Forty Arctic Summers

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Gaius R. Shaver
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Student ◽  
Lessons Learned ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Ecosystem Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Umbrella Organization ◽  
Set Up

I was committed to long-term, site-based, research long before the Arctic (ARC) Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) site was established in 1987. Working with the LTER program since then has allowed me to reach my goals more easily than would have been possible otherwise. Because of my deep involvement in research in the LTER program, most of the examples I use in teaching now come from LTER sites. For the same reason, most of my communications with the public are about research in the LTER program. I learned the value of collaboration as a graduate student, from my earliest mentors and collaborators. Being a part of the LTER program has helped me to develop a wide array of enjoyable, comfortable, and productive collaborations. A message to students: be generous in all aspects of your research and professional life, because there is much more to be gained from generosity than there is to be lost. I helped set up the ARC site of the LTER program in 1987 and have made it the focus of my scientific career for the past 27 years. My experience with integrated, site-based, multidisciplinary ecosystem research actually began in 1972, however, when as a graduate student I worked with the US Tundra Biome Study at Barrow, Alaska (Brown et al. 1980; Hobbie 1980). The Tundra Biome Study and its umbrella organization, the International Biological Program (IBP), ended officially in 1974, but the ideas developed and lessons learned from these programs were central to the later development of the LTER program (Coleman 2010). These lessons were central to the formation of my own professional worldview; key among them was the idea that long-term approaches, including long-term, whole-ecosystem experiments, were essential to understanding distribution, regulation, and change in populations, communities, and ecosystems everywhere. My dissertation research, on root growth at the Barrow site, benefited greatly from the interactions I had with the diverse group who worked there. I finished my PhD in 1976, during a period when the need for a federally supported program of long-term, multidisciplinary, site-based ecological research was becoming increasingly clear.

The Long-Term Ecological Research Stimulus: Research, Education, and Leadership Development at Individual and Community Levels

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
James R. Gosz
Keyword(s):  
Forest Management ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Hubbard Brook ◽  
Research Education ◽  
The Public ◽  
Research Reporting ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Communication Needs ◽  
Set Up

Through the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program, I have learned to appreciate the complexity of environmental dynamics when they are analyzed at multiple time and space scales. My experience as a postdoctoral fellow and in the LTER program facilitated much of my understanding of interdisciplinary research because of access to multiple disciplinary approaches and accumulation of long-term and multiple- scale information. My teaching of science benefited through recognition of the need for a combination of a deep understanding of each discipline’s role in an issue (reductionist approach) and the collaborative need for integrating disciplines to fully understand complexity. No single discipline can answer the complexity in an environmental question. I have improved my communication with the public through the combination of teaching and research reporting. The challenge is to develop the information in ways that can be communicated: free of scientific jargon, containing only essential data, and developed in scenarios that are recognized as real-life situations. The public has many forms and levels of understanding—there are K to gray and ordinary citizens and policy-makers; consequently, communication needs to be targeted appropriately. I value the role of collaboration; there is tremendous satisfaction and reward from working in teams that can accomplish so much more than can an individual. This collaboration requires compromise, interaction, and time, but those that strive for this approach to science are well recognized. I am fortunate in being in positions that have created opportunities for sustaining a long career in stimulating interdisciplinary and collaborative science. I had a traditional forest management and soil science education (Michigan Technological University and the University of Idaho). However, my entrée into ecosystem science was set up by my very valuable postdoctoral fellowship at the Hubbard Brook Experimental Forest under the guidance of Gene Likens from 1969 to 1970, before the formation of the LTER program. The Hubbard Brook experience, quite literally, educated me about systems thinking, with the watershed approach to understanding integrated responses from complex, multifactor interactions and influences of forest management as disturbances.

Long-Term Ecological Research Over the Long Term: A Historian’s Perspective

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher Hamlin
Keyword(s):  
History Of Science ◽  
Social Relations ◽  
Environmental Research ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
The Public ◽  
The Social ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
History Of ◽  
Ecological Science

