Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Dear list members, - Some people now are talking about question-driven research as the same as hypothesis- riven research. Those are 2 different things. I think every research could be based on a question, even if you are making a species list of an area, what butterflies species occur in this area?. - I believe most people are confusing what is a scientific hypothesis. A scientific hypothesis is about a process (how a system works), usually answering the question why or how, and rooted on theory. You see the pattern that a bird migrate, that is the pattern, now you need to answer why and how the bird migrate, but your hypothesis need to be grounded in theory. - Is very common to see statement starting like, I hypothesize ... and people think that they are establishing and testing an hypothesis. For example, I hypothesize that more carnivores species would occur on mature forest than succesional forests. That is not a scientific hypothesis, that is a pattern that could be stated as a prediction from a scientific hypothesis and also could be stated as a statistical hypothesis. I don't even know what is the scientific hypothesis behind that statement. - What many people are doing in ecology is parameter estimation: You can have an occupancy model like this: Frog species occupancy ~ Percentage of forest cover + Temperature + Altitude. You are not strictly testing any scientific hypothesis either, you already know that the frog species occurrence is influenced by forest cover, temperature and altitude. What you are trying to do is parameter estimation, trying to see the effect size and what are the kind of relationships among species occurrence and those variables and you can see variable interactions if you fit an interaction model. I just read on another list that a person want to test the null hypothesis that a frog species does not occur at random in an area. You don't need to spend any funding answering that question. Everybody knows that the frog species is not going to be distributed at random in an area. - To suggest testing scientific hypothesis in ecology under a Popperian approach is misleading. most of the time See: Quinn, J. F. and Dunham, A. E. 1983. On hypothesis testing in ecology and evolution. - The American Naturalist 122: 602-617. Loehle, C. 1987. Hypothesis testing in ecology: Psychological aspects and the importance of theory maturation. Quarterly Review of Biology, 62:397--409. - If you are still thinking that null hypothesis significant testing and P values are useful in ecology, you may want to read: Anderson, D. R., K. P. Burnham, and W. L. Thompson. 2000. Null hypothesis testing: problems, prevalence, and an alternative. Journal of Wildlife Management 64:912-923. Hobbs , N. T., and R. Hilborn. 2006. Alternatives to statistical hypothesis testing in ecology: A guide to self teaching. Ecological Applications 16:5-19. Johnson, D. H. 1999. The Insignificance of Statistical Significance Testing. Journal of Wildlife Management 63(3):763-772. Best, Manuel On 08/03/2011 02:34 p.m., Resetarits, William wrote: It seems a rather critical issue has raised its head at this juncture in the discussion. Is all data gathering research. I think we risk being disingenuous and misleading the many students on this listserve if we don't clearly and unequivocally answer NO. To suggetst hat the system is somehow faulty and that it is OK for folks, especially students, to follow their hearts and simply gather data on their favorite organisms or systems is doing them a grave disservice. One of the first, and undoubtedly the most important, thing I learned in my PhD. was also the most simple. The key question in any research project, whether empirical, experimental or theoretical, is... What's the question? Or as one of my committee members so eloquently put it, why should I care. The fact that no one knows anything about a particular taxon or a system, or I really like organism X is rarely an adequate answer. No one really doubts the absolute value of pure descriptive natural history, and data is a good thing, but it cannot realistically be an end in itself for a professional scientist in this day and age. Even the most storied present day natural historians, and those of the past as well, bring much more to the table. In any realistic funding climate, question driven science will, and should, take precedence. This does not mean that one can't do pure natural history in the context of question driven science, but it alone is unlikely to be sufficient to drive the research to the top of anyone's funding list, onto the pages of top journals, or to drive a candidate to the top of many job lists, at least at the PhD. level. Similarly, biodiversity discovery is important, ongoing, and it gets funded. Why? NSF's Program in Biotic Surveys and Inventories, recently expired programs in Microbial
[ECOLOG-L] PhD position in Plant Systematics available at NCB Naturalis
Dear all, I would like to draw your attention to this job announcement: The Netherlands Centre for Biodiversity Naturalis seeks to attract a PhD student who will be working on a project focussing on the diversification of mycoheterotrophic angiosperms. You are an energetic and enthusiastic scientist with interest in plant systematics, evolution, and diversification. You are eager to join our new institute and to study the NCB Naturalis natural history collections. For more details see: http://www.ncbnaturalis.nl/nl/werken-bij-ons/vacatures/three-phd-students/ or contact me directly (mer...@nhn.leidenuniv.nl). Applications can be submitted before March 14th, 2011 Best regards, Vincent Dr. Vincent Merckx Research Fellow Netherlands Centre for Biodiversity Naturalis (section NHN) P.O. Box 9514, 2300RA Leiden, The Netherlands email: mer...@nhn.leidenuniv.nl phone: + 31 71 5273570 fax: + 31 71 5273522
[ECOLOG-L] Animation of global vegetation since last glacial
Thought this might interest some of you.. it's an animated global version of my old QEN maps, vegetation since the last glacial maximum. It was done by Adrian Meyer and Karl Rege in Switzerland. There are a few little glitches: the ice extent is not from my maps, and I disagree with its accuracy in some places (e.g. southern Australia, Northern Siberia, Himalayan Plateau). Also the time slices merge slowly so some rapid transitions seem more gradual than they likely were. And deforestation isn't shown, only 'natural potential vegetation'. But anyway, it's the overall big picture here that's important... what it shows is that our world has changed a lot in just 20,000 years. Here's the link: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C3Jwnp-Z3yE
[ECOLOG-L] Congressional request for university research on quagga and zebra mussels
Dear colleagues, I was contacted yesterday by Congresswoman Grace Napolitano who is seeking research articles from the university community on quagga and zebra mussels to help inform the US Bureau of Reclamation on their control actions. Of course, I can do a web of science search and come up with a list, but I would like to be able to include a contact name if the Congresswoman would like to follow up. Making these kinds of connections helps to demonstrate the utilty of our research to the Nation. Please send a pdf (or URL linking to a pdf) of any relevant articles on these invasive species along with a corresponding author's name and e-mail to rhoo...@cuahsi.orgmailto:rhoo...@cuahsi.org. The article can be quite technical--that's OK. Grace is just trying to see that work isn't duplicated and that the responsible government agencies are aware of university research. **Please forward this e-mail to colleagues who are doing such work so that they can respond. Thanks for your help, Rick P.S. CUAHSI is a university consortium supported by the NSF to advance water science. More info at http://www.cuahsi.org. *** Richard P. Hooper, PhD CUAHSI 196 Boston Avenue, Suite 2100 Medford, MA 02155
