4,707
edits
ICER and Conservation at ADBC Summit VII: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m
ICER and Conservation at ADBC Summit VII (view source)
Revision as of 14:41, 8 December 2017
, 8 December 2017→ICER Documents in Progress
| (12 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown) | |||
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
** '''The NEON Biorepository: Vision and Status''' | ** '''The NEON Biorepository: Vision and Status''' | ||
::'''Abstract:''' This presentation provides a brief overview and history of the NSF-funded NEON Project and our vision for and status of the NEON Biorepository. NEON has a long history dating to the late 1990's. Since then, it has progressed through the phases of design, construction and initial operations. Construction is nearly complete; full operations will begin in late 2019 and continue for 30 years. A key feature of NEON is establishment a curated collection of diverse aquatic and terrestrial samples and specimens gathered annually at 81 NEON sites across the US. The overarching goal of the biorepository is to make reference material and replicate samples available for future research and retrospective studies. To help achieve this goal, we are designing the biorepository to ensure efficiency, utility, discoverability, and timely sample processing – i.e., to be responsive to the needs of the scientific community. We plan to engage the community and foster broad use of the NEON samples via a biorepository technical working group and several related technical working groups, and by working with the ICER and similar initiatives. | ::'''Abstract:''' This presentation provides a brief overview and history of the NSF-funded NEON Project and our vision for and status of the NEON Biorepository. NEON has a long history dating to the late 1990's. Since then, it has progressed through the phases of design, construction and initial operations. Construction is nearly complete; full operations will begin in late 2019 and continue for 30 years. A key feature of NEON is establishment a curated collection of diverse aquatic and terrestrial samples and specimens gathered annually at 81 NEON sites across the US. The overarching goal of the biorepository is to make reference material and replicate samples available for future research and retrospective studies. To help achieve this goal, we are designing the biorepository to ensure efficiency, utility, discoverability, and timely sample processing – i.e., to be responsive to the needs of the scientific community. We plan to engage the community and foster broad use of the NEON samples via a biorepository technical working group and several related technical working groups, and by working with the ICER and similar initiatives. | ||
:: [http://idigbio.adobeconnect.com/pd8jpb2vqcau/ Recording] (time mark 1:55-17:40) | |||
:: [[Media:1_Tazik_NEON_Biorepository.pdf|Slides]] | |||
* Jennifer McGuire (Georgia Tech) | * Jennifer McGuire (Georgia Tech) | ||
** '''Collections data as an historical experiment''' | |||
:: [http://idigbio.adobeconnect.com/pd8jpb2vqcau/ Recording] (time mark 19:54-35.22) | |||
:: [[Media:2_McGuire_ICER_2017.pdf|Slides]] | |||
* Anna K. Monfils, Central Michigan University; Rachel A. Hackett, Central Michigan University; Michael Belitz, Central Michigan University; Ed Gilbert, SEINet, Arizona State University; Gil Nelson, iDigBio, Florida State University; Mike J. Monfils, Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Michigan State University Extension; Lillian Hendrick, Central Michigan University; Akito Y. Kawahara, LepNet, University of Florida; Neil S. Cobb, LepNet, Northern Arizona University; Christopher J. Marshall, LepNet, Oregon State University; Jennifer M. Zaspel, LepNet, Milwaukee Public Museum | * Anna K. Monfils, Central Michigan University; Rachel A. Hackett, Central Michigan University; Michael Belitz, Central Michigan University; Ed Gilbert, SEINet, Arizona State University; Gil Nelson, iDigBio, Florida State University; Mike J. Monfils, Michigan Natural Features Inventory, Michigan State University Extension; Lillian Hendrick, Central Michigan University; Akito Y. Kawahara, LepNet, University of Florida; Neil S. Cobb, LepNet, Northern Arizona University; Christopher J. Marshall, LepNet, Oregon State University; Jennifer M. Zaspel, LepNet, Milwaukee Public Museum | ||