There are many precedents for long-term research in the history of science. Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program’s current identity reflects significant change—intended and accidental, both consensual and conflictual—from research concerns that were prevalent in the 1980s. LTER program has pioneered modes of research organization and professional norms that are increasingly prominent in many areas of research and that belong to a significant transformation in the social relations of scientific research. The essays in this volume explore the impact of the LTER program, a generation after its founding, on both the practice of ecological science and the careers of scientists. The authors have applied the agenda of long- term scrutiny to their own careers as LTER researchers. They have recognized the LTER program as distinct, even perhaps unique, both in the ways that it creates knowledge and in the ways that it shapes careers. They have reflected on how they have taught (and were taught) in LTER settings, on how they interact with one another and with the public, and on how research in the LTER program has affected them “as persons.” A rationale for this volume is LTER’s distinctiveness. In many of the chapters, and in other general treatments of the LTER program, beginning with Callahan (1984), one finds a tone of defensiveness. Sometimes the concerns are explicit: authors (e.g., Stafford, Knapp, Lugo, Morris; Chapters 5, 22, 25, 33, respectively) bemoan colleagues who dismiss LTER as mere monitoring instead of serious science or who resent LTER’s independent funding stream. But more broadly, there is concern that various groups, ranging from other bioscientists to the public at large, may not appreciate the importance of long-term, site-specific environmental research. Accordingly, my hope here is to put LTER into several broader contexts. I do so in three ways. First, to mainstream LTER within the history of science, I show that the LTER program is not a new and odd way of doing science but rather exemplifies research agendas that have been recognized at least since the seventeenth century in the biosciences and beyond.

scholarly journals Long-Term Ecological Research

2016 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Final Section ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Multiple Perspectives ◽  
Social Scientists ◽  
Future Directions ◽  
The Public ◽  
Attitudes And Practices ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Probing Questions

The Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) Program is, in a sense, an experiment to transform the nature of science, and represents one of the most effective mechanisms for catalyzing comprehensive site-based research that is collaborative, multidisciplinary, and long-term in nature. The scientific contributions of the Program are prodigious, but the broader impacts of participation have not been examined in a formal way. This book captures the consequences of participation in the Program on the perspectives, attitudes, and practices of environmental scientists. The edited volume comprises three sections. The first section includes two chapters that provide an overview of the history, goals, mission, and inner workings of the LTER network of sites. The second section comprises three dozen retrospective essays by scientists, data managers or educators who represent a broad spectrum of LTER sites from deserts to tropical forests and from arctic to marine ecosystems. Each essay addresses the same series of probing questions to uncover the extent to which participation has affected the ways that scientists conduct research, educate students, or provide outreach to the public. The final section encompasses 5 chapters, whose authors are biophysical scientists, historians, behavioral scientists, or social scientists. This section analyzes, integrates, or synthesizes the content of the previous chapters from multiple perspectives and uncovers emergent themes and future directions.

Biodiversity and Environmental Change

2014 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Environmental Change ◽  
Terrestrial Ecosystem ◽  
Cost Effective ◽  
Research Network ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Ecological Data ◽  
Ecosystem Research ◽  
Australian Continent ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research

This data-rich book demonstrates the value of existing national long-term ecological research in Australia for monitoring environmental change and biodiversity. Long-term ecological data are critical for informing trends in biodiversity and environmental change. The Terrestrial Ecosystem Research Network (TERN) is a major initiative of the Australian Government and one of its key areas of investment is to provide funding for a network of long-term ecological research plots around Australia (LTERN). LTERN researchers and other authors in this book have maintained monitoring sites, often for one or more decades, in an array of different ecosystems across the Australian continent – ranging from tropical rainforests, wet eucalypt forests and alpine regions through to rangelands and deserts. This book highlights some of the temporal changes in the environment that have occurred in the various systems in which dedicated field-based ecologists have worked. Many important trends and changes are documented and they often provide new insights that were previously poorly understood or unknown. These data are precisely the kinds of data so desperately needed to better quantify the temporal trajectories in the environment in Australia. By presenting trend patterns (and often also the associated data) the authors aim to catalyse governments and other organisations to better recognise the importance of long-term data collection and monitoring as a fundamental part of ecologically-effective and cost-effective management of the environment and biodiversity.

Long-Term Ecological Research in the Arctic: Where Science Never Sleeps

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John E. Hobbie
Keyword(s):  
Mycorrhizal Fungi ◽  
Field Experiments ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Nitrogen And Phosphorus ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Bacterial Uptake ◽  
Project Data ◽  
Kinetics Of Uptake