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
If you think Darwin's comment overstates the case, I recommend Michael Ghiselin's book, The Triumph of the Darwinian Method. He tested alternate hypotheses regularly as he gathered his observations. He did gather much information about many things and collected widely on many areas (e.g. coral reef formation), but his successes were conscious of a method that led to new insights. This view resonates with the Resetarits comment about which proposals in areas of biodiversity focused on collecting are most likely to get funded. Anthony Joern Professor of Biology Co-Director, Institute for Grassland Studies Kansas State University -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Jane Shevtsov Sent: Wednesday, March 09, 2011 2:43 AM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology Darwin's comment is indeed famous, but let's not forget that it was made in a private letter in the context of defending the theory of evolution by natural selection. For that reason, it may well overstate the case. I'm no expert on Darwin, but I'm willing to guess (hypothesize?) that a good fraction of his observations of worms, barnacles, and South America were not initially made to support or refute any view, although they may well have been used that way later. Can anyone speak to this? Jane Shevtsov On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Hal Caswell hcasw...@whoi.edu wrote: People seem to be struggling over how to understand the value of observational research in the context of hypothesis-oriented discussions. One missing fact is that hypothesis-oriented research does not have to involve modern statistics, because scientific hypothesis-testing is not the same as statistical null hypothesis testing. Im surprised that no one has quoted Darwins perceptive comment about observational research (an activity in which he was an acknowledged master): How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service! (see http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/entry-3257 for the entire letter, to H. Fawcett, 18 Sept. 1861) Hal Caswell On Mar 8, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Martin Meiss wrote: I am amazed by Pat Swain's statements implying that unless a program of work includes formal hypothesis testing, it's not even research. (...I think that pure survey of a property for species (making a list of all the species of some taxonomic group) encountered isn't research..., ...some of the projects that I rejected as not being research might well have been fundable ...)This appears to be defining the word research in a way I have never seen or heard before. Does this mean that none of the scientific work that was done before the rise of modern statistics was not research? Where the people doing that work also not really scientists? And whatever happened to library research? Martin 2011/3/7 Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net Honorable Forum: Re: I think these general surveys are valuable, but they don't overtly involve hypotheses and testing. However, it can and does include assumptions/hypotheses; as one of the posters on the topic pointed out there are always assumptions made. One doesn't walk every square inch of a site, rather picks areas (from aerials, maps, knowledge, observations when out there) places that are most likely to be different/interesting (have rare things). --Pat Swain (Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM) I don't want to appear to jump to conclusions, so I would be interested in Swain's expansions upon this issue. I wonder if Pat would have funded a survey which was based upon random sampling/mapping that would provide a baseline dataset and provide another level of scrutiny of the different/interesting as well as an opportunity to discover that which one's present state of knowledge might otherwise overlook. Please describe the theoretical foundation for walking the site rather than randomly sampling it, and how one approaches gaining knowledge of a site without a (statistically) valid inventory. WT - Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE) pat.sw...@state.ma.us To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology Ecolog-L, Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first posed to the group, one of the questions was whether anyone had rejected projects or grant proposals for lack of hypotheses. The discussion has gone on while I thought about posting a response to that, but with Jane Shevtsov's prodding, I offer the following thoughts on hypothesis testing and research. For some years I was on a committee to review and select graduate student research proposals for grant support for a regional botanical organization at the same time that I was involved in evaluating proposals for small
[ECOLOG-L] National Park Service Botanist/Ecologist job open until March 23
The National Park Service's Northern Great Plains Network (NGPN) Inventory and Monitoring Program seeks an Ecologist (GS-0408) or Botanist (GS-0430) to implement a long-term ecological monitoring program for vegetation in 13 park units. This is a permanent, full time, GS-11 position (approx. $56,411 - $73,329) and is open to federal status and non-status applicants. Applicants must be U.S. citizens. The Ecologist will implement and develop additional measures to examine vegetation as part of a long-term monitoring program that evaluates status and trends in selected Vital Signs (key ecosystem components and processes). The Ecologist is responsible for ensuring the scientific rigor and statistical soundness of the overall vegetation program. The incumbent leads or works with teams (consisting of NPS resource professionals, agency and academic researchers, and other internal or external cooperators) in the implementation and development of vegetation monitoring protocols. The incumbent visits field sites to implement and supervise data collection, conducts statistical data analysis using appropriate techniques and tools, interprets and synthesizes results, and communicates the significance of findings through presentations, reports, and publications. The incumbent also supports administration of the program through project coordination, writing and overseeing contracts and agreements, developing work plans, schedules, and cost estimates, and tracking budgets. The position will involve a combination of office work, field time, and travel to the parks. Go to the following web sites for the official announcements: http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=97210055JobTitle=Botanistq=where=rapid+citybrd=3876vw=bFedEmp=NFedPub=Yx=0y=0AVSDM=2011-03-02+10%3a52%3a00 http://jobview.usajobs.gov/GetJob.aspx?JobID=97210188JobTitle=Ecologistq=where=rapid+citybrd=3876vw=bFedEmp=NFedPub=Yx=0y=0pg=2re=4AVSDM=2011-03-02+10%3a52%3a00 If you have questions please contact: Kara Paintner-Green Network Coordinator NPS Northern Great Plains Inventory Monitoring Network 231 East St. Joseph Street Rapid City, SD 57701 Office 605-341-2807 Cell605-381-2441 Fax605-341-7192 kara_paint...@nps.gov
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Mobile mapping app for iPhone or Android?
