Ever been in an area where you can’t leave the trail without wading through poison oak? Bigger, earlier and itchier: Why poison ivy loves climate change | WBUR News
1 Like
New paper out on this topic: Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science
A few things I found interesting - the analysis of terms in use over time, and the supplementary materials and the breadth of the proposed translations of the paper’s suggested English terminology. Screenshot of some translations below. Perhaps relevant to iNat classifications and translations?
ABSTRACT
Standardised terminology in science is important for clarity of interpretation and communication. In invasion science–a dynamic and rapidly evolving discipline–the proliferation of technical terminology has lacked a standardised framework for its development. The result is a convoluted and inconsistent usage of terminology, with various discrepancies in descriptions of damage and interventions. A standardised framework is therefore needed for a clear, universally applicable, and consistent terminology to promote more effective communication across researchers, stakeholders, and policy-makers. Inconsistencies in terminology stem from the exponential increase in scientific publications on the patterns and processes of biological invasions authored by experts from various disciplines and countries since the 1990s, as well as publications by legislators and policymakers focusing on practical applications, regulations, and management of resources. Aligning and standardising terminology across stakeholders remains a challenge in invasion science. Here, we review and evaluate the multiple terms used in invasion science (e.g.‘non-native’, ‘alien’, ‘invasive’ or ‘invader’, ‘exotic’, ‘non-indigenous’,‘naturalised’, ‘pest’) to propose a more simplified and standardised terminology. The stream-lined framework we propose and translate into 28 other languages is based on the terms (i) ‘non-native’, denoting species transported beyond their natural biogeographic range, (ii) ‘established non-native’, i.e. those non-native species that have established self-sustaining populations in their new location(s) in the wild, and (iii) ‘invasive non-native’–populations of established non-native species that have recently spread or are spreading rapidly in their invaded range actively or passively with or without human mediation. We also highlight the importance of conceptualising ‘spread’ for classifying invasiveness and ‘impact’ for management. Finally, we propose a protocol for classifying populations based on (i) dispersal mechanism, (ii) species origin, (iii) population status, and (iv) impact. Collectively and without introducing new terminology, the framework that we present aims to facilitate effective communication and collaboration in invasion science and management of non-native species.
6 Likes
I certainly appreciate the international cast and input on this paper. That would seem to give it some gravitas in wider circles.
1 Like
This topic was automatically closed 60 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.