When the Arctic (ARC) Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) project began, I was an aquatic ecologist with experience in managing large projects in freshwaters and estuaries and a specialization in microbes. This project, which studies lakes, streams, and tundras, has greatly increased my breadth as an ecologist and allowed me to take part in terrestrial modeling, microbial studies in streams, and the role of soil mycorrhizal fungi in providing nutrients to many species of plants. As a mentor to several postdoctoral fellows, my LTER research has enabled me to learn about other fields such as the application of molecular biology to microbial ecology. The Arctic LTER project data, the long-term field experiments, and the facilities available at the University of Alaska field station brought me in contact with ecologists from many countries. One result of this association with experts was my coauthorship of a book on Arctic natural history aimed at communicating scientific knowledge to scientists and the general public unfamiliar with the Arctic (Huryn and Hobbie 2012). I have always collaborated extensively with many scientists and encouraged collaboration as the best way to carry out ecosystem research. The Arctic LTER project brought many opportunities to broaden the scope of my collaboration to include terrestrial ecologists and microbiologists. My PhD research was about year-round primary productivity of an Arctic lake but while on a postdoctoral fellowship at Uppsala University, Sweden, I switched to an emphasis on bacterial uptake kinetics in lakes. The techniques I helped develop in freshwater worked in the ocean and estuaries too (Hobbie and Williams 1984). In addition we developed the epifluorescence method for quantifying the abundance of planktonic bacteria. Our paper (Hobbie, Daley, and Jasper 1977) finally convinced oceanographers that bacteria are abundant (at 10⁹ per liter) and important. Recently, I have used my understanding of kinetics of uptake to analyze microbial activity in the soil. My Arctic expertise led to leadership of the aquatic part of the International Biological Program (IBP) at Barrow, Alaska, beginning in 1970. We (28 scientists, graduate students, and postdoctoral fellows) studied shallow ponds to quantify the carbon, nitrogen, and phosphorus cycles.

Bridging Community and Ecosystem Ecology at the Arctic Long-Term Ecological Research Site via Collaborations

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura Gough
Keyword(s):  
The Arctic ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Major Life Events ◽  
Major Life ◽  
University Of Texas ◽  
Louisiana State University ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Meta Analyses ◽  
Cross Site

My research in the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program helped to shape me into the ecologist that I am, working at the interface between communities and ecosystems on a variety of questions. As a university educator and public speaker, I incorporate examples of LTER site-based empirical and theoretical research, as well as cross-site meta-analyses in my teaching and presentations. My awareness of long-term research, in particular the response of North American ecosystems to global change, is heightened by my interactions within the LTER network. Working in the LTER program has provided me with opportunities for collaborations both within the Arctic site and across the network. The LTER program has thus inadvertently provided the framework for all of my current and recently funded research projects. These collaborations assisted in sustaining me through major life events, particularly having children, by helping me maintain my research productivity when my family required more of my time and attention. Currently, I am a professor in the Department of Biology at the University of Texas at Arlington. I teach undergraduate and graduate courses in botany and ecology, and I also supervise MS and PhD students working in the tundra at the Arctic (ARC) LTER site and locally on urban ecology questions. I earned my PhD in plant biology from Louisiana State University and have been affiliated with ARC site since 1996, when I was hired as a postdoctoral scientist by Gus Shaver on a related grant. Since 1999, when I started my first faculty position, I have been an independently funded researcher affiliated with the ARC site, and for the past few years I have served as a member of the ARC Executive Committee. My research at ARC site is at the interface between the community and the ecosystem. My contributions to site-specific understanding have focused on the factors (abiotic and biotic) that control tundra plant species diversity, including the role of consumer species (Figure 7.1). In addition, I have been involved in a cross-site working group in the LTER network (now called PDTNet: Productivity-Diversity-Traits Network) since 1996.

scholarly journals Assessing the biogeographical and socio-ecological representativeness of the ILTER site network

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christoph Wohner ◽  
Thomas Ohnemus ◽  
Steffen Zacharias ◽  
Hannes Mollenhauer ◽  
Erle Ellis ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
South America ◽  
Central Africa ◽  
Arctic Region ◽  
Governance Structure ◽  
Global Network ◽  
The Arctic ◽  
Ecosystem Research ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Site Network

<p>The challenges posed by climate and land use change are increasingly complex, with rising and accelerating impacts on the global environmental system. Novel environmental and ecosystem research needs to properly interpret system changes and derive management recommendations across scales. This largely depends on advances in the establishment of an internationally harmonised, long-term operating and representative infrastructure for environmental observation. One example for such an infrastructure for environmental observation is the International Long-Term Ecological Research (ILTER) network. ILTER is a global network of networks consisting of research sites in a wide array of ecosystems that focuses on long-term, site-based research, and builds on a “bottom-up” governance structure. To assess the biogeographical and socio-ecological representativeness of the ILTER site network, we analysed all of the 743 formally accredited sites in 47 countries with regard to their spatial distribution. So-called “Representedness” values were computed from six global datasets. The analysis revealed a dense coverage of Northern temperate regions and anthropogenic zones most notably in the US, Europe and East Asia. Notable gaps are present in economically less developed and anthropogenically less impacted hot and barren regions like Northern and Central Africa and inner-continental parts of South America. These findings provide the arguments for our recommendations regarding the geographic expansion for the further development of the ILTER network, most notably in inner continental parts of South America, the Arctic region and Western and Central Africa.</p>