Hi all, GISROAM from ESRI is pretty flexible. The program is free, but they charge you to transfer data. IGIS is supposed to decent, but I have not tried it. Theodolite Pro is fantastic, but it doesn't do polygons. It will export location data and photographs to Google Maps and send you a .kml file via email. The .kml files can be easily converted to GIS files. The fellow who wrote the software is very accessable and good about responding to queries. He might be able to add an option to connect points and create polygons. This blog goes into some of the technical aspects of how to draw polygons on iPhone maps: http://www.gisnotes.com/wordpress/2009/09/iphone-devnote-13-drawing-point-line-polygon-on-top-of-mkmapview/ The ArcGIS iPhone app lets you draw polygons (under the tools icon in the upper right) and get area measurements, but I don't see any way of exporting the data. Good luck, let us know what works best, Neahga On Fri, Mar 4, 2011 at 11:30 PM, Thiago Silva thi...@uvic.ca wrote: Hi Jonathan and list, I have just downloaded and installed the ICMTGIS application on my iPad, but haven't had the chance to try it fully yet. Five minutes of play before bed showed me that you can digitize on screen, and even load Google Maps imagery to digitize on top, and it also lets you create and edit attribute tables. I think you can export the data too. It's a free application, so it's easy to give it a try: http://itunes.apple.com/us/app/icmtgis/id409254102?mt=8 Best, -- Dr. Thiago Sanna F. Silva Postdoctoral Fellow Remote Sensing Division - National Institute for Space Research (INPE) São José dos Campos, SP - Brazil www.dsr.inpe.br Personal Webpage: www.thiagosilva.wordpress.com On 2011-03-04, at 4:08 PM, Jonathan Greenberg wrote: Folks: I'm trying to hunt down a field-GIS software a la ArcPad that runs on an iPhone or Android phone/tablet. It needs to be able to do the following: 1) Collect point, line and polygon via on-screen digitization. 2) Allow for some level of meta-data associated with the features (a full blown data dictionary would be nice, but even a comment field for the polygon would be fine. 3) Load/view raster/vector layers. Any suggestions? ArcGIS for iPhone does not appear to do much except display maps (which I can do with google maps already), despite claiming to have data collection capabilities. --j -- Jonathan A. Greenberg, PhD Assistant Project Scientist Center for Spatial Technologies and Remote Sensing (CSTARS) Department of Land, Air and Water Resources University of California, Davis One Shields Avenue Davis, CA 95616 Phone: 415-763-5476 AIM: jgrn307, MSN: jgrn...@hotmail.com, Gchat: jgrn307
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Is it not true that in attempting to say something about environmental influence on barnacle biology, Darwin realized he did not know enough about barnacles to use them as a model for his theories? Thus arose one of the most famous and definitive studies of any time about the morphology and biology of a large taxon. At least an old story makes that claim. mcneely Jane Shevtsov jane@gmail.com wrote: Darwin's comment is indeed famous, but let's not forget that it was made in a private letter in the context of defending the theory of evolution by natural selection. For that reason, it may well overstate the case. I'm no expert on Darwin, but I'm willing to guess (hypothesize?) that a good fraction of his observations of worms, barnacles, and South America were not initially made to support or refute any view, although they may well have been used that way later. Can anyone speak to this? Jane Shevtsov On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:51 AM, Hal Caswell hcasw...@whoi.edu wrote: People seem to be struggling over how to understand the value of observational research in the context of hypothesis-oriented discussions. One missing fact is that hypothesis-oriented research does not have to involve “modern statistics”, because scientific hypothesis-testing is not the same as statistical null hypothesis testing. I’m surprised that no one has quoted Darwin’s perceptive comment about observational research (an activity in which he was an acknowledged master): How odd it is that anyone should not see that all observation must be for or against some view if it is to be of any service!” (see http://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/entry-3257 for the entire letter, to H. Fawcett, 18 Sept. 1861) Hal Caswell On Mar 8, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Martin Meiss wrote: I am amazed by Pat Swain's statements implying that unless a program of work includes formal hypothesis testing, it's not even research. (...I think that pure survey of a property for species (making a list of all the species of some taxonomic group) encountered isn't research..., ...some of the projects that I rejected as not being research might well have been fundable ...)This appears to be defining the word research in a way I have never seen or heard before. Does this mean that none of the scientific work that was done before the rise of modern statistics was not research? Where the people doing that work also not really scientists? And whatever happened to library research? Martin 2011/3/7 Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net Honorable Forum: Re: I think these general surveys are valuable, but they don't overtly involve hypotheses and testing. However, it can and does include assumptions/hypotheses; as one of the posters on the topic pointed out there are always assumptions made. One doesn't walk every square inch of a site, rather picks areas (from aerials, maps, knowledge, observations when out there) places that are most likely to be different/interesting (have rare things). --Pat Swain (Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM) I don't want to appear to jump to conclusions, so I would be interested in Swain's expansions upon this issue. I wonder if Pat would have funded a survey which was based upon random sampling/mapping that would provide a baseline dataset and provide another level of scrutiny of the different/interesting as well as an opportunity to discover that which one's present state of knowledge might otherwise overlook. Please describe the theoretical foundation for walking the site rather than randomly sampling it, and how one approaches gaining knowledge of a site without a (statistically) valid inventory. WT - Original Message - From: Swain, Pat (FWE) pat.sw...@state.ma.us To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Sent: Monday, March 07, 2011 6:03 AM Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology Ecolog-L, Way back when the question about hypothesis testing in ecology was first posed to the group, one of the questions was whether anyone had rejected projects or grant proposals for lack of hypotheses. The discussion has gone on while I thought about posting a response to that, but with Jane Shevtsov's prodding, I offer the following thoughts on hypothesis testing and research. For some years I was on a committee to review and select graduate student research proposals for grant support for a regional botanical organization at the same time that I was involved in evaluating proposals for small contracts from my office which is focused on rare species and uncommon natural communities in the state. (I stress the research grants vs. contracts; and I am no longer on the committee which no doubt has different biases from mine, and my office doesn't have money for small contracts like we used to). On the grad research committee, I was
[ECOLOG-L] PhD position in Ecology/Ecohydrology at Eawag/EPFL (Switzerland)
The Department of Aquatic Ecology (Eawag, Switzerland) and the Department of Ecohydrology (EPFL Lausanne, Switzerland) seek a PhD student in Ecology and Ecohydrology. Project title: Experimental and theoretical evaluations of travelling waves of organisms spreading in differently structured aquatic systems. The PhD student will participate in a collaborative research project with Dr. Florian Altermatt (Aquatic Ecology, Eawag) and Prof. Dr. Andrea Rinaldo (Ecohydrology, EPFL) to experimentally study travelling waves of aquatic organisms in landscapes of different structures. Understanding the spread of organisms in natural landscapes is a central issue of ecology and is currently receiving a large theoretical interest. We will use microcosm-system with protozoans, in which the propagation front can be accurately measured in the laboratory. These estimates are then used to parametrize a broad class of models. Ultimately, we want to get a more comprehensive understanding of the spread of organisms, such as disease vectors or invasive species, in bifurcating waterways and rivers. For this project, financed by Eawag, we are looking for a highly motivated candidate with interests in ecology, ecohydrology and river network dynamics. The project combines laboratory microcosm-experiments with protozoans and mathematical modeling. We offer a stimulating research environment in lively and social institutes in Dübendorf (near Zürich) and in Lausanne. At both localities, the departments host other research groups in ecology and ecohydrology. The position will be for a period of three years, and should start as soon as possible (June 2011 or soon thereafter). The PhD student will be enrolled at EPFL, but the lab- and working-environment is shared between the two localities (i.e., a large part of the PhD will be done in Dübendorf, the other part in Lausanne). The ideal candidate has good experimental skills and/or a strong background in quantitative modeling. Excellent communicational and writing skills in English, good work ethics, and creative thinking are desired. A Diploma or Masters degree (or equivalent) in biology, physics or related subject is necessary for admission. The working language in the groups is English. Applications should include a letter of interest with a description of pertinent experience, curriculum vitae, a list of publications (if any), the names (with e-mail addresses) of three potential referees, and copies of certificates of academic qualifications. Applications must be submitted with the online-application tool, using the following link: http://internet1.refline.ch/673277/0028/++publications++/1/index.html Please submit your application by 10 April 2011. For further information, consult www.eawag.ch http://www.eawag.ch/about/personen/homepages/altermfl/index_EN http://www.epfl.ch/ http://echo.epfl.ch/page-12889.html or contact Florian Altermatt (Tel. +41 58 765 55 92) florian.alterm...@eawag.ch Eawag, the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, is a Swiss-based internationally active research institute within the ETH Domain (ETH Zurich and EPFL). It is committed to the ecologically, economically and socially responsible management of water. EPFL is the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. Its mission are education, research and technology transfer at the highest international level.
