Southwest Exotic Plant Information Clearinghouse
 |
 |
 |
Terminology and References
Alert: Additional designation for some species in either the High or Medium category, but whose current ecological amplitude and distribution are limited. This designation alerts site managers to species that are capable of rapidly invading unexploited natural communities based on initial, localized observations, or in similar ecosystems and communities elsewhere.
Anecdotal: The response to a question is supported only by unconfirmed, anecdotal information. Anecdotal includes newspaper articles, third party information, or information from a non-qualified professional.
Biological diversity (biodiversity): The variety of life at every hierarchical level and spatial scale of biological organization: genes within populations, populations within species, species within communities, communities within landscapes, landscapes within biomes, biomes within the biosphere (Wilson 1992). In the context of the Criteria and categorization process, it is limited to native biodiversity.
Biotic interactions: Includes the effects of the non-native plants on native plant propagule dispersal, seedling recruitment, or survivorship or on the resource needs of higher trophic levels.
Ecological types: Assemblages of species and their associated ecosystem processes that co-occur in a defined area and can be characterized by one or more factors. For example, floristic composition, hydrology, and physiography can include both abiotically defined ecosystems and floristically defined plant communities or their combinations. Related terms include natural communities and ecological systems.
Ecosystem processes: In the context of the criteria, includes disturbance regimes, e.g. fire and flooding, nutrient cycling and other abiotic processes.
Evaluated but not listed: In general this designation is for species for which information is currently inadequate to respond with certainty to the minimum number of Criteria questions (i.e. too many "U" responses) or for which the sum effects of ecological impacts, invasiveness, and ecological amplitude and distribution fall below the threshold for listing (i.e. the overall rank falls below Low). Many such species are widespread but are not known to have substantial ecological impacts (though such evidence may appear in the future). All species receiving a "D" score for ecological impact (Section 1 of the Criteria), regardless of what other section scores they receive, are by default placed into this category.
High [Category]: These species have severe impacts on ecosystems, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Invasiveness attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal and establishment. These species are usually widely distributed both among and within ecosystems/communities.
Invasive non-native plants that threaten wildlands: Plants that (1) are not native to, yet can spread into, the wildland ecosystems under consideration, and that also (2) do any of the following within wildland ecosystems: displace native species, hybridize with native species, alter biological communities, or alter ecosystem processes.
Invasive: Can establish in and cause unwanted impacts to native ecosystems and biological diversity, as well as to economic, recreation, and health interests.
Low [Category]: These species have minor yet detectable ecological impacts. Invasiveness attributes result in low to moderate rates of invasion. Ecological amplitude and distribution are generally limited, but the species can be problematic locally.
Medium [Category]: These species have substantial and apparent ecological impacts on ecosystems, plant and animal communities, and vegetation structure. Invasiveness attributes are conducive to moderate to high rates of dispersal often enhanced by disturbance. Ecological amplitude (diversity of ecosystems/communities) and distribution (within an ecosystem/community) may range from limited to widespread.
No information: The response to a question has no information available to justify the response.
Non-native plants: Species introduced to the ecosystems under consideration [here in reference to Arizona] after European contact and as a direct or indirect result of human activity.
Observational: The response to a question is supported by little published information, but confirmed, not-yet-published observations are available from a qualified professional. This definition is expanded to include inference; either inference based on the evaluator's review of the literature (reviewed science publication or other published material) or inference based on the evaluator's personal observation and general scientific principles. Inference is identified as the level of documentation when a particular observation or experimental result is not available for the species under evaluation, but some degree of deductive logic can be used to arrive at a reasonable conclusion that enables the evaluator to respond to the criteria question with something other than "unknown".
Other published material: The response to a question is supported by reports, non-peer-reviewed documents, etc. Includes documents such as agency reports, technical reports, in-house documents, conference proceedings, fact sheets, element stewardship abstracts, and books covering numerous invasive plants that may be edited but whose individual contributions are not peer-reviewed. If the only source of information is an overview or synthesis type of article, then this is stated in the rationale and the level of documentation is "other published material" unless the original citations are actually reviewed by the evaluator him/herself (in which case the documentation level would be "reviewed scientific publication"). Even if it is a book or synthesis article (often both are considered peer-reviewed), it is still "other published material" because the evaluator is relying on the author's understanding and interpretation of the original literature. If authors of other published material indicate they are inferring something based on observation and general scientific principles, then it is stated as such and observational is the correct level of documentation. This represents a more "conservative" approach and follows the reasoning that it is only the author(s) observation or inference.
Red Flag: Additional designation to identify and document a critical piece of information not evident in the overall ranking. The red flag notation provides an opportunity to convey essential information to land managers and others that may use and interpret the categorization of a specific plant.
Reviewed scientific publication: The response to a question is supported by published, peer-reviewed scientific evidence. If the author(s) includes in the manuscript possible explanations (even though this may not be the particular research question being addressed) or an observation as a result of the covered research and this manuscript is peer-reviewed, the appropriate documentation level is reviewed scientific publication. If authors indicate they are inferring something based on observation and general scientific principles, then it should be stated as such in the rationale and reviewed scientific publication is still the correct level of documentation. The assumption is the peer-reviewers have confidence in the author's conclusions or speculations.
Suspected as invasive: Species status is based on existing records and data, such as previously constructed lists of invasive species or recommendations from observers, natural resource managers, scientists, and horticulturalists.
Wildlands: Public and private lands [and waters] that support native ecosystems, including national, state, and local parks and forests, ecological reserves, wildlife areas, Bureau of Land Management lands, and so on. Working landscapes such as grazed rangeland and active timberlands that support native ecosystems are included in the definition.
References
Brown, D.E. (ed.). 1994. Biotic Communities of Southwestern United
States and Northwestern Mexico. University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City, Utah.
342 p.
Brown, D.E., C.H. Lowe, and C.P. Pase. 1979. A Digitized Classification System for the Biotic Communities of North America, with community (series) and association examples for the southwest. Journal of the Arizona-Nevada Academy of Science 14 (Suppl. 1): 1-16.
Brown, D., F. Reichenbacher, and S. Franson. 1988. A Classification of North American Biotic Communities. University of Utah Press. Salt Lake City. 141 p.
Morse, L.E., J.R. Randall, N. Benton, R. Hiebert, and S. Lu. 2004. An Invasive Species Assessment Protocol Evaluating Non-Native Plants for Their Impact on Biodiversity. Version 1. NatureServe, Arlington, Virginia. Available at http://www.natureserve.org.
Wilson, E.O. 1992. The Diversity of Life. The Belknap Press of Harvard University Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts.
Please contact Kathryn Thomas regarding any questions.
