Back to Search Start Over

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science.

Authors :
Soto I
Balzani P
Carneiro L
Cuthbert RN
Macêdo R
Serhan Tarkan A
Ahmed DA
Bang A
Bacela-Spychalska K
Bailey SA
Baudry T
Ballesteros-Mejia L
Bortolus A
Briski E
Britton JR
Buřič M
Camacho-Cervantes M
Cano-Barbacil C
Copilaș-Ciocianu D
Coughlan NE
Courtois P
Csabai Z
Dalu T
De Santis V
Dickey JWE
Dimarco RD
Falk-Andersson J
Fernandez RD
Florencio M
Franco ACS
García-Berthou E
Giannetto D
Glavendekic MM
Grabowski M
Heringer G
Herrera I
Huang W
Kamelamela KL
Kirichenko NI
Kouba A
Kourantidou M
Kurtul I
Laufer G
Lipták B
Liu C
López-López E
Lozano V
Mammola S
Marchini A
Meshkova V
Milardi M
Musolin DL
Nuñez MA
Oficialdegui FJ
Patoka J
Pattison Z
Pincheira-Donoso D
Piria M
Probert AF
Rasmussen JJ
Renault D
Ribeiro F
Rilov G
Robinson TB
Sanchez AE
Schwindt E
South J
Stoett P
Verreycken H
Vilizzi L
Wang YJ
Watari Y
Wehi PM
Weiperth A
Wiberg-Larsen P
Yapıcı S
Yoğurtçuoğlu B
Zenni RD
Galil BS
Dick JTA
Russell JC
Ricciardi A
Simberloff D
Bradshaw CJA
Haubrock PJ
Source :
Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society [Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc] 2024 Aug; Vol. 99 (4), pp. 1357-1390. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Mar 18.
Publication Year :
2024

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 policymakers. 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 streamlined 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.<br /> (© 2024 The Authors. Biological Reviews published by John Wiley & Sons Ltd on behalf of Cambridge Philosophical Society.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1469-185X
Volume :
99
Issue :
4
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
Biological reviews of the Cambridge Philosophical Society
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
38500298
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1111/brv.13071