Aha! You’ve discovered my rotting bones.

but the history of many invasive species is totally inseparable from the ways the landscape was altered to create niches for those species. European style farming, surface/strip mining, construction, roads and railroads, etc. created novel ecosystems with novel disturbance regimes that the "invasive" species are highly capable of taking advantage of.

There is nothing wrong about Kudzu that makes it invasive in Appalachia, but there is something wrong with Appalachia that makes it so extraordinarily invasible by kudzu, and that thing is "you exploded the tops off the mountains, scraped the whole entire surface of the land away, and put a bunch of fucking highways through the wreckage."

I believe that the history of destruction and exploitation could possibly still be present in the evolutionary history of the invasive species even when the destruction is no longer visible.

In the case of Kudzu, Chinese scientists have compared USAmerican kudzu to Chinese kudzu and found evolutionary changes in the USAmerican kudzu's DNA that come from its adaptation in the environments in the introduced range. I can't find the article right now I'll look for it later

but, think of this: entire eastern half of the USA was laid waste, logging strip mining and destructive methods of farming obliterating the soil and previous landscapes. during the same time non-native species are introduced. The wasteland left over is poorly suited for native species, but the non-native species are weeds, they are adapted for this stuff. So the non-native populations become huge because there is so much destroyed habitat, and they have lots of genetic diversity. They breed and breed and breed and they evolve and evolve and evolve. Then, even when the forests are partly restored and the land starts to heal, the non-native species are highly adapted to the new environment due to having been able to breed, evolve, and spread widely in the previous state of destruction.

that is my thought anyway, I would have to study it more to confirm.

Cities, at least in the contemporary, concrete-jungle sense of the word, are novel ecosystems; they have notably different climate than the surroundings due to urban heat island effect, and the soils can be highly depleted or highly over-fertilized, depending. They have tons of non-native species that wouldn't otherwise survive being kept alive in landscaping and gardens. Basically it creates lots of tiny local niches where non-native species can survive, and where a population survives and reproduces, it evolves.

Within the special novel ecosystems of cities, populations evolve and evolve and evolve and with every generation there is a chance that an individual will emerge that is capable of surviving a little outside the novel ecosystem. And then, when the species is able to expand to live in new conditions, the new genes are spread widely because they are so helpful.

humans introduce species to new places, but we also cause evolution of species through our creation of new habitats. there is even a word for plants that are adapted only to live in human created habitats, and have no apparent "wild" populations because human habitats ARE their habitat: they are called anecophytes and the word has mostly been used by urban ecologists studying central Europe but it is a very intriguing concept. here is PDF of an inventory of Czech Republic flora that uses the term extensively.

Kudzu itself is adapted to live alongside humans: it has been used by human beings for over 6,000 years in its native range and its genetics have been strongly affected by human selection and breeding for various traits. It is considered possible that kudzu is not controlled by "natural enemies" because its "natural enemy" is, in fact, humans. here is article about it

the history of destruction and exploitation of the land has profoundly affected the evolution of invasive species. the presence of invasive species on the land often communicates the violence that was done to the land.

the natural state of an ecosystem is seen as passive, whereas invasive species are considered beings with destructive agency. But the invaded territory is not a passive state of nature, it is a bleeding wound in need of immediate attention and care, and a state of chaos and upheaval that invites WEEDS to intervene

But everything is nature: the roadside ditch, the vacant lot, the clearcuts. Wherever something moves, wherever something changes, there Nature is.

We humans are ecosystem engineers. We are Caretakers. That is our ecological niche. On the continent of north america an idea of hierarchy and domination was imported by settlers colonizing the land.

The dominant view is to see humans as separate from nature, and that means we often cannot recognize what we are doing when we alter ecosystems. When you mow a lawn, that is maintaining a particular ecosystem. Lawn-mowing acts upon every life form in the ecosystem, creating an ecosystem where some creatures thrive and others are eliminated.

Now think of how an ecosystem is changed by all the other ecosystems it is connected to. A lawn next to a pine forest is not just a lawn, and a pine forest next to a lawn is not just a pine forest. They are a lawn-next-to-a-pine-forest, and a pine-forest-next-to-a-lawn, and every part of each part of that whole is a different microhabitat depending upon its proximity to the other. Fascinating!

I became overwhelmed trying to understand edge habitats and ecological succession. It requires more dimensions than I know how to think in. I'm not a goddamn tesseract.

Anyway, the important thing is that humans are creating specific ecosystems with specific characteristics all the time, and due to the dominant philosophy of humans and nature as separate, most humans(atleast in my area of my country) are unable to even notice it. It's just "mowing the lawn," "maintaining a powerline cut," and so on.

But the flipside is that a whole lot of local natives love the exact same niche - that's part of why the umbrellas fill it so easily, the place is basically tailor made to have it be a great niche and dozens of local species evolved for it - so any place I see an umbrella tree sneakily growing to a decent size on the property or in council scrubland I can go 'well, that spot clearly wants a smooth davidson plum or a wampee or a walking stick palm in it', earmark it for later, and then do succession planting management and guerrilla plantings. Every plant and animal on the land I'm lucky enough to live on is a signal to learn from.

Since B. pensylvanicus is a threatened species, it is worthwhile to document what their favorite plants are, and this one seems to top the list. That's why I collected seeds from them, they had so many American bumblebees on them!

Most thistles I see around here are non-native thistles. But the non-native thistles bloom earlier than C. discolor, so maybe they are out of sync with the bumblebee lifecycle? Not sure.

The hyena biologist that arranged for Disney animators to come sketch captive  hyenas for The Lion King film (Laurence Frank) was so incensed when the animals were depicted as villains in the movie that he later included boycotting the film on a list of ways the average person could help hyena conservation.

