Talk:Introduced species

message: Algae are not plants; reference to Caulerpa as a plant is not strictly accurate even though common usage often lumps algae in with plants.  Is it more important to maintain "familiar" usage for non-technical readers, or strict accuracy?  Guettarda 23:52, 9 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduced plants 

message: Where do invasive species come from?
Introduced species (that establish).
Where will invasive species continue to come from?
Introduced species (that establish).
Therefore, to be responsible, places like Wikpedia should NOT have ambivalent articles on introduced species, and should emphasise the inherent risks with human introductions of species, risks so great that the practice should not occur any further. I therefore expect to see my article appear in invasive species courtesy of those who have already moved it, and a less ambivalent introduced species page. cheers.
:Unfortunately, the world is full of people with different points of view.  Do you seriously think everyone cares about biodiversity? My guess is you are a graduate student with minimal real world experience (sorry, if I'm off base).  Look at the popularity of Crichton's "State of Fear", a totally unscientific, misinformed novel about global warming that is very popular. I read a recent review that suggested the real point of the novel (if not Crichton's intent) is that if ecologists are going to save the world, they damn well better come up with a better approach to how they swing public opinion.  Take New Orleans: the focus for weeks has been on just who (politically) is to blame. But the truth is barely being discussed: the people of Louisiana (and maybe all of us Americans) are to blame for letting the wetlands of the delta diasappear; wetlands that once protected the city from storm surges (and who knows what role global warming played in the severity of the storm in the first place). - Marshman 19:26, 15 September 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps one of the best examples of an introduction with negligible impact is that of the Little Owl to Great Britain. An accident of geology meant that this species didn't get to Britain before it was cut off from the European mainland, so when it was introduced in fitted into the same niche as on the continent some 20 miles away. The real problems seem to arise when species are transported halfway around the world to totally alien environments. jimfbleak 06:13, 17 September 2005 (UTC)

text: I have reworked Control of introduced species to be about control of introduced species and legal ramifications rather than a rehash of invasive species arguments. Garglebutt / (talk) 05:59, 22 September 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Question: Where do invasive species come from?

message: We propose to make the following changes to the introduced species page.  We will add information to the section titled “The nature of introductions.”   Specifically, we propose the addition of two main subcategories that describe human involvement in species transport: intentional and unintentional introductions.  Under intentional introductions we will add information regarding the common motivations that underlie human mediated introductions.   We plan to merge some of the relevant examples that already exist on this page into the new text.  Examples that do not fit under “the nature of introductions”  will be moved to appropriate sections such as “Common introduced species” or other pages (List of introduced species).  
The subsection on Reintroduction will be merged into the newly created section about Intentional introductions.
Finally, we propose to move the section on Control from the Introduced species page and merge it with new additions to the Invasive species page.  We recognize that many introduced species are subjects of management efforts.  However, the term “introduced” is a neutral term, and therefore information about control measures is better served on the invasive species page.  We support creating a link to this topic in the “see also” section.  We expect to post these changes in the next few days.- PBG250 00:03, 6 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed changes to Introduced Species Page

message: As discussed above we have added information about the nature of introductions to this page.  The section on reintroduction was merged into the new text and the section on control was removed for reasons stated above.  There are many examples of introduced species embedded in the text of this page.  We feel that separate sections about animals, plants, and diseases are somewhat redundant and could be more simply presented on the list of introduced species.  For now we have left these sections as they are and await comments on the changes we have made. -PBG250 22:29, 9 December 2005 (UTC)
thread_title: Changes Made

message: While this article makes some attempt to explain the controversy over introduced species, I think there is much room for improvement. For example, although it mentions that from some POVs, all introduced species are invasive, it doesn't really mention that whether something is invasive or not is often debated. Here in NZ for example, certain species of palm are being added to the list of weeds by the ARC (a move which is supported by many ecologists (and botanists)) but there are others disagree that these species are invasive or a threat. Also the bit on Pinus radiata might be a bit misleading. While it is a very commercially important crop, as with other introduced species it's generally not considered beneficial when it is found in natives forests, especially forests reserves and indeed would usually be considered a weed. Possums especially and also deer to a lesser extent are of course generally regarded as all around bad. Nil Einne 03:57, 15 August 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Invasive etc

message: A number of animals such as sheep, cattle and horses have been introduced to many countries that they are not native to. Would it be fair to say that these animals are Introduced. --WikiCats 07:26, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Yes :) Djlayton4 | talk  |  contribs 12:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduced species 

