The introduction of non-native species into new environments is often viewed as harmful, but in many cases, it can actually be beneficial to local ecosystems. First, non-native species can fill ecological niches that have been left vacant due to habitat destruction or the extinction of native species. For example, in Hawaii, the introduced myna bird has taken over the role of seed dispersal for certain native plants whose original bird dispersers have vanished, thereby aiding in forest regeneration. Second, non-native species can increase biodiversity by creating new food sources and habitats. In the Great Lakes, the introduction of zebra mussels has clarified the water, allowing sunlight to penetrate deeper and promoting the growth of aquatic plants, which in turn support a wider variety of invertebrates and fish. Third, non-native species often have economic benefits. In the United States, many agricultural crops, such as soybeans and wheat, are non-native but form the backbone of the economy, and some introduced species, like the Asian oyster in the Chesapeake Bay, provide a sustainable harvest that supports local fishing industries. Thus, rather than being inherently harmful, non-native species can play a valuable role in ecosystem functioning and human welfare.
🎧 听力讲座
🎯 模拟考试环境：先点「播放讲座」听完内容，再作答。听力原文默认隐藏。
The reading claims that non-native species are generally beneficial, but this view is overly simplistic and ignores serious ecological costs. First, while the myna bird in Hawaii does disperse seeds, it also outcompetes native birds for nesting sites and food, leading to declines in native bird populations. Moreover, the plants it disperses are often invasive weeds, not the native trees the reading mentions. So, the net effect on forest health is negative, not positive. Second, the example of zebra mussels is misleading. Although they clarify water, they also filter out phytoplankton, which is the base of the aquatic food web, causing collapses in native fish populations. The increased plant growth mentioned in the reading is often due to harmful algal blooms that deplete oxygen and create dead zones, reducing overall biodiversity. Third, the economic benefits of non-native species are not always sustainable. The Asian oyster in the Chesapeake Bay, for instance, has introduced diseases that have devastated native oyster populations, and the harvesting of non-native species often requires intensive management to prevent their spread. In the long run, the costs of controlling invasive species, such as the billions spent on zebra mussel control in the Great Lakes, far outweigh any short-term gains. Therefore, the negative impacts of non-native species typically outweigh their purported benefits.
📝 写作提示 Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they cast doubt on the specific points made in the reading passage.