** '''Research and management applications of online collection data: a case study of prairie fen biodiversity''' | ** '''Research and management applications of online collection data: a case study of prairie fen biodiversity''' | ||
::'''Abstract''': Prairie fen wetlands are globally vulnerable wetlands, provide habitat for over 35 state and federally listed species, and function at the headwaters for several major watersheds in the Great Lakes. Since 2012, the Prairie Fen Biodiversity Project (PFBP) has collected biodiversity data and associated metadata in prairie fen communities to inform researchers, conservation biologists and managers about potential drivers of biodiversity in these diverse systems. One priority for PFBP has been to manage our biodiversity data digitally in support of research and management pipelines. We will show how we have integrated our research, data usage, and digitization workflows and how we assessed this as the project grows and incorporates insect biodiversity data. Annotated species checklists are now available through the Central Michigan University Collection on the Consortium of Midwest Herbaria portal (http://midwestherbaria.org). The PFBP data and checklists have multiple potential uses and we anticipate that our PFBP can use the portal to add, update, or pool data in new ways as the collaboration grows and new tools become available. Online digitized data gives us unprecedented access to biodiversity data and facilitates data accessibility, current data updates, and a broader use of the specimen and research data both within our research team and with associated conservation and management partners. | ::'''Abstract''': Prairie fen wetlands are globally vulnerable wetlands, provide habitat for over 35 state and federally listed species, and function at the headwaters for several major watersheds in the Great Lakes. Since 2012, the Prairie Fen Biodiversity Project (PFBP) has collected biodiversity data and associated metadata in prairie fen communities to inform researchers, conservation biologists and managers about potential drivers of biodiversity in these diverse systems. One priority for PFBP has been to manage our biodiversity data digitally in support of research and management pipelines. We will show how we have integrated our research, data usage, and digitization workflows and how we assessed this as the project grows and incorporates insect biodiversity data. Annotated species checklists are now available through the Central Michigan University Collection on the Consortium of Midwest Herbaria portal (http://midwestherbaria.org). The PFBP data and checklists have multiple potential uses and we anticipate that our PFBP can use the portal to add, update, or pool data in new ways as the collaboration grows and new tools become available. Online digitized data gives us unprecedented access to biodiversity data and facilitates data accessibility, current data updates, and a broader use of the specimen and research data both within our research team and with associated conservation and management partners. | ||
:: [[Media:3_Monfils_PFRC_ADBC_Summit_2017.pdf|Slides]] | |||
* Barry Sinervo (USCS EEB) | * Barry Sinervo (USCS EEB) | ||
** '''Predicting phenology, demography and extinction risk due to climate change from ecophysiology and museum records''' | ** '''Predicting phenology, demography and extinction risk due to climate change from ecophysiology and museum records''' | ||
::Standard species distribution models (SDM) use climate layers to determine a species "climate" niche and then project the species distribution to future time points as climate warms or dries, | ::'''Abstract''': Standard species distribution models (SDM) use climate layers to determine a species "climate" niche and then project the species distribution to future time points as climate warms or dries, but such models do not take into account evolved physiological or ecological differences among species that might impact resistance to warm spells and / or long-term droughts. Here I will describe the relationships between climate layers and operative thermal and hydric environments for reptiles and amphibians. I use museum occurrence records linked to published ecological data to derive a general class of models that can be used in SDM which allow for evolved changes in phenology and physiology to be incorporated in the modeling. In addition, I will describe how other ecological interactions such as competition for thermal niches can be used to model the impact of climate driven extinctions of cool-adapted taxa (e.g., montane taxa) arising from the invasion of a warm-adapted competitor (e.g., lowland taxa) that might expand its range under climate warming. I apply the models to nearly all species of reptiles and diverse amphibians of North America. | ||
ecological differences among species that might impact resistance to warm spells and / or long-term droughts | :: [http://idigbio.adobeconnect.com/pys67j468xhl/ Recording] (time mark 19:23-35:43) | ||
:: [[Media:4_Sinervo_iDigBio_Nov2017.pdf