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

Long-Term Ecological Research ◽

10.1093/oso/9780199380213.003.0058 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Forty Arctic Summers

Long-Term Ecological Research ◽

10.1093/oso/9780199380213.003.0016 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

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

Long-Term Ecological Research ◽

10.1093/oso/9780199380213.003.0068 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Ecological Research

10.1093/oso/9780199380213.001.0001 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Long-Term Ecological Research and Lessons from Networked Lives

Long-Term Ecological Research ◽

10.1093/oso/9780199380213.003.0060 ◽

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.

Download Full-text

Mysteries in the Marsh

Long-Term Ecological Research ◽

10.1093/oso/9780199380213.003.0052 ◽

2016 ◽

Author(s):

Anne Giblin

Keyword(s):

Scientific Information ◽

Student Experiences ◽

Ecological Research ◽

Policy Makers ◽

Level Of Involvement ◽

The Public ◽

The Gift ◽

Long Term Ecological Research ◽

Students First

I feel as though my graduate student experiences “preadapted” me to become involved in long-term ecological research. I already enjoyed collaborative research and instantly felt comfortable in the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program when I first had the opportunity to work in it. Working on large, collaborative projects offers a great number of opportunities for students and postdoctoral fellows, but their mentors need to ensure that they develop intellectually independent ideas. Giving students and postdoctoral fellows the long-term collaborative view of science while having them develop as fully independent scientists is a balancing act that I try to always keep in mind. The LTER program has led me into an increased level of communication with the public, students, and local and regional level managers and policy-makers. I have found that at every level people are hungry for scientific information, and my interactions with all of them have been extremely rewarding—although challenging. It has forced me to expand my communication skills and work with others who have the gift of science translation. There are costs and benefits to scientific collaboration that change with the size of the project and with one’s level of involvement in the project. Entraining young scientists is a challenge for large-sized projects, such as those in the LTER program. It was 1975 when I and several other beginning graduate students first walked down a short path through the woods to the Great Sippewissett Marsh in Falmouth, Massachusetts. Ahead of me marched my major professor, Ivan Valiela. As we explored the marsh, Ivan pointed out numerous circular plots staked in the grass. These, it turned out, defined the bounds of his fertilization experiments. The grass within some of the plots was distinctly greener and taller compared to others. Ivan began explaining the marsh fertilization experiment that he had begun 5 years earlier with John Teal. He described how the responses of the marsh seemed to differ with the amount of added fertilizer. The community composition of the vegetation had been changing over time.

Download Full-text