A Forest to Prairie Transition as a Long-Term Ecological Research Scientist

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John Blair
Keyword(s):  
Graduate Student ◽  
Forest Floor ◽  
Principal Investigator ◽  
Spatial And Temporal Variability ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
Ecological Processes ◽  
University Of Georgia ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
Kansas State University

Being involved in the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program for most of my career has greatly influenced my development as an ecologist. It has broadened my understanding and appreciation of ecological processes at scales ranging from microbial processes to ecosystem fluxes. Participating in the LTER program has heightened my awareness of the critical role of spatial and temporal variability in ecological dynamics, as well as the value of long-term data for identifying directional environmental changes or assessing responses to experimental manipulations. Working with other investigators at an LTER site over long periods of time has revealed the importance of a place-based understanding of ecological processes as a source of insight into complex ecological phenomena. Interacting and collaborating with students and scientists having diverse research interests and backgrounds has enhanced my ability to communicate more effectively with other scientists and with the public. There are some trade-offs between directing a large research program and advancing one’s personal research, but the rewards of long-term collaboration are substantial. I have been part of the LTER program for most of my career, from graduate student at one LTER site to principal investigator at another. I began my PhD training at the University of Georgia in 1983 under the direction of D.A. (Dac) Crossley, Jr., the first leader of the Coweeta (CWT) LTER program. My early research focused on forest ecology, including plant litter decomposition and effects of clear-cutting and regrowth on decomposer communities and forest floor processes (Blair and Crossley 1988). My first postdoctoral appointment was on a National Science Foundation (NSF) grant that I wrote to study forest-floor nitrogen dynamics using stable isotope tracers. In 1992, I joined the faculty of the Division of Biology at Kansas State University as an ecosystem ecologist. This position had been held by Tim Seastedt, another Crossley graduate student who served as principal investigator of the Konza Prairie LTER (KNZ) program and later as principal investigator of the Niwot Ridge LTER program. I was hired with the expectation that I would become engaged in the KNZ program, where my research would focus on ecosystem processes in tallgrass prairie.

Long-Term Ecological Research and Lessons from Networked Lives

2016 ◽  
Author(s):  
John C. Moore
Keyword(s):  
Life Histories ◽  
Graduate Program ◽  
Michigan State University ◽  
Ecological Research ◽  
State University ◽  
Santa Barbara ◽  
The Public ◽  
Long Term Ecological Research ◽  
The University

The Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program has affected how I conduct and evaluate ecological research. Working with the LTER program has given me a greater appreciation for the complexity of the natural world and has provided a framework to study it. The LTER program has provided the best possible venue to connect ecological research with classroom instruction, mentoring, and professional development. Translating our science to the public is a challenge. My experiences in the LTER program have provided multiple opportunities to work with the public, K–12 and college or university students, and professionals in different fields. This process has honed my communication skills. The ideas that emerge from true collaborative science cannot be understated. The work at an LTER site and within the LTER network works best when we collaborate. I received my undergraduate training in ecology at the University of California (UC) Santa Barbara. At UC Santa Barbara in the 1970s, the ecology program focused largely on populations and communities. Field observations, laboratory studies, manipulative field studies, and equation-based modeling were the norm. I recall the first set of litter and soil samples of arthropods that I sorted were extracted using Tullgren funnels and thought at the time that a person would have to be insane to pursue this type of work as a career. Two years later, I was in the graduate program at Michigan State University working with Dr. Richard Snider where I studied the impacts of herbicides on soil arthropods in no- till corn. At Michigan State, I learned the importance of species life histories, behaviors, and tolerances to environmental variation. My first exposure with the LTER program started in 1979, during my first year of graduate school at Michigan State University. A National Science Foundation (NSF) program officer was visiting the university to promote the concept of the LTER program and the first round of competition. Being 22 years old at the time, it was difficult for me to appreciate discussions about a program that would potentially operate over several decades. As a graduate student, it was a lesson in the planning, extended time frame, and other programmatic logistics of collaborative science.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document