Gregory+Niguidula+-+Hegemonic+Backdrops

Hegemonic Backdrop An assumption many invasion ecologists appear to make in their papers is the idea that if an invasive species can be removed, it should be. This is a flawed assumption that may have arisen from cases in which introduced species created serious problems. These cases are in the minority but widely studied and cited. A few years back it was discovered that a species classified as invasive was actually rehabilitating a damaged ecosystem, further proving the point. I believe there also exists the assumption that the idealized nature desired by humans is the most ecologically beneficial result. One paper exists that directly supports the idea, but if I find it to be true, then it is one of the main problems with invasive species research and management. The citing of other invasive species literature and little else in invasive species literature is common practice. It has been proposed that invasive species researchers begin utilizing succession ecology papers because the two fields are very much related if not the same. Personally, I feel that there may be legitimate arguments for classifying the two subdisciplines separately, but interdisciplinarity is rarely a bad thing. Another hegemonic practice is the lack of standardization in the nomenclature. Multiple articles have proposed definitions for “invasive species,” “native species,” and the like, but still the field retains an “I know it when I see it” mentality. The lack of standard definitions among scientists is simply an unnecessary complication that further confounds an already difficult field of study.