (for example, cactus moths) or conduct reforestation or environmental bioremediation (such as mangroves and legumes), but whether this sort of ecological manipulation is ultimately a benefit to the ecosystem is difficult to say, as it will undoubtably affect how an ecosystem is "intended" to respond to overwhelming disturbances; simultaneously, their ability to outcompete most natives through occupying an unexpected niche may quickly result in dominance of the area and the loss of diversity.

It's perfectly possible that some invasives that have successfully invaded other areas are ultimately subjected to a similar degree of pressure to natives, and thus be integrated into native fauna/flora (and I would suppose that species invasion happens even without human activity), but a trend of haphazard species introduction would not likely result in many of these occurrences.