message: An introduced species Blah Blah (also known as naturalized species or exotic species) is an organism that is not indigenous to a given place or area and instead has been accidentally or deliberately transported to this new location by human activity.
If we define introduced species as only those introduced by humans (and not chance events, say), where is the more general article on non-indigenous species? Wouldn't it be better to start with such an article as the main topic, then have specific articles on the more limited subjects of human introduced species and invasive species (which need not be introduced by humans, but do not cover all non-indigenous species either.
I would also like to see a reference given for the definition. Richard001 11:28, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Self introduced species are considerably less common than human introduced ones. At least insofar as ones we have witnessed and recorded. Conventionally introduced species refers to ones where we did the introducing. Ones that managed it by themselves are referred to as colonising species. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 11:35, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We at least need more mention of this subject - e.g. how species are naturally introduced (storms, seeds sticking to birds feathers or snails clinging to their feet), and the evolutionary theory behind it (species coming from a larger land mass tend to outcompete those on smaller islands where the pace of evolution is slower). It would probably justify a whole article, but I can't identify one at present. Biological dispersal does cover one side of it, but isn't very specific and doesn't go into the consequences of the dispersal. Richard001 11:48, 11 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree completely, but this isn't the article for that. Introduced species has a very clear meaning in ecological literature, it refers to human assisted ones. An article on biological colonisation would be appropriate for what you're suggesting, and could be linked out of here. Sabine's Sunbird  talk 03:41, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Definition

message: The photo that appears at the very opening of this article has a poor caption that should be improved. The subject of the photo is the bugs, not the plant. If those insects have some sort of relevance to the topic, then the caption should be changed to explain what species they are and what they are doing. If they don't, the photo should be removed and replaced with another (there are plenty of photos of introduced species around). Djlayton4 | talk  |  contribs 12:41, 30 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Admittedly the newer caption has more relevance to the topic, but I feel that the opening photo should simply be of something non-native. A photo should pertain to the text near it and there is nothing in the introduction about an invasive plant increasing biodiversity. If that is mentioned in the text somewhere, then the photo should be moved next to it. For someone just opening the article, however, I feel that the bug photo is unhelpful. And I don't see what political correctness has to do with anything. Thanks. Djlayton4 | talk  |  contribs 09:20, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Significance of the Photo of Clover 

message: The article was previously categorized in :Category:Ecological definitions. I removed this cat and added instead :Category:Biogeography and :Category:Conservation. Reasoning: introduced species are usually mentioned either in the context of species distributions (hence biogeography) or of conservation biology. Sure, not every introduced species is a conservational concern, but we don't use the term "introduced species" when talking about gardening anyway! Ecology is a broad field and I think the categorization in this case should be more specific. Gidip (talk) 23:25, 20 October 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Proper categorization of the article

message: I am part of a group of graduate students at UC Santa Cruz has an assignment to improve this page.  Given that the Wikipedia Ecology group rates this page as high on the importance scale and a B on the quality scale, I think a major addition to the page is appropriate.  Specifically, I think that the page should include:
- More information of the worldwide impacts of introduced species.  There have been some previous comments that it treats introduced species as trivial.  I would like to bring in quantification and other information on the global impacts.
- Some application of ecological theory.  The page is currently rich in antidotes and examples, but I would like to see a discussion of why species are more likely to be introduced given human activity, why they sometimes spread and sometimes don't, how convolution can help shape a species fitness in its native habitat, and how predator release may help make an introduced species invasive, et cetera.
- A discussion of the argument that native and invasive are constructed concepts.  This could center on the evidence reviewed in Warren (2007) and the subsequent response by Richardson et al. (2008).  
Warren,  CR. 2007. Perspectives on the 'alien' versus 'native' species debate: a critique of concepts, language and practice. PROGRESS IN HUMAN GEOGRAPHY 31, no. 4 (August): 427-446.
Richardson, D. M., P. Pysek, D. Simberloff, M. Rejmanek, and A. D. Mader. 2008. Biological invasions-the widening debate: a response to Charles Warren. PROGRESS IN HUMAN GEOGRAPHY 32, no. 2: 295.
--Devonds (talk) 01:18, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed Changes 