[ECOLOG-L] suggested text for a symbiosis course?
Next fall I am going to start up a senior-level course in symbiosis, which I will mostly teach from my skewed perspective as a biochemist, but which I realize has very patchy coverage in that regard. I will probably hand out papers to the students from the original literature, but I was hoping that there might be a book or two that would be helpful - although a fast look did not find much. So, if any of the folks on your listserv has a favorite they'd like to point me to, I'd appreciate it. Many thanks Skip _ Sidney K. Pierce, Ph. D. Emeritus Professor of Biology, University of Maryland And Professor of Biology Department of Biology University of South Florida 4202 E. Fowler Ave., SCA 110 Tampa, FL 33620 email: pie...@usf.edu Phone: office (813) 974-4494 Lab (813) 974-8159 Web- http://biology.usf.edu/ib/faculty/spierce/
[ECOLOG-L] Fish Kill in California
Is anyone in this list working on the recent fish kill in Redondo Beach, south of Los Angeles, California ? Sarah Frias-Torres, Ph.D. Postdoctoral Scholar Schmidt Research Vessel Institute Postdoctoral Fellowhttp://independent.academia.edu/SarahFriasTorresOcean Research Conservation Association 1420 Seaway Drive, 2nd Floor Fort Pierce, Florida 34949 USA http://www.teamorca.org
Re: [ECOLOG-L] PhD position in Ecology/Ecohydrology at Eawag/EPFL (Switzerland)
Dear ECOLOG-L'ers, I've seen enough of this kind of advertisement and I must speak up. I want everyone to read this very carefully and tell me if you REALLY think this sounds like an 'opportunity' for learning and being taught and mentored - an educational/student scenario - OR, meerly a 3-year technician position (note the requirement of pre-existing skills with no description of what they'll be taught or how the 'student' will benefit) at the end of which the possibility of being provided with a PhD certificate??? I encourage a lively and robust discussion here. Later, I may find an equivalent 'postdoc opportunity' ad on which to make the same inquiry. Cheers! Aaron T. Dossey, Ph.D. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology On 3/9/2011 10:00 AM, Julie Kellner wrote: The Department of Aquatic Ecology (Eawag, Switzerland) and the Department of Ecohydrology (EPFL Lausanne, Switzerland) seek a PhD student in Ecology and Ecohydrology. Project title: Experimental and theoretical evaluations of travelling waves of organisms spreading in differently structured aquatic systems. The PhD student will participate in a collaborative research project with Dr. Florian Altermatt (Aquatic Ecology, Eawag) and Prof. Dr. Andrea Rinaldo (Ecohydrology, EPFL) to experimentally study travelling waves of aquatic organisms in landscapes of different structures. Understanding the spread of organisms in natural landscapes is a central issue of ecology and is currently receiving a large theoretical interest. We will use microcosm-system with protozoans, in which the propagation front can be accurately measured in the laboratory. These estimates are then used to parametrize a broad class of models. Ultimately, we want to get a more comprehensive understanding of the spread of organisms, such as disease vectors or invasive species, in bifurcating waterways and rivers. For this project, financed by Eawag, we are looking for a highly motivated candidate with interests in ecology, ecohydrology and river network dynamics. The project combines laboratory microcosm-experiments with protozoans and mathematical modeling. We offer a stimulating research environment in lively and social institutes in Dübendorf (near Zürich) and in Lausanne. At both localities, the departments host other research groups in ecology and ecohydrology. The position will be for a period of three years, and should start as soon as possible (June 2011 or soon thereafter). The PhD student will be enrolled at EPFL, but the lab- and working-environment is shared between the two localities (i.e., a large part of the PhD will be done in Dübendorf, the other part in Lausanne). The ideal candidate has good experimental skills and/or a strong background in quantitative modeling. Excellent communicational and writing skills in English, good work ethics, and creative thinking are desired. A Diploma or Masters degree (or equivalent) in biology, physics or related subject is necessary for admission. The working language in the groups is English. Applications should include a letter of interest with a description of pertinent experience, curriculum vitae, a list of publications (if any), the names (with e-mail addresses) of three potential referees, and copies of certificates of academic qualifications. Applications must be submitted with the online-application tool, using the following link: http://internet1.refline.ch/673277/0028/++publications++/1/index.html Please submit your application by 10 April 2011. For further information, consult www.eawag.ch http://www.eawag.ch/about/personen/homepages/altermfl/index_EN http://www.epfl.ch/ http://echo.epfl.ch/page-12889.html or contact Florian Altermatt (Tel. +41 58 765 55 92) florian.alterm...@eawag.ch Eawag, the Swiss Federal Institute of Aquatic Science and Technology, is a Swiss-based internationally active research institute within the ETH Domain (ETH Zurich and EPFL). It is committed to the ecologically, economically and socially responsible management of water. EPFL is the Ecole Polytechnique Fédérale de Lausanne. Its mission are education, research and technology transfer at the highest international level.
