scholarly journals Macrosystems EDDIE Teaching Modules Increase Students’ Ability to Define, Interpret, and Apply Concepts in Macrosystems Ecology

2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (8) ◽  
pp. 382
Author(s):  
Alexandria G. Hounshell ◽  
Kaitlin J. Farrell ◽  
Cayelan C. Carey

Ecologists are increasingly using macrosystems approaches to understand population, community, and ecosystem dynamics across interconnected spatial and temporal scales. Consequently, integrating macrosystems skills, including simulation modeling and sensor data analysis, into undergraduate and graduate curricula is needed to train future environmental biologists. Through the Macrosystems EDDIE (Environmental Data-Driven Inquiry and Exploration) program, we developed four teaching modules to introduce macrosystems ecology to ecology and biology students. Modules combine high-frequency sensor data from GLEON (Global Lake Ecological Observatory Network) and NEON (National Ecological Observatory Network) sites with ecosystem simulation models. Pre- and post-module assessments of 319 students across 24 classrooms indicate that hands-on, inquiry-based modules increase students’ understanding of macrosystems ecology, including complex processes that occur across multiple spatial and temporal scales. Following module use, students were more likely to correctly define macrosystems concepts, interpret complex data visualizations and apply macrosystems approaches in new contexts. In addition, there was an increase in student’s self-perceived proficiency and confidence using both long-term and high-frequency data; key macrosystems ecology techniques. Our results suggest that integrating short (1–3 h) macrosystems activities into ecology courses can improve students’ ability to interpret complex and non-linear ecological processes. In addition, our study serves as one of the first documented instances for directly incorporating concepts in macrosystems ecology into undergraduate and graduate ecology and biology curricula.

2017 ◽  
Vol 26 (2) ◽  
pp. 182-209 ◽  
Author(s):  
Brian Mayton ◽  
Gershon Dublon ◽  
Spencer Russell ◽  
Evan F. Lynch ◽  
Don Derek Haddad ◽  
...  

What role will ubiquitous sensing play in our understanding and experience of ecology in the future? What opportunities are created by weaving a continuously sampling, geographically dense web of sensors into the natural environment, from the ground up? In this article, we explore these questions holistically, and present our work on an environmental sensor network designed to support a diverse array of applications, interpretations, and artistic expressions, from primary ecological research to musical composition. Over the past four years, we have been incorporating our ubiquitous sensing framework into the design and implementation of a large-scale wetland restoration, creating a broad canvas for creative exploration at the landscape scale. The projects we present here span the development and wide deployment of custom sensor node hardware, novel web services for providing real-time sensor data to end user applications, public-facing user interfaces for open-ended exploration of the data, as well as more radical UI modalities, through unmanned aerial vehicles, virtual and augmented reality, and wearable devices for sensory augmentation. From this work, we distill the Networked Sensory Landscape, a vision for the intersection of ubiquitous computing and environmental restoration. Sensor network technologies and novel approaches to interaction promise to reshape presence, opening up sensorial connections to ecological processes across spatial and temporal scales.


Author(s):  
Lawrence R. Walker ◽  
Michael R. Willig

For those who may have skipped to this chapter and not read the 3 introductory chapters, the 36 essays, or the 4 evaluative chapters of this book, the answer to the burning question “Does participation in the Long-Term Ecological Research (LTER) program change scientists?” is an unequivocal “Yes!” As Boyer and Brown (Chapter 41) point out, however, those changes are mostly in the realms of knowledge acquisition and behavior adoptions in the practice of science. Participation in the program did not appear to have a substantial effect on the development of attitudes. Could such changes have occurred outside of the LTER program? Schlesinger (Chapter 40) thinks so. He suggests that the LTER program provides “some structure and modest standardization to a set of common measurements” but that it has not substantially broadened or deepened the ecological sciences. Yet the effect of the LTER program on science, while a fascinating and often-addressed question, is not the focus of this book (see Willig and Walker, Chapter 1). Of course, to address how scientists change also involves understanding how they approach and conduct science. In addition, personal change occurs in a broad societal context. For example, the LTER program has coincided with and helped promote a transition in ecology from research done by one or a few investigators on a particular organism or process in a particular habitat to investigations involving multidisciplinary teams working together to test models about how ecosystem dynamics unfold across large spatial and temporal scales. However, going to “big programs” and “big data sets” does not mean losing a sense of place or being divorced from the natural history of particular organisms. Even as spatial and temporal scales increase, ecological research is ideally still “place aware” (Bestelmeyer, Chapter 19). Using the essays of this book as a rich source of information to address fundamental questions about the nature of scientists, we provide some final thoughts on how the LTER program has affected its participants, particularly on how they view time and space, collaboration, and communication. We end with reflections on the future of ecology and society, based on the views expressed in this book and on our own participation in the LTER program.