Though it’s commonly known that Charles Darwin’s distaste for parasitic wasps played a role in his development of evolution theory (since he felt no loving God would create animals with such a disturbing life cycle), the biologists who study these wasps find it an unfair characterization. When they were tasked with coming up with a common name for the family of parasitic wasps (Ichneumonidae) that old Charles so disliked, they proposed the name “Darwin Wasps” to spite the famous naturalist who had insulted their beloved family of insects.

Parasitologist Tommy Leung was so frustrated with the way people write about parasites to evoke horror and gore that he started writing a Parasite of the Day blog, that specifically avoids inflammatory or unsettling language to describe them. He also illustrates different species in colorful anime art on Twitter in a series called Parasite Monster Girls—which he calls his “love letter to parasites.”

-Don’t use “buy now pay later.” The fine print isn’t what it seems.

-The fine print on medical financing, store credit cards, and contactless payment is also not what it seems.

-Payday loans are still predatory, even when offered by your employer

-Rewards programs are an income stream for the companies that run them. The points systems are manipulated so that the house always wins. They depend on people leaving money in rewards accounts and not in interest-bearing traditional bank accounts.

-Electronic payment apps like VenMo are not banks. You don’t earn interest. Your money is not protected.

-Your financial information is not private if your money is not kept in a regulated bank.

-None of this is regulated by the FDIC. Your money is not protected if it is held by a non-bank doing banking business. Our economy is not protected from the collapse of financial institutions that are not banks.

 A third of younger Americans hold their savings on nonbank tech platforms like Venmo

PEOPLE! DO NOT LEAVE YOUR MONEY IN VENMO OR APPLE PAY OR ANY OF THIS SHIT. FOR THE LOVE OF GOD GO FIND A REAL BANK OR A CREDIT UNION.

If Venmo were to close tomorrow all your money would vanish. There's no insurance or guarantee on any of these things. I know banks aren't great but legit banks will have the "FDIC insured" logo on their doors and websites, which means if my bank goes under tomorrow I still get my money back. Also I guarantee you there is a credit union somewhere in your town, go find it.

your funds are insured up to $250,000 by the FDIC in the event Green Dot Bank fails

In the event Green Dot Bank fails. Meaning the only time your money is protected is if Green Dot goes under. Not if Apple goes under (unlikely, granted). Or if Apple changes its terms (entirely possible). Or if you got scammed. Or if Apple freezes your account because they think you're the one scamming. Or any of the other countless mishaps your money could suffer. Green Dot is insured, but Apple Cash is not.

This is the disclaimer (highlighted) you see before you set up Apple Cash:

For the love of god get an account at a federally insured institution. Look for FDIC (banks) or NCUA (credit unions) insured and regulated financial institution. They are legally required to have this status publicly available and accessible so it's not hard to find.

The FDIC and/or NCUA will insure your accounts up to $250,000 PER AUTHORIZED SIGNER and per account type. These are factors to max your coverage to even higher than $250k but the key point is that if something happens to your bank or accounts there, that first $250k of your money is secured anyway.

Banks are for profit. Credit Unions are exactly what it sounds like: unions. They are not for profit and member owned.

Bigger institutions have more money and resources at their disposal; they have the fancier apps, 24/7 phone banking and more locations. But watch out! They are no different than any other large corporation you've heard of when it comes to ethics. Smaller institutions have more limitations, and lesser size is not an indicator of morality, but it's something to consider when choosing where to keep your money.

These institutions, regardless of what kind you choose, will offer interest bearing accounts. Money Market Savings and Time Accounts (also called Certificates of Deposit,) are popular choices to put the money you already have to work for you. You can earn money just for having your money in an interest bearing account type.

All financial institutions charge fees of one sort or another. They are offering products and services, after all. Nothing is free! They will also disclose options to avoid paying those fees, usually based around meeting specific criteria such as minimum balances or direct deposits.

GIRLS THAT'S FUCKING TERRIFYING,, PLEASE FACTORY RESET YOUR PHONES GET NEW ONES IF YOU HAVE TO GET AN INDEPENDENT SIM card WHAT IS HAPPENING

I'M BEGGING YOU

What's the worst that can happen if you do it anyway? Genuinely. The literal worst. Catastrophise about it with me for a sec.

Will your mum yell at you? You're an adult. Yelling at fellow adults is Not Okay Actually. (Yelling at kids is also not okay but let's take this one step at a time.) If your mum is yelling at you, a fellow adult, she's the one being weird and out of line. You asked your friend and they said so too (me. I'm the friend.)

Will she cut off your phone plan? That would be a problem. Can you look into whether you can afford to switch to a new plan she doesn't have access to? Most phone companies will let you port your number over pretty easily.

Will she cut you off financially? Run the numbers again. Can you afford for that to happen? If the answer is no, that's okay, I believe you and I know you're making the best decision for your own well-being that you can in the moment. If there's anything you can do to make it more affordable, I do suggest doing that, though.

Will she be physically violent, inclusive of breaking stuff that belongs to you? That’s assault. That's a crime. It's not okay for her to do that and she almost certainly knows it.

Will she stop talking to you? Honestly I gotta say at this point that's not sounding like a bad outcome. It sucks. It really really sucks and I'm sorry if that's a choice you're having to make, but take it from someone who's been there and done that: when someone who is being abusive to you (stalking is abuse! Yelling at you is abuse! Threatening to cut off your funds if you don't do what they want forever is abuse! Breaking your stuff or physically hurting you is abuse!) decides of their own volition to cut you off, it hurts for a hot minute, and then you suddenly realise that you can breathe, and it feels so. Goddamn. Amazing.

Delete the tracking application. Live where you want to live. Change your name. Join or leave the religion. Get the piercing or the tattoo or the surgery. Live your life, because it's yours and not your parents'.