[ECOLOG-L] Summer Field Technician-- Black Hills Area
JOB TITLE: Summer Field Technician 40-50 hours/week. A second year grad student in the Knapp Lab at Colorado State University needs summer field work help in South Dakota. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: This project addresses the ecological impacts of nitrogen deposition on native plant communities and soils in the mixed prairie grasslands of Wind Cave and Badlands NP, South Dakota. Critical thresholds of N input will be determined using experimental plots with a range of N fertilization levels comparable to ecological and rangeland studies (0, 2.5, 5, 7.5, 10, 20, 45, 68 and 100 kg N/ ha /yr) with and without water treatments in one vegetation type at Badlands National Park and two vegetation types at Wind Cave National Park. JOB DESCRIPTION: Position Duration: (12 weeks) June-mid August, approximately 40 hours a week, 40+ hours during the 4 vegetation sampling weeks. There is flexibility in the schedule but you must commit to long hours during the vegetation sampling weeks in late June and mid-August. The technician will perform a variety tasks related to vegetation and soil sampling. A large part of the position will be the bi-weekly watering of the plots. Technician must be able to hike short distances over rough terrain and inclement weather repeatedly with backpack sprayer on. The technician will learn and perform soil sampling, data retrieval from sensors, biological crust identification and of course, vegetation sampling. The Black Hills region is a beautiful area with unique geology, forested hills with elevations up to 7000ft and rolling grasslands supporting bison, elk and other wildlife, with major cultural and historical interest as well. The technician has two housing options: low-rent housing in Hot Springs with the researcher and other park staff or tent camping with a free site in Wind Cave NP with access to shower and kitchen. Camping is required when working at Badlands NP( approximately 1/3 of the time) with access to shower and kitchen. REQUIREMENTS: Attention to detail and good record-keeping skills. BS / BA, or significant progress toward, in biology, ecology, range science, environmental science, or a similar degree. Field experience preferred, at least some experience working outdoors required. This is a physically demanding position! Previous plant identification experience, plant taxonomy or field botany class required, though advanced identification techniques will be taught . A positive attitude, desire to work hard even in difficult conditions and gain field experience. A car would be helpful, though not required, as Hot Springs, SD is a small, isolated town. We will not be working on the weekends. COMPENSATION: Valuable plant identification and field experience. Pay is $10.00/hr and in sunsets. Potential for other paid opportunities in the fall for vegetation sample sorting. CONTACT INFORMATION: To apply please email a cover letter, resume, and list of references by April 1st for first consideration to Anine Smith, MS student, Graduate Degree Program in Ecology, aninesm...@hotmail.com
[ECOLOG-L] National Workshop on Climate and Forests
Workshop Highlights Tools to Help Plan for Change The Earth's climate is dynamic, which poses challenges for forest managers. Fortunately, many of the management tools that promote healthy forests also can alert managers to problems from extreme weather, climate change or other stressors. Foresters and resource managers can explore these concepts at the upcoming National Workshop on Climate and Forests to be held in Flagstaff, Arizona, from May 16 to 18: http://www.safnet.org/natworkshop11/index.cfm. Early Registration Deadline is April 2nd! At the workshop, Dr. Kier Klepzig will share some details on up-and-coming tools that can help managers keep a better eye on the forests in their care with help from satellites and online tools. For instance, Klepzig will report on a tool the U.S. Forest Service will soon be launching across the nation: the Forest Incidence Recognition and State-Tracking System. FIRST incorporates daily satellite images assessing vegetation greenness into models that can alert managers to potential problems. Dr. Kier Klepzig is the assistant director-Research and leader of the Threats to Forest Health Science Area at the USDA Forest Service Southern Research Station in Asheville, NC. Theyve been able to use these satellite images and find tracks of storms that have gone through areas of forest, Klepzig noted, referring to efforts by Forest Service researchers. FIRST can also identify outbreaks of defoliators. Weve found that these severe outbreaks of caterpillars out there eating leaves show up on satellite images. We can track them too. With a FIRST alert based on the analysis of satellite images in near-real time, managers can prioritize problem areas for fly-bys or ground truthing efforts a necessity in these days of budget challenges. Klepzig will also present an online research tool (http://www.forestthreats.org/news-events/additional-news/taccimo-v2.0) that allows managers producing forest plans to easily access and use the climate change scientific literature most relevant to their specific geographic location. TACCIMO (Template for Assessing Climate Change Impacts and Management Options) also generates reports containing available management options for dealing with climate change impacts. Klepzig will be joined by a top-notch list of other speakers at the Flagstaff workshop, which is designed to: stimulate thinking about how ecosystems may adapt to changes; explore the role that managers may have to mitigate ecosystem responses; foster discussion and partnerships among managers and scientists; and make online planning and modeling tools more accessible. During an afternoon field trip, participants will explore the Four Forests Restoration Initiative and sites of ponderosa pine ecosystem restoration, aspen decline, wildfire, and piñon pine bark beetle mortality. The workshop is sponsored by the USDA Forest Service, USDA National Institute of Food and Agriculture, Society of American Foresters, the University of Arizona, Northern Arizona University, the Association of Natural Resource Extension Professionals and Arizona Cooperative Extension. Professional CFE credits will be approved by the Society of American Foresters. The deadline for Poster Submission is March 22. P.S. With only a 90-minute drive, Flagstaff is the gateway to the Grand Canyon! IMPORTANTS DATES: Deadline for Poster Abstract Submission March 22 Registration Fees Before April 2 After April 2 Climate and Forest Workshop Registration $235 $295 Climate and Forest Workshop Registration (Student SAF Member) $140 $235 Climate Forests Field Trip $50 $65 Climate Forests Field Trip (Student SAF Member) $40 $50 Christopher Jones, Associate Agent Agriculture Natural Resources Programs University of Arizona Gila County Cooperative Extension 5515 S Apache Avenue, Suite 600 Globe, AZ 85501 U.S.A. Phone: (928) 402-8586 Fax: (928) 425-0265 Email: ckjo...@cals.arizona.edu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Need textbook Suggestiond
Meadows' book is excellent -- by far the best I've read on intro-level systems thinking. Also, have you looked at G. Tyler Miller's Essentials of Ecology? I haven't read it, but Miller's environmental science textbooks are substantive and very engaging. Jane Shevtsov On Tue, Mar 8, 2011 at 6:44 AM, Doug Miller mil...@eesi.psu.edu wrote: Donella Meadows book Thinking in Systems: A Primer would appear to fit one of your needs. I was impressed with this book after a quick hands-on review at a local bookstore. I recall thinking it would make a nice intro to the subject... Doug Penn State University mil...@eesi.psu.edu On 3/8/11 12:06 AM, Rebecca Sherry wrote: I am developing a course in Ecological Literacy. At a minimum, I would like to use one book on systems thinking, and one general ecology text. I may use two books on systems thinking and also add a book on ecological resilience, and of course, individual papers and book chapters. I am having trouble finding an appropriate general ecology text. I need something with an emphasis on ecosystem science and climate interactions (don't need any autecology). Many of the students may not be science majors, so the typical ecosystem science textbook is not appropriate. But the students will have had some science and will be very into the subject and fairly knowledgeable on environmental issues, so a typical environmental science text for non-majors may not be right either. I need something in between. Finally, I don't want anything too big, heavy or expensive. Any suggestions? Thanks! Becky Sherry University of Oklahoma rshe...@ou.edu -- - Jane Shevtsov Ecology Ph.D. candidate, University of Georgia co-founder, www.worldbeyondborders.org Check out my blog, http://perceivingwholes.blogspot.comPerceiving Wholes In the long run, education intended to produce a molecular geneticist, a systems ecologist, or an immunologist is inferior, both for the individual and for society, than that intended to produce a broadly educated person who has also written a dissertation. --John Janovy, Jr., On Becoming a Biologist
