A neutral terminology to define 'invasive' species

The use of simple terms to articulate ecological concepts can confuse ideological debates and undermine management efforts. This problem is particularly acute in studies of nonindigenous species, which alternatively have been called ‘exotic’, ‘introduced’, ‘invasive’ and ‘naturalised’, among others. Attempts to redefine commonly used terminology have proven difficult because authors are often partial to particular definitions. In an attempt to form a consensus on invasion terminology, we synthesize an invasional framework based on current models that break the invasion process into a series of consecutive, obligatory stages. Unlike previous efforts, we propose a neutral terminology based on this framework. This ‘stage‐based’ terminology can be used to supplement terms with ambiguous meanings (e.g. invasive, introduced, naturalized, weedy, etc.), and thereby improve clarity of future studies. This approach is based on the concept of ‘propagule pressure’ and has the additional benefit of identifying factors affecting the success of species at each stage. Under this framework, invasions can be more objectively understood as biogeographical, rather than taxonomic, phenomena; and author preferences in the use of existing terminology can be addressed. An example of this recommended protocol might be: ‘We examined distribution data to contrast the characteristics of invasive species (stages IVa and V) and noninvasive species (stages III and IVb)’.     

Risk management in the design of medical device software systems

The safety of any medical device system is dependent on the application of a disciplined, well-defined, risk management process throughout the product life cycle. Hardware, software, human, and environmental interactions must be assessed in terms of intended use, risk, and cost/benefit criteria. This article addresses these issues in the context of medical devices that incorporate software. The article explains the principles of risk management, using terminology and examples from the domain of software engineering. It may serve as a guide to those new to the concepts of risk management and as an aide-memoire for medical device system/software engineers who are more familiar with the topic.     

Bovine placenta: A review on morphology,components, and defects from terminology and clinical perspectives

The bovine placenta has been the subject of many studies. Concurrently, several specialized terms have been developed to describe its development, morphology, components, function, and pathology. Many of these terms are simple, some are difficult to understand and use, and others are antiquated and may not be scientifically accurate. Defining and adopting terminology for the bovine placenta that is clear, precise and understandable, and available in a single source is expected to facilitate exchange of clinical and research information. This review presents a brief overview of the current knowledge regarding the bovine placenta and attempts to define terms. In this process, conventional terminology is presented, and contemporary and novel terms are proposed from a biological perspective. For example, use of terms such as syndesmochorial, retained placenta, and large offspring syndrome should be revisited. Furthermore, the clinical relevance of the structure and function of the bovine placenta is reviewed. Finally, terms discussed in this review are summarized (in table format).     

Inconsistent use of terminology in animal developmental toxicology studies: a discussion

The usage and meaning of terminology in teratology studies varies from laboratory to laboratory. This variability often causes confusion on the part of those reading and attempting to interpret the results published in papers and technical reports. Terms often used to categorize individual findings include embryotoxicity, fetotoxicity, teratogenicity, and maternal toxicity. One reason for the variability in the meaning of these words may be the inconsistency in the categorization of data leading up to the interpretation of the results. A more standardized use of these terms would allow more consistent interpretation and comparison of the data presented in teratology reports. This communication discusses some of these inconsistencies and offers suggestions that might help improve the situation.     

Standardized descriptions of primate locomotor and postural modes

As quantitative studies on primate positional behavior accumulate the lack of a standard positional mode terminology is becoming an increasingly serious deficiency. Inconsistent use of traditional terms and inappropriate conflation of mode categories hamper interspecific and interobserver comparisons. Some workers use common terms without definition, allowing at least the possibility of misunderstanding. Other researchers coin neologisms tailored to their study species and not clearly enough defined to allow application to other species. Such neologisms may overlap, may completely encompass, or may conflate previously defined labels. The result is, at best, the proliferation of synonyms and, at worst, the creation of confusion where clarity had existed. Historical precedents have sometimes resulted in “catch-all” terms that conflate any number of kinematically different behaviors (e.g. “brachiation,” “climbing,” and “quadrumanous climbing”). We recognize three areas where distinction of positional modes has some current importance: (1) Modes that require humeral abduction should be distinguished from adducted behaviors; (2) locomotor modes that involve ascent or descent should be distinguished from horizontal locomotor modes; and (3) suspensory modes should be distinguished from supported modes. We recommend a nomenclature that is not dedicated to or derived from any one taxonomic subset of the primates. Here we define 32 primate positional modes, divided more finely into 52 postural sub-modes and 74 locomotor sub-modes.     