message: Hello, xenophyte redirects here but this word is not present in the article. Could you delete the redirection otherwise could you explain this word in this article? Pamputt (talk) 12:51, 15 November 2011 (UTC)
thread_title:  xenophyte 

message: The terminology section seems to suggest that any domesticated/cultivated species is invasive (most visibly the table of terms). The section 'Nature of introductions' on the other hand seems to suggest that only cultivated species that were introduced by transportation are introduced species. I think the terminology section should include a sentence clarifying whether species that were locally domesticated (e.g. turkeys in North-America, domesticated rabbits in Europe and rice in East Asia) are introduced for the scope of this article. Because the exact definition of introduced species seems unclear and may be controversial I hope several people are willing to grant us their opinion on what the sentence should state. PinkShinyRose (talk) 22:11, 11 July 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Clarification for locally cultivated species 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Introduced species. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20070424172339/http://www.iucn.org:80/themes/ssc/publications/policy/invasivesEng.htm to http://www.iucn.org/themes/ssc/publications/policy/invasivesEng.htm#anchor392619=
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:50, 18 October 2015 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Some statements in this section lack a neutral tone. See the first sentence in paragraph 2 that reads, "The following definition from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), although perhaps lacking ecological sophistication...". The bolded phrase could be omitted completely. Later in the paragraph, the sentence "they further spread beyond the place of introduction they are called "invasive"." restates what has already been said in paragraph 1 and should be removed.
Also, citations 4 and 6 are listed as dead links in the references section. I propose these sources are revisited and properly cited, or the information is removed. The introduction/establishment/spread process described in paragraph 2, with the inactive citation 4, is described by Lockwood et al. in their book so this piece of information can be retained if linked to this new citation 
Overall, I propose this section be revised for writing tone and the citations updated. WCK8207 (talk) 02:55, 25 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Proposed changes to Terminology Section 

message: Although the article is supposed to be about introduced species it actually covers invasive species in almost every section and practically all the examples are of invasive species. This makes no sense at all. Approximately 1% of introduced species becomes invasive. Invasive species are discussed on their own page, and this is the way it should be.
There is hardly mention of the most common and abundant introduced species: crops and domestic animals. This is what the article should be all about. In my opinion, it needs rewriting almost in its entirety. --Polinizador (talk) 20:59, 21 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  Introduced should be the real subject 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Introduced species. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20120706102943/http://www.pnas.org:80/content/105/suppl.1/11490.full to http://www.pnas.org/content/105/suppl.1/11490.full
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at ).
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 20:38, 22 March 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: Cultivated plants and domesticated animals have been transported by humans for thousands of years and introduced far from their place of origin. The rate of cultivated species transported to other lands accelerated after the Columbian Exchange. This is why the most widespread and abundant introduced species throughout the world are cultivated species, to the point that this is often taken for granted.
For example: "Intentional introductions are often for purposes of livestock or agricultural production, e.g., introduction of domesticated cattle, goats, swine, and honeybees from Europe to the New World in centuries past." .
Another example: "What Is an Introduced Species? - Definition, Effects & Examples. One positive impact is increased food production. Americans would have a much more limited menu if it weren't for the introduction of livestock, such as cows, chickens, and food product  such as tomatoes, potatoes, and pears and wheat from other parts of the world. ()
And this from this very article: "Peaches, for example, originated in China, and have been carried to much of the populated world. Tomatoes are native to the Andes. Squash (pumpkins), maize (corn), and tobacco are native to the Americas, but were introduced to the Old World." Introduced species#Introduced_plants
--Polinizador (talk) 18:37, 22 May 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Cultivated introduced species 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 4 external links on Introduced species. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080515154626/http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/eos/eo13112.html to http://ceq.eh.doe.gov/nepa/regs/eos/eo13112.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090909153444/http://www.lacerta.de/Themengebiete/Verschleppung%20und%20Aussetzung/Podarcis_muralis_in_Cincinnati.html to http://www.lacerta.de/Themengebiete/Verschleppung%20und%20Aussetzung/Podarcis_muralis_in_Cincinnati.html
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110127203635/http://www.biochange.ie/alienplants/ to http://www.biochange.ie/alienplants/
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150101161258/http://www.nisbase.org/nisbase/index.jsp to http://www.nisbase.org/nisbase/index.jsp
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:18, 4 September 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: — Assignment last updated by Warmedforbs (talk) 01:26, 18 April 2024 (UTC)
thread_title: Wiki Education assignment: Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2024