[ECOLOG-L] job ad. - please post
Hello: Could you please post the following position asap? Mahalo! David. HAWAII BIRD FIELD ASSISTANT needed for 4 months (April 1 - July 31, 2011). We are seeking a committed, enthusiastic, and hard working field technician to work with native birds on the Big Island of Hawaii. The technician will assist with forest passerine nest searching and monitoring, mist-netting and banding birds, and resighting color-banded birds. Field work will take place in mid-elevation native Hawaiian forest patches. Desirable qualifications include experience finding and monitoring passerine nests in a forest setting, taking birds out of mist-nets, and banding. The assistant must have their own binoculars and have excellent observation skills. Further, field assistnats should possess good record-keeping skills, a solid work ethic, and be in good physical condition because field work will take place in a rugged, often wet, and sometimes cool landscape. The position requires carrying steel mist-netting poles far distances across rugged lava. Work begins between 5 and 7 am and ends between 3 and 5 pm, five days/week. In addition to the above desirable skills, we are seeking individuals who work well with others under difficult field conditions; the technician will work as part of a field crew and will live in a common apartment with three others. Amenities include working with one of the most unique and imperiled bird communities in the world. This is a full-time temporary position. The field assistant is responsible for airfare to Hilo, HI and will receive a stipend of $400/mo. Housing will be provided in Hilo, HI. Send a cover letter, resume, and a list of three references via email (please put: Kipuka Field Assistant in subject line) to DAVID FLASPOHLER (djfla...@mtu.edu). We will begin reviewing applications as soon as they arrive so please apply asap. David Flaspohler; on sabbatical till June 2011 Inst. Pacific Island Forestry, Hilo, HI Professor, School of Forest Resources and Environmental Science Michigan Technological University Houghton, MI 49931 C: 906-370-1122 djfla...@mtu.edu
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
William and others, Personally, I think that the answer to the question Is all data gathering research? is clearly and unequivocally YES...just as I think this is not really the question you are addressing here. Instead, I think you are more properly asking Is all data gathering fundable research? (or perhaps Is all data gathering research that is useful for professional advancement?). For these latter questions, I think your comments are important and useful to keep in mind, for both students and professionals; however, I think your initial paragraph too broadly dismisses activities that are crucial to our understanding of nature. As but one example: I was recently reading a paper by Jerry Coyne et al (Evolution 2008) examining the origins of sexual dimorphism in birds. As their data, they used information on hybrids gathered from the literature. Now, my guess is that many of us (if we wanted) could use the original hybrid reports as an example of non-research data gathering, since on their own they really have no useful purpose other than just as a bit of information, perhaps only interesting to other ornithologists. But, with enough of these pieces out there, Coyne et al. were able to address an interesting theoretical question. As I learned early on, write down and record everything, as you never know what will be important later on. Chris *** Chris Brown Associate Professor Dept. of Biology, Box 5063 Tennessee Tech University Cookeville, TN 38505 email: cabr...@tntech.edu website: iweb.tntech.edu/cabrown -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Resetarits, William Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 2:34 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology It seems a rather critical issue has raised its head at this juncture in the discussion. Is all data gathering research. I think we risk being disingenuous and misleading the many students on this listserve if we don't clearly and unequivocally answer NO. To suggetst hat the system is somehow faulty and that it is OK for folks, especially students, to follow their hearts and simply gather data on their favorite organisms or systems is doing them a grave disservice. One of the first, and undoubtedly the most important, thing I learned in my PhD. was also the most simple. The key question in any research project, whether empirical, experimental or theoretical, is... What's the question? Or as one of my committee members so eloquently put it, why should I care. The fact that no one knows anything about a particular taxon or a system, or I really like organism X is rarely an adequate answer. No one really doubts the absolute value of pure descriptive natural history, and data is a good thing, but it cannot realistically be an end in itself for a professional scientist in this day and age. Even the most storied present day natural historians, and those of the past as well, bring much more to the table. In any realistic funding climate, question driven science will, and should, take precedence. This does not mean that one can't do pure natural history in the context of question driven science, but it alone is unlikely to be sufficient to drive the research to the top of anyone's funding list, onto the pages of top journals, or to drive a candidate to the top of many job lists, at least at the PhD. level. Similarly, biodiversity discovery is important, ongoing, and it gets funded. Why? NSF's Program in Biotic Surveys and Inventories, recently expired programs in Microbial Observatories, and Microbial Inventories and Processes, and to some extent the ongoing Dimensions of Biodiversity program, among others, target biodiversity discovery. But all of them require well-framed questions that convince the target audience that THIS biodiversity discovery project should be funded over the 90% of those submitted that cannot be funded. The key is what else it brings to the table beyond just documenting what is out there. Most applied funding that allows for simple inventories and surveys is driven by economic and political considerations, not scientific. As valuable as it was for documenting the flora, fauna, ethnography, and geology of the American West, the Corps of Discovery expedition was NOT a scientific expedition but funded solely for economic and political purposes. Onl! y Jefferson's personal missive to gather data on plants, animals, Indian tribes etc., made it something beyond an exploration and mapping expedition. The actual science was done by others long after the Corps had returned. Similarly, naturalists (such as Darwin) were employed on commercial and exploratory voyages largely to bring back interesting, and more importantly, economically valuable plants and animals. Such was the case with the Beagle. We all admire Darwin as a natural historian, but that isn't why we
[ECOLOG-L] Job: Managing Director, Global Freshwater Team, TNC
Managing Director, Global Freshwater Team The Nature Conservancy seeks a strategic conservation thinker to lead and manage its Global Freshwater Team. The primary focus of the team is to reduce the impact of water infrastructure development, reduce agriculture's footprint on freshwater resources, improve water management for people and nature, and advance system-scale conservation and management of great rivers around the world. The Director is accountable for raising public and private funds to support the freshwater team and its activities and serves as the Conservancy's principal freshwater spokesperson to government agencies, foundations, academia and partner conservation organizations. Master's degree preferred w/15 yrs experience in freshwater conservation or equivalent. Management, supervisory and budgetary experience required; experience in motivating and chartering interdisciplinary teams; experience in identifying, cultivating and closing major donor gifts; experience in influencing, developing and implementing conservation policy and plans; ability to build partnerships in multiple countries; ability to work with current trends and practices in sustainable water management and freshwater conservation across global regions. Frequent travel inside/outside the U.S. Visit http://www.nature.org/careerswww.nature.org/careers and apply to job #12992. Application deadline: April 15, 2011.
