To be, or not to be, a non-native species in non-English languages: gauging terminological consensus amongst invasion biologists

In invasion biology, terminological frameworks contribute to the improvement of effective communication among scientists, stakeholders, and policy-makers.This is important not only for informing policy decisions but also for engaging the broader public in understanding the risks associated with biological invasions.Meanwhile, the role of non-English languages in advancing knowledge in invasion biology has gained momentum in recent years.Building on the seminal contributions in this scientific discipline by Professor Gordon H. Copp, this paper examines the provision of three key terms defining species invasiveness in 28 non-English languages.We first define the three non-redundant terms "non-native species", "established species", and "invasive species".Through a comparative analysis of the equivalent of these terms in the 28 non-English languages, as contributed by our panel of invasion biologists and native speakers, with those in a reference review paper, and following the diffusion-of-English versus ecology-of-language paradigms, we identify discrepancies and nuances reflecting the dynamic nature of terminology in invasion biology.While some languages showed consensus in terminology, others differed due to either the avoidance of a culturally or politically laden term for "non-native" or the achievement of greater precision in meaning.Our findings highlight the requirement for clear and precise terminology in invasion biology and suggest the adoption of multidisciplinary approaches to reach consensus and facilitate communication amongst scientists, policy-makers, and the general public in a globally interconnected and rapidly changing world.This will enhance international collaboration and accelerate knowledge exchange, leading to more effective management of biological invasions.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Management of Biological Invasions
Published
2024-11-15
DOI
https://doi.org/10.3391/mbi.2025.16.1.02
Citations
2
Primary Topic
Botanical Studies and Applications
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
1.20

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

To be, or not to be, a non-native species in non-English languages: gauging terminological consensus amongst invasion biologists

Baran Yoğurtçuoğlu, Costas Perdikaris, David Almeida, Grzegorz Zięba et al.
2 citations
Management of Biological Invasions
Botanical Studies and Applications
1.20
article

To be, or not to be, a non-native species in non-English languages: gauging terminological consensus amongst invasion biologists

Baran Yoğurtçuoğlu, Costas Perdikaris, David Almeida, Grzegorz Zięba, Gábor Herczeg, Akihiko Koyama, Lidia Marszał, Daniela Giannetto, V. Suresh, Nicholas Koutsikos, Zainab Al-Wazzan, Cristina Preda, Dariusz Pietraszewski, Yuriy Kvach, Usman Atique, Marina Piria, Martin Malmstrøm, Kristína Slovák Švolíková, Hugo Verreycken, Anna Vila‐Gispert, Angela Boggero, João Gama Monteiro, Renanel Pickholtz, Hui Wei, Philippe Goulletquer, Ivan Špelić, Lukas Petrulaitis, Ayşe Yazlık, Barbora Števove, Juliane Lukas, Predrag Simonović, Oldřich Kopecký, Leonidas Vardakas, Shan Li, Roberto Mendoza, Ilona Jukonienė, Lorenzo Vilizzi, Daniya Ualiyeva, Luka Duniš
article en
2 citations

Abstract

In invasion biology, terminological frameworks contribute to the improvement of effective communication among scientists, stakeholders, and policy-makers.This is important not only for informing policy decisions but also for engaging the broader public in understanding the risks associated with biological invasions.Meanwhile, the role of non-English languages in advancing knowledge in invasion biology has gained momentum in recent years.Building on the seminal contributions in this scientific discipline by Professor Gordon H. Copp, this paper examines the provision of three key terms defining species invasiveness in 28 non-English languages.We first define the three non-redundant terms "non-native species", "established species", and "invasive species".Through a comparative analysis of the equivalent of these terms in the 28 non-English languages, as contributed by our panel of invasion biologists and native speakers, with those in a reference review paper, and following the diffusion-of-English versus ecology-of-language paradigms, we identify discrepancies and nuances reflecting the dynamic nature of terminology in invasion biology.While some languages showed consensus in terminology, others differed due to either the avoidance of a culturally or politically laden term for "non-native" or the achievement of greater precision in meaning.Our findings highlight the requirement for clear and precise terminology in invasion biology and suggest the adoption of multidisciplinary approaches to reach consensus and facilitate communication amongst scientists, policy-makers, and the general public in a globally interconnected and rapidly changing world.This will enhance international collaboration and accelerate knowledge exchange, leading to more effective management of biological invasions.

Management of Biological InvasionsVol. 16(1)
Ifremer (FR)
European Commission
Openalex Percentile: Top 16%
Botanical Studies and Applications
1.20
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.