Nativeness is not binary ‐ a graduated terminology for native and non‐native species in the Anthropocene

Taming the terminological tempest in invasion science

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.

Future changes in society and climate may strongly shape wild large-herbivore faunas across Europe

Restoring wild communities of large herbivores is critical for the conservation of biodiverse ecosystems, but environmental changes in the twenty-first century could drastically affect the availability of habitats. We projected future habitat dynamics for 18 wild large herbivores in Europe and the relative future potential patterns of species richness and assemblage mean body weight considering four alternative scenarios of socioeconomic development in human society and greenhouse gas emissions (SSP1-RCP2.6, SSP2-RCP4.5, SSP3-RCP7.0, SSP5-RCP8.5). Under SSP1-RCP2.6, corresponding to a transition towards sustainable development, we found stable habitat suitability for most species and overall stable assemblage mean body weight compared to the present, with an average increase in species richness (in 2100: 3.03 ± 1.55 compared to today's 2.25 ± 1.31 species/area). The other scenarios are generally unfavourable for the conservation of wild large herbivores, although under the SSP5-RCP8.5 scenario there would be increase in species richness and assemblage mean body weight in some southern regions (e.g. + 62.86 kg mean body weight in Balkans/Greece). Our results suggest that a shift towards a sustainable socioeconomic development would overall provide the best prospect of our maintaining or even increasing the diversity of wild herbivore assemblages in Europe, thereby promoting trophic complexity and the potential to restore functioning and self-regulating ecosystems. This article is part of the theme issue 'Ecological novelty and planetary stewardship: biodiversity dynamics in a transforming biosphere'.

Navigating ecological novelty towards planetary stewardship: challenges and opportunities in biodiversity dynamics in a transforming biosphere

Human-induced global changes, including anthropogenic climate change, biotic globalization, trophic downgrading and pervasive land-use intensification, are transforming Earth's biosphere, placing biodiversity and ecosystems at the forefront of unprecedented challenges. The Anthropocene, characterized by the importance of Homo sapiens in shaping the Earth system, necessitates a re-evaluation of our understanding and stewardship of ecosystems. This theme issue delves into the multifaceted challenges posed by the ongoing ecological planetary transformation and explores potential solutions across four key subthemes. Firstly, it investigates the functioning and stewardship of emerging novel ecosystems, emphasizing the urgent need to comprehend the dynamics of ecosystems under uncharted conditions. The second subtheme focuses on biodiversity projections under global change, recognizing the necessity of predicting ecological shifts in the Anthropocene. Importantly, the inherent uncertainties and the complexity of ecological responses to environmental stressors pose challenges for societal responses and for accurate projections of ecological change. The RAD framework (resist-accept-direct) is highlighted as a flexible yet nuanced decision-making tool that recognizes the need for adaptive approaches, providing insights for directing and adapting to Anthropocene dynamics while minimizing negative impacts. The imperative to extend our temporal perspective beyond 2100 is emphasized, given the irreversible changes already set in motion. Advancing methods to study ecosystem dynamics under rising biosphere novelty is the subject of the third subtheme. The fourth subtheme emphasizes the importance of integrating human perspectives into understanding, forecasting and managing novel ecosystems. Cultural diversity and biological diversity are intertwined, and the evolving relationship between humans and ecosystems offers lessons for future stewardship. Achieving planetary stewardship in the Anthropocene demands collaboration across scales and integration of ecological and societal perspectives, scalable approaches fit to changing, novel ecological conditions, as well as cultural innovation. This article is part of the theme issue 'Ecological novelty and planetary stewardship: biodiversity dynamics in a transforming biosphere'.

Trophic rewilding as a restoration approach under emerging novel biosphere conditions

Rewilding is a restoration approach that aims to promote self-regulating complex ecosystems by restoring non-human ecological processes while reducing human control and pressures. Rewilding is forward-looking in that it aims to enhance functionality for biodiversity, accepting and indeed promoting the dynamic nature of ecosystems, rather than fixating on static composition or structure. Rewilding is thus especially relevant in our epoch of increasingly novel biosphere conditions, driven by strong human-induced global change. Here, we explore this hypothesis in the context of trophic rewilding - the restoration of trophic complexity mediated by wild, large-bodied animals, known as 'megafauna'. This focus reflects the strong ecological impacts of large-bodied animals, their widespread loss during the last 50,000 years and their high diversity and ubiquity in the preceding 50 million years. Restoring abundant, diverse, wild-living megafauna is expected to promote vegetation heterogeneity, seed dispersal, nutrient cycling and biotic microhabitats. These are fundamental drivers of biodiversity and ecosystem function and are likely to gain importance for maintaining a biodiverse biosphere under increasingly novel ecological conditions. Non-native megafauna species may contribute to these effects as ecological surrogates of extinct species or by promoting ecological functionality within novel assemblages. Trophic rewilding has strong upscaling potential via population growth and expansion of wild fauna. It is likely to facilitate biotic adaptation to changing climatic conditions and resilience to ecosystem collapse, and to curb some negative impacts of globalization, notably the dominance of invasive alien plants. Finally, we discuss the complexities of realizing the biodiversity benefits that trophic rewilding offers under novel biosphere conditions in a heavily populated world.