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology: Precision is what makes it valuable
Hi, I am fascinated by the varying use of hypotheses in ecology, and have been following the recent emails with great interest. All scientific research must presumably share a common goal to reach the highest attainable levels of precision in explicitly articulating the research focus, and the ensuing research results. For me, precise research hypotheses are the most effective means of achieving this goal. The most important components of an hypothesis are that it is novel and contains a testable prediction An hypothesis is a supposition made as a starting point for further investigation from known facts. The process of initial hypothesis generation, literature review, methodological considerations, and further refinement (or even replacement) of the hypothesis is iterative, and may pass through several cycles before a novel, testable and precise hypothesis is reached. The efficiency of the subsequent processes of experimentation (or other approaches to testing such as modelling or surveying), data analyses, and write-up, is markedly enhanced by the a priori development of a clearly stated and focussed research hypothesis. Furthermore, often during the data interpretation or write-up stage, additional reflection on the processes of experimentation and evaluation of the data may indicate to the scientist (or to a manuscript reviewer) that the test did not reflect the hypothesis as well as originally thought. In such cases, further refinement or editing of the hypothesis statement should be made so that the final research output the peer-reviewed publication disseminating the new knowledge is as accurate and accessible to others as possible. As a result, I usually finish my manuscript Introduction sections with: We used our data to test the following hypotheses (rather than We tested the following hypotheses... which gives the impression of great foresight on the part of the author). I published results of a survey of ecological journals in 2005 which suggested that (in order of decreasing specificity and detail) only ~40% of papers contained explicit hypotheses, ~15% had questions, 25% had objectives, and the remainder had aims. Clearly not all ecologists are in agreement on the effectiveness of hypotheses. As suggested above, I agree with Manuels recent comment that questions, no matter how precise, are not the same as hypotheses (because the predictive element in the latter forces the researcher to APPLY the current knowledge). I also agree with Jane Shetsov in her comments yesterday that hypothesis-oriented research does not have to involve modern statistics, because scientific hypothesis-testing is not the same as statistical null hypothesis testing. The latter didactic approach may be useful to some ecologists, but multiple working hypotheses are more common in ecology. Furthermore, the next higher level putting ones questions and results in a meaningful ecological context is at least as important. This is the level that I try to work at. In any event, at whatever level they are used, what is most important is that the development and use of explicit hypotheses compels the researcher to be PRECISE in thought and language, and to focus on generating NEW knowledge It is the process that is most important. Paul Grogan (Dept. of Biology, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada)
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology: Precision is what makes it valuable
Paul Grogan has stated very elegantly the case for a well formulated hypothesis, but I wish point out another aspect of the matter. People who are prospecting for iron will pass right over gold without seeing it. This is more than just a metaphor; it reflects how the human mind seems to work. That iterative process of refining the hypothesis can also be seen as selectively excluding opportunities for novel observations and discoveries. In a sense, one becomes progressively less open-minded. I don't mean that in the common pejorative sense, but I think it shows how there is still room for the researcher who naively makes observations and gathers data without specifically looking for anything in particular. Martin Meiss 2011/3/9 Paul Grogan grog...@queensu.ca Hi, I am fascinated by the varying use of hypotheses in ecology, and have been following the recent emails with great interest. All scientific research must presumably share a common goal to reach the highest attainable levels of precision in explicitly articulating the research focus, and the ensuing research results. For me, precise research hypotheses are the most effective means of achieving this goal. The most important components of an hypothesis are that it is novel and contains a testable prediction – An hypothesis is “a supposition made as a starting point for further investigation from known facts”. The process of initial hypothesis generation, literature review, methodological considerations, and further refinement (or even replacement) of the hypothesis is iterative, and may pass through several cycles before a novel, testable and precise hypothesis is reached. The efficiency of the subsequent processes of experimentation (or other approaches to testing such as modelling or surveying), data analyses, and write-up, is markedly enhanced by the a priori development of a clearly stated and focussed research hypothesis. Furthermore, often during the data interpretation or write-up stage, additional reflection on the processes of experimentation and evaluation of the data may indicate to the scientist (or to a manuscript reviewer) that the test did not reflect the hypothesis as well as originally thought. In such cases, further refinement or editing of the hypothesis statement should be made so that the final research output – the peer-reviewed publication disseminating the new knowledge – is as accurate and accessible to others as possible. As a result, I usually finish my manuscript Introduction sections with: “We used our data to test the following hypotheses” (rather than “We tested the following hypotheses... which gives the impression of great foresight on the part of the author). I published results of a survey of ecological journals in 2005 which suggested that (in order of decreasing specificity and detail) only ~40% of papers contained explicit ‘hypotheses’, ~15% had ‘questions’, 25% had ‘objectives’, and the remainder had ‘aims’. Clearly not all ecologists are in agreement on the effectiveness of hypotheses. As suggested above, I agree with Manuel’s recent comment that ‘questions’, no matter how precise, are not the same as hypotheses (because the predictive element in the latter forces the researcher to APPLY the current knowledge). I also agree with Jane Shetsov in her comments yesterday that “hypothesis-oriented research does not have to involve “modern statistics”, because scientific hypothesis-testing is not the same as statistical null hypothesis testing”. The latter didactic approach may be useful to some ecologists, but multiple working hypotheses are more common in ecology. Furthermore, the next higher level – putting one’s questions and results in a meaningful ecological context is at least as important. This is the level that I try to work at. In any event, at whatever level they are used, what is most important is that the development and use of explicit hypotheses compels the researcher to be PRECISE in thought and language, and to focus on generating NEW knowledge – It is the process that is most important. Paul Grogan (Dept. of Biology, Queen's University, Ontario, Canada)
Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
