Terminology

Invasive Woody Plants

Tree Autecology and Biology

Temperate Forest Ecology

Tropical Forest Ecology

Misuse of terminology and anthropomorphic concepts in the description of introduced species.

Binggeli, P. (1994) Bull. Brit. ecol. Soc. 25, 10-13.

Tansley (1935) discussed the pitfalls associated with the use of terminology in vegetation science. Subsequently a number of papers have been published, particularly in the field of plant ecology, discussing the misuse of words or of concepts. Many of these terminological difficulties originate from the fact that words normally used in a particular context, often in relation to humans, are applied to plants. With the rise of sociobiology, an ever increasing number of ambiguous words have been promoted, e.g. mate 'choice' in plants (Willson & Burley, 1983).

Since last century (de Candolle, 1855, pp. 608-611) a number of publications have attempted to introduce a terminology to describe the status of introduced plant species, some of which may have self-maintaining populations, often leading to extensive and confusing jargon (e.g. Schroeder, 1969). In fact, few terms are necessary to describe the ecological status and the distribution of species in a particular geographical region and the following four broad definitions may be sufficient.

native (indigenous): species naturally occurring in an area since prehistorical time;
introduced (alien, exotic): deliberate or accidental release of a species into an area in which it has not occurred in historical times;
invasive (naturalised, neophyte, adventive): the establishment of self-regenerating, usually expanding, populations of an introduced species in a free-living state in the wild;
weed (pest): any plant, either native or introduced, interfering with the objectives or requirements of people.

Recently their usage in Britain has been questioned, although the Oxford English Dictionary definitions of alien, native and invasive justify their usage in the description of plant species. Moore (1992) and subsequently Garthwaite (1993) reported the views of G. Barker of English Nature which 'has decided that the prefix "native" applied to trees or plants not only causes offence to ethnic groups, but is irrelevant'. Garthwaite (1993) concluded that 'When next the Guidelines for Management [by The Forestry Authority] are revised let us hope that, in the interests of racial harmony and ecological common sense, there will be no more reference to native species in any context'. The word 'invade' has also been questioned by Barber (1987) who wondered whether he 'can use that emotive word'.

Obviously both the words 'alien' and 'invasive' do have long-standing negative connotations and in recent times they may have been regarded as offensive by some ethnic groups; similarly the use of 'natives' to describe the people of Africa and America.

Despite the reports of Moore (1992) and Garthwaite (1993), however, 'English Nature does not have any official policy on the use (or not) of the terms "native" and "alien". There is no policy for abandoning use of the terms' (Barker, pers. comm., 1993).

This current debate shows that human value judgments are now freely applied to the plant kingdom and tree species in particular and an example is provided by people's perception of the controversial sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus L.) in Britain. The three contrasting quotes below clearly show the problem:

'The suspicion remains that the present attitudes [towards sycamore] are a result of conservatism, with a smattering of xenophobia' (Taylor 1985, p. 47).
'Currently we are engaged in fighting a rearguard action against an invasion of sycamore. The mass elm-death of the 1970s encouraged an attempted sycamore coup d'‚tat at Didham. A successful 16th-century cross-Channel invader, sycamore succeeded where Hitler later failed. This arboreal fascist seems determined to oust our native ash and oak. In the crazed mind of the conservationist, the chainsaw's whine echoes the Spitfire's scream' (Argles 1990).
'Sycamore continues to attract negative comment despite the welcome move towards its political rehabilitation' (Gray 1993).

These issues raise important questions which undermine some basic biological concepts. Firstly, the concept of race is commonly used in relation to phenotypic variation within a single species (e.g. humans). When applied to trees this concept changes and it is implied that racism discriminates between species. Secondly, one of the most important areas of investigation in ecology is biogeography. Barker's statement that 'as ecologists, it shouldn't matter why a plant came from A to B' (Moore, 1992), indicates that he regards this discipline as unimportant or irrelevant. When dealing with introduced species it is important not to confuse political borders (usually ecologically meaningless) with physical and climatic barriers (e.g. oceans, deserts, which hinder dispersal).

Levins & Lewontin (1985, p. 4) assert that 'social forces influence or even dictate either the scientific method or the facts and theories of science' and it is therefore important that these issues should be addressed with care by institutions like English Nature. Since English Nature provides a substantial amount of educative material and regularly makes public 'learned' statements, these should be free of confusion between 'species' and 'race', transfers of moral values from humans to trees, and should not discard key areas of ecology such as biogeography.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Thanks to Jenny Cresswell, Peter Garthwaite and James Power for comments and Brian Rushton for editing this article.

REFERENCES

Argles, M. (1990) The bark's worse than the bite. The Guardian, 14th December, p. 31.

Barber, F. (1987) Sycamore - noxious weed or valuable tree? North West Naturalist, 1987, 14-18.

Candolle, A. de (1855) Geographie Botanique, Tome 2. Masson, Paris.

Garthwaite, P.F. (1993) End to term 'native'. Quarterly Journal of Forestry, 87, 59-60.

Gray, C. (1993) The conservation value of sycamore. Quarterly Journal of Forestry 87, 235.

Levins, R. & Lewontin, R.C. (1985) The Dialectical Biologist. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.

Moore, T. (1992) Rooting out racism in trees. The Daily Telegraph, July.

Schroeder, F.-G. (1969) Zur Klassifizierung der Anthropochoren. Vegetatio, 16, 225-238.

Tansley, A.G. (1935) The use and abuse of vegetational concepts and terms. Ecology, 16, 284-307.

Taylor, N.W. (1985) The Sycamore (Acer pseudoplatanus) in Britain: Its Natural History and Value to Wildlife. Ecology and Conservation Unit, University College, London.

Willson, M.F. & Burley, N. (1983) Mate Choice in Plants. Princeton University Press, Princeton.