Skeletal morphology of Opius dissitus and Biosteres carbonarius (Hymenoptera: Braconidae), with a discussion of terminology

The Braconidae, a family of parasitic wasps, constitute a major taxonomic challenge with an estimated diversity of 40,000 to 120,000 species worldwide, only 18,000 of which have been described to date. The skeletal morphology of braconids is still not adequately understood and the terminology is partly idiosyncratic, despite the fact that anatomical features form the basis for most taxonomic work on the group. To help address this problem, we describe the external skeletal morphology of Opius dissitus Muesebeck 1963 and Biosteres carbonarius Nees 1834, two diverse representatives of one of the least known and most diverse braconid subfamilies, the Opiinae. We review the terminology used to describe skeletal features in the Ichneumonoidea in general and the Opiinae in particular, and identify a list of recommend terms, which are linked to the online Hymenoptera Anatomy Ontology. The morphology of the studied species is illustrated with SEM-micrographs, photos and line drawings. Based on the examined species, we discuss intraspecific and interspecific morphological variation in the Opiinae and point out character complexes that merit further study.     

Carl Friedrich Naumann and the introduction of enantio terminology: a review and analysis on the 150th anniversary

Enantiomorphism and enantiomorphous were the first enantio-based terms, introduced 150 years ago, by Carl Friedrich Naumann, a German crystallographer, to refer to non-superposable mirror-image crystals. The terminology was not adopted by Pasteur, the discoverer of molecular chirality, and was not embraced at first in the stereochemical context, until it was accepted in 1877 by Van't Hoff in the German edition of his proposal for the tetrahedral asymmetric carbon atom. In the 1890s the use of enantio terms began to spread in the research literature, and many new derivatives of Naumann's original two terms were subsequently introduced. Problems in the usage of some of the terms are often found in the literature, e.g., enantiomorphism is sometimes confused with chirality; enantiomeric is often misused; the meaning of some of the many derived terms, e.g., enantiosymmetric, enantioposition, etc., is unclear. All in all, Naumann should be remembered as the creator of essential terminology in the realm of chirality.     

The value of stress and limitation in an imperfect world: A reply to Körner

A recent perspective paper offered by Körner essentially argued that ‘limitation’ and ‘stress’ are functionally useless terms for ecology except perhaps within limited contexts such as plant physiology or agriculture. We strongly disagree, and to this end argue that, although stress is not as precise as other concepts in ecology and is probably more difficult to apply to communities than to individuals, if ecologists want to communicate in a meaningful and interesting way about the distribution and abundance of species, we have to use multi‐purpose terminology that allows us to scale from reductionistic, strictly quantifiable levels of analysis to more general conceptual levels. Here, we revisit the main arguments presented against these concepts and use three lines of counter‐argument to support our conclusion that limitation and stress are necessary concepts for organizing and integrating general ecological inquiry. We discuss (1) the role of interactions between individuals in changing the limitation experienced by a species, (2) the importance of delineating whether stress is being applied to individuals or to the community, and (3) the evolutionary argument that fitness is never perfect since even adapted species are likely limited to some degree by the environment.     

Lethal interactions among vertebrate top predators: a review of concepts,assumptions and terminology

Lethal interactions among large vertebrate predators have long interested researchers because of ecological and conservation issues. Research focusing on lethal interactions among vertebrate top predators has used several terms with a broad sense, and also introduced new terminology. We analysed the published literature with reference to the main underlying concepts and the use of terminology and its ecological context. The most frequently used terms in the literature were ‘predation’, ‘intraguild predation’, ‘interference competition’, and ‘interspecific killing’. Most studies presented evidence of the killing of the victim (77%), but information regarding its consumption was not given in 48% of cases. More than half of the analysed studies (56%) had no solid information on the degree of competition between interacting species. By reviewing definitions and their underlying assumptions, we demonstrate that lethal interactions among large vertebrate predators could be designated using four terms—‘predation’, ‘intraguild predation’, ‘interspecific competitive killing’, and ‘superpredation’—without the need to employ additional terminology that may increase confusion and misuse. For a correct framework of these lethal interactions it is critical to assess if the kill is consumed, if the victim is indeed a competitor of the killer, and if the prey is a high‐order predator. However, these elements of the framework are simultaneously the most common constraints to studies of lethal interactions, since they often require a great effort to obtain. The proper use of terms and concepts is fundamental to understanding the causes behind lethal interactions and, ultimately, what is actually happening in these complex interactions.     

Mobilizing metaphors: the popular use of keystone,flagship and umbrella species concepts

Misrepresentation of terminology is a major impediment for attempts at enhancing public conservation literacy. Despite being critically important for improving conservation practice, there have been few systematic analyses of the popular use of conservation terminology. This paper draws from science communication studies and metaphor analysis, to examine how keystone, flagship and umbrella species concepts are used and represented in non-academic contexts. 557 news articles containing these terms were systematically analyzed. Mammals featured in 60% of articles on keystones, 55% on flagships and 63% on umbrella species. Number of articles explaining the terms keystone (35%) and flagship (31%) was low, and keystones were the most misrepresented term. Keystones were metaphorically linked with balance, flagships with representation and umbrella species with protection. These metaphors influenced public interpretation of scientific terminology, oriented actions towards select species, and led to a valuation of such actions. Together, the findings highlight three important aspects of popular use of conservation terminology: (1) communication is largely biased towards mammals, (2) everyday language plays a vital role in the interpretation of concepts, and (3) metaphors influence peoples’ actions and understanding. Conservation biologists need to engage with issues of language if public conservation literacy is to be improved. Further evaluations of concepts with high public and policy relevance, systematic identification of communication shortfalls, and linguistic assessments prior to promoting new terms are potential ways of achieving this.     

Anatomical terminology, then and now

Anatomical terminology, which had become chaotic by the nineteenth century, was codified in the BNA of 1895, when some 5,000 terms were carefully selected from among approximately 50,000 names. The BNA and its three major revisions (BR, INA, PNA) are here reviewed and placed in historical perspective. It is emphasized that many anatomical terms are very ancient and that the various nomenclatures are not 'new terminologies' but rather, for the most part, selections of already existing names. This can be seen clearly in the naming of the cranial nerves. Another example, the carpal and tarsal bones, is analysed in detail. Of the 8 carpal bones, for instance, the current names for 7 of them are those proposed by Henle in 1855. All the nomenclatures are, as they should be, in Latin, but it is understood that translations of many terms into other languages are necessary. Although views pro and con have been expressed, current usage favours the erect posture and the anatomical position as a basis, as well as the elimination of eponyms. In both teaching and research, the Nomina has been of great benefit in reducing drastically the number of unnecessary synonyms and in providing a coherent, internationally accepted system that is now the standard in anatomical textbooks. Hence, further use of the Nomina should be encouraged.     

An Ichnotaxonomic Approach to Wrinkled Microbially Induced Sedimentary Structures

Microbially induced sedimentary structures (MISS) are an important facet of recent paleoichnological work because of their taphonomic implications. MISS are extensively studied in terms of their formation processes, recognition in the ancient record, and their diverse morphologies. Classification and terminology schemes are based on their appearance and mode of formation; however, the taxonomic treatment of MISS remains debated. Traditionally MISS have been considered sedimentary structures, and arguments have been made that they cannot be treated as trace fossils under the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (ICZN) due to MISS being formed by communities of microbiota including algae, cyanobacteria, and others, rather than a single tracemaker. Here, we reexamine MISS using an ichnotaxonomic approach and apply ichnologic terminology and binomial names. Upon reexamining the holotype of Kinneyia Walcott, a genus commonly used to describe some MISS, we argue it cannot be used to correctly describe wrinkle or ripple-like features seen in MISS, and we agree with previous authors that Kinneyia is likely not biogenic in origin. We here assign a new ichnogenus and ichnospecies, Rugalichnus matthewii, to ripple-like sedimentary wrinkle marks known as MISS, separating them from the nomen dubium genus Kinneyia.     

Problems of terminology in the teaching of plant water relations

The considerable variation and confusion in terminology used in the teaching of plant water relations is discussed. The concept of water potential is described briefly and compared with the older concepts of diffusion pressure deficit and suction pressure. The advantages of using water potential terminology are considered. Reference is made to some well-known student texts to illustrate the conflicting meanings of osmotic terms and symbols, and attention is drawn to the problems which arise when authors mix old and new terms. It is recommended that the new terminology should be incorporated into school examination syllabuses and textbooks as soon as possible.