I have to agree with Christopher B. on his points. Stating unequivocally (if not dogmatically) that work that isn't hypothesis-driven is NOT research simply doesn't correspond to the meaning of research if we look it up in a dictionary. Granted, specialized fields such as ecology may redefine English words to suit their special purpose, but I am certainly not aware that consensus within ecology has emerged to justify such restricted usage. An earlier poster pointed out that if a granting agency only wants to fund hypothesis-driven research, one should heed that when applying for their funds. This is not a comment on the value of different approaches to research; it's just a pragmatic meeting of requirements. This touches on the fact, also addressed by Christopher B's comments, that science, by its nature, is not an individual enterprise. The knowledge base drawn upon, the resources made available, and the consequences of outcomes, all function at the level of large institutions or all of society. We are all drawing from a common pool and are all contributing to the pool. Funding agencies are a mechanism to evaluate and reward certain types of contributions, but people within a particular agency shouldn't imagine that their agency speaks for all of science. Some individuals, because of habit, training, temperament, and intellectual styles may wish to focus on one type of research (say, rigorous hypothesis testing) and others prefer another type, say exploration and data gathering without a-priori expectations. This diversity is good; let each individual function in the niche to which he/she is most suited or most enjoys. It's fine if some of us just publish observations if others of us can use those observations. It is up to higher-level control mechanisms (or an invisible hand, as in economics) to make the most use of these contributions, to bring together people and data that reinforce one another, and to provide nudges in useful directions. As has been pointed out by other posters, what is most valuable may change as a field or sub-field matures, or as society's needs change, but there's still room for everyone. I think this is especially true when we consider how new information technology can get more data before more people, even data that were gathered a hundred years ago. Martin Meiss 2011/3/9 Christopher Brown cabr...@tntech.edu William and others, Personally, I think that the answer to the question Is all data gathering research? is clearly and unequivocally YES...just as I think this is not really the question you are addressing here. Instead, I think you are more properly asking Is all data gathering fundable research? (or perhaps Is all data gathering research that is useful for professional advancement?). For these latter questions, I think your comments are important and useful to keep in mind, for both students and professionals; however, I think your initial paragraph too broadly dismisses activities that are crucial to our understanding of nature. As but one example: I was recently reading a paper by Jerry Coyne et al (Evolution 2008) examining the origins of sexual dimorphism in birds. As their data, they used information on hybrids gathered from the literature. Now, my guess is that many of us (if we wanted) could use the original hybrid reports as an example of non-research data gathering, since on their own they really have no useful purpose other than just as a bit of information, perhaps only interesting to other ornithologists. But, with enough of these pieces out there, Coyne et al. were able to address an interesting theoretical question. As I learned early on, write down and record everything, as you never know what will be important later on. Chris *** Chris Brown Associate Professor Dept. of Biology, Box 5063 Tennessee Tech University Cookeville, TN 38505 email: cabr...@tntech.edu website: iweb.tntech.edu/cabrown -Original Message- From: Ecological Society of America: grants, jobs, news [mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of Resetarits, William Sent: Tuesday, March 08, 2011 2:34 PM To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology It seems a rather critical issue has raised its head at this juncture in the discussion. Is all data gathering research. I think we risk being disingenuous and misleading the many students on this listserve if we don't clearly and unequivocally answer NO. To suggetst hat the system is somehow faulty and that it is OK for folks, especially students, to follow their hearts and simply gather data on their favorite organisms or systems is doing them a grave disservice. One of the first, and undoubtedly the most important, thing I learned in my PhD. was also the most simple. The key question in any research project, whether empirical, experimental or theoretical,
[ECOLOG-L] Excellent Postdoc opportunities in Australia - ARC DECRA Awards
This opportunity is being posted by the academics in the School of Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland (Australia), in hopes of attracting excellent postdoctoral candidates interested in working with the staff at UQ. However, these grants are not UQ specific (or ecology specific) and the information about the grant funding program is applicable for any University in Australia. UQ, however, has one of the best ecology and evolutionary biology programs in Australia (see details below) and I encourage interested persons to take a look at our staff to see if there is anyone in the School/Centre who you would be interested in working with. These fellowships, if awarded, allow for three years of research freedom, and UQ (see below) provides an excellent environment in which to be a postdoctoral fellow. Importantly, international applicants are eligible for this grant scheme. If you are interested in submitting an application to work with an academic at UQ please contact them directly as you will need a sponsor for your application, or contact Dr. Margie Mayfield for more information (m.mayfi...@uq.edu.au). You can find a list of academic staff with research interests at the following websites: http://www.biology.uq.edu.au/academic-staff http://www.ecology.uq.edu.au/index.html?page=20497 DETAILS ABOUT THIS FUNDING OPPORTUNITY ARC funded DECRA Postdoctoral Fellowships/Grants The opportunity: The School of Biological Sciences at the University of Queensland would like to advise you of an excellent Postdoctoral Fellowship scheme that is attractive to PhD graduates (must have a PhD by May 2011) of up to 5 years postdoctoral experience. The Discovery Early Career Researcher Award (DECRA) scheme provided by the Australian Research Council (ARC) is a separate element of the Discovery Program (Australia's equivalent to NSF research grants). The DECRA scheme will provide more focused support and more opportunities for early-career researchers in both teaching and research, and research-only positions. It is anticipated that up to 200, three year Awards of up to $125,000 per annum, may be awarded for funding commencing in 2012, making this a very attractive scheme. Moreover, the salary is attractive at $85,000 per annum, including 28 percent on costs. The Fellows will also be supported with up to $40,000 project costs. Funding will be allocated on a competitive basis according to criteria associated with the following components: Candidate track record 30%, Project Quality 50%, and Institutional Support 20%. For more information about the granting scheme please see the ARC website: http://www.arc.gov.au/ncgp/decra/fundingrules.htm UQ site for DECRA support and submission help see: http://www.uq.edu.au/research/rid/?page=151880 Important Dates Allocation of Grant Writing Support at School of Biological Sciences: Now and Ongoing UQ internal deadline: 28 April 2011 (for review and compliance checking of your application) ARC Closing date; 18 May 2011 (PhD must be awarded by this date) Organisational Environment The University of Queensland was recently rated by Readers of The Scientist magazine as among the top five best places in the world for post-doctoral work in life sciences, outside the USA. UQ was the only institution in Australia to make it into the Top 10 International Institutions list when the results of the survey, now in its ninth year, were released this month. This ranking reflects factors such as salary, relocation expenses and health benefits. Safety is a priority at UQ, as is equal opportunity and hence attractive conditions such as six months maternity leave at full pay are provided. The School of Biological Sciences is part of the Faculty of Science and includes the traditional disciplines of Botany, Zoology and Entomology. The School provides unique opportunities for study or research in plant and animal biology with international research programs spanning ecology, molecular plant sciences and biotechnology, plant and animal physiology, marine biology, insects and parasite interactions, and genetics evolution. The school is one of the most research intensive schools at The University of Queensland, which is itself one of Australias leading research intensive Universities. The information provided above is not intended to be relied upon over and above the official ARC grant information site referred to above. Please make sure information you rely upon is sought from official ARC and University of Queensland sources.