2021 ◽  
Vol 25 (02) ◽  
pp. 475-493
Author(s):  
Gabriel Lourenço Brejão ◽  
◽  
Cecília Gontijo Leal ◽  
Pedro Gerhard ◽  
◽  
...  

Landscape ecology emphasizes the interaction between spatial patterns and ecological processes, i.e., the consequences of spatial heterogeneity across various scales. It is an interdisciplinary science that seeks to understand the relationships between ecological patterns and processes considering different spatial and temporal scales. This understanding has been supported by the rapid development of a methodological framework, largely based on Geographic Information Systems (GIS). Thus, it has allowed understanding how ecological processes are affected by anthropogenic activities that trigger profound changes in ecosystems, such as habitat loss and fragmentation. Although commonly applied to studies in terrestrial ecosystems, there is a time lag in both theoretical development and methodological adaptation of landscape ecology applied to studies in streams, especially in Brazil. Methodological adaptations are necessary considering the particularities of aquatic environments in relation to terrestrial ones. For example, streams have a hierarchical spatial organization that results in local conditions dependent on the regional context. In fact, streams are connected to the landscape in which they are inserted through multiple spatial and temporal scales. This hydrologic connectivity, and the low ratio/proportion of aquatic/terrestrial areas, in turn results in anthropogenic impacts accumulating along the hydrographic networks. Considering the above, the objectives of this chapter are: (1) Introduce the general concepts of landscape ecology; (2) Present the main methods of spatial data acquisition and management relevant to stream approaches; (3) Describe the spatial and temporal scales relevant to stream ecology and (4) Discuss the potential of landscape ecology to assess human impacts on streams. Landscape ecology has much to offer to the study of stream fish in Brazil and has shown to be a promising approach for advancing this frontier of knowledge.


2021 ◽  
Vol 14 (4) ◽  
Author(s):  
Zarai Besma ◽  
Walter Christian ◽  
Michot Didier ◽  
Montoroi Jean Pierre ◽  
Hachicha Mohamed

2021 ◽  
Vol 9 (5) ◽  
pp. 465
Author(s):  
Angelos Ikonomakis ◽  
Ulrik Dam Nielsen ◽  
Klaus Kähler Holst ◽  
Jesper Dietz ◽  
Roberto Galeazzi

This paper examines the statistical properties and the quality of the speed through water (STW) measurement based on data extracted from almost 200 container ships of Maersk Line’s fleet for 3 years of operation. The analysis uses high-frequency sensor data along with additional data sources derived from external providers. The interest of the study has its background in the accuracy of STW measurement as the most important parameter in the assessment of a ship’s performance analysis. The paper contains a thorough analysis of the measurements assumed to be related with the STW error, along with a descriptive decomposition of the main variables by sea region including sea state, vessel class, vessel IMO number and manufacturer of the speed-log installed in each ship. The paper suggests a semi-empirical method using a threshold to identify potential error in a ship’s STW measurement. The study revealed that the sea region is the most influential factor for the STW accuracy and that 26% of the ships of the dataset’s fleet warrant further investigation.


2008 ◽  
Vol 1 (2) ◽  
pp. 81-88 ◽  
Author(s):  
C. Zevenbergen ◽  
W. Veerbeek ◽  
B. Gersonius ◽  
S. Van Herk

2015 ◽  
Vol 120 ◽  
pp. 51-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yuval ◽  
Meytar Sorek–Hamer ◽  
Amnon Stupp ◽  
Pinhas Alpert ◽  
David M. Broday

Hydrobiologia ◽  
2008 ◽  
Vol 611 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-4 ◽  
Author(s):  
A. Razinkovas ◽  
Z. Gasiūnaitė ◽  
P. Viaroli ◽  
J. M. Zaldívar

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document