scholarly journals Meta-analyses of insect temporal trends must account for the complex sampling histories inherent to many long-term monitoring efforts

Author(s):  
Ellen A R Welti ◽  
Anthony Joern ◽  
aaron ellison ◽  
David C. Lightfoot ◽  
Sydne Record ◽  
...  

In an article recently published in Nature Ecology & Evolution (Crossley et al. 2020 “No net insect abundance and diversity declines across US Long Term Ecological Research sites”), sampling effort within Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) datasets was assumed to be consistent across years. Given the complex history of many long-term datasets at LTER sites, this assumption does not often hold and we believe this assumption led to errors in Crossley et al.’s analysis. Here we first use the Konza Prairie grasshopper dataset as an example of how changes in sampling locations and effort can cause errors when data are assumed to be collected with invariant sampling. Second, we describe similar and additional errors in data use from 7 of the 13 LTER sites included in Crossley et al. (2020)’s analysis.

Author(s):  
Christopher Hamlin

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.


Author(s):  
William H. Schlesinger

Ecology has a history of long-term studies that offer great insight to ecosystem processes. The advent of the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program institutionalized long-term studies with some core measurements at a selection of sites across North America. The most successful LTER sites are those that have an energetic leader with a clear vision, who has guided the work over many years. Several LTER sites have established successful education programs for K–12 and college-age students, as well as for science policy-makers. Implementation of more and better cross-site work would be welcome. The various essays in this volume reflect a broad range of experiences among participants in the LTER program. Nearly all are positive: only mad dogs bite the hand that feeds them. All authors appreciate the advantages of long-term funding for their research and lament that funding of the LTER program by the National Science Foundation (NSF) is so limited. There are numerous testimonials for how the LTER program has changed and broadened participation in collaborative science. The real question is whether the LTER program has allowed science to proceed faster, deeper, broader, and with more critical insight than if the program had not been created. To answer that question, I offer a few personal reflections on the LTER program. First, we must note that long-term research existed well before the LTER program. Edmondson began his long-term measurements of exogenous phosphorus in Lake Washington in the early 1950s (Edmondson 1991). Across the country, Herb Bormann and Gene Likens began long-term studies, now in their 50th year, of forest biogeochemistry at Hubbard Brook in 1963 (Likens 2013). Each of these long-term studies enjoys ample coverage in every text of introductory ecology. The advantages of long-term research are undisputed among those who are funded for it. Indeed, NSF embraces a wide variety of decade-long studies with its Long-Term Research in Environmental Biology (LTREB) program. The authors of several chapters recall how Howard Odum’s early work focused their attention on the connections between large units of the landscape.


2020 ◽  
Vol 4 (10) ◽  
pp. 1368-1376 ◽  
Author(s):  
Michael S. Crossley ◽  
Amanda R. Meier ◽  
Emily M. Baldwin ◽  
Lauren L. Berry ◽  
Leah C. Crenshaw ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Laura Gough

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.


Ecosphere ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 12 (5) ◽  
Author(s):  
David M. Iwaniec ◽  
Michael Gooseff ◽  
Katharine N. Suding ◽  
David Samuel Johnson ◽  
Daniel C. Reed ◽  
...  

Author(s):  
Ellen A. R. Welti ◽  
Anthony Joern ◽  
Aaron M. Ellison ◽  
David C. Lightfoot ◽  
Sydne Record ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document