___1___. And you shouldn’t judge a species by its place of origin. So say ecologists in a commentary in the journal Nature. [Link to come.] They argue that conservationists should assess organisms based on their impact on the local environment, rather than simply whether they’re native.

When you hear the phrase “non-native species” you no doubt ___2___ an image of an invasive animal or plant that’s pushing out the native species and ___3___ the local ecology—like zebra mussels in the Great Lakes or cane toads in Australia. But Mark Davis of Macalaster College in Minnesota and his colleagues see things differently. They say that being indigenous doesn’t grant a species special rights to inhabit an ecosystem. Or mean that its presence is good for the environment. The insect currently thought to kill more trees than any other in America is the native mountain pine beetle. And many invaders actually boost biodiversity, not ___4___ it.

As climate change and urbanization continue to reshape the ecological landscape, more species will leave their homelands—making the distinction between resident and alien ___5___. So, ask not where a species comes from. But whether it belongs.
【視聽版科學小組榮譽出品】
You shouldn't judge a book by its cover. conjure up wreaking havoc on decimate a moot point
以貌取人不可,以“源”取“物”不當?!蹲匀弧冯s志中刊載的某篇評論中生態(tài)學家如是說。他們認為自然保護主義者們應(yīng)當從外來物種對當?shù)丨h(huán)境的影響來考慮,而非單純從是否是當?shù)匚锓N這一角度進行評估。 一聽到“非本地物種”,人們的第一反應(yīng)肯定是某種對本地物種及生態(tài)環(huán)境造成威脅的外來動植物——比如五大湖中斑馬貽貝的以及澳大利亞的甘蔗蟾蜍。但來自明尼蘇達州馬卡萊斯特學院的馬克戴維斯和他的同事們并不這么認為。他們的觀點是,當?shù)匚锓N并沒有什么特權(quán),而且它們的存在也并不一定對當?shù)丨h(huán)境有利。美國境內(nèi)對樹木破壞最大的不是外來物種,就是當?shù)氐纳剿杉紫x。而很大一部分的“外來物種”事實上豐富了生物多樣性,而并非起到破壞作用。 氣候變化以及城市化時刻影響著生態(tài)景觀,未來會有更多的物種離開本土——這使得區(qū)分當?shù)匚锓N和外來物種難上加難。所以嘛,不要問“物”從哪里來,適不適合當?shù)丨h(huán)境才是關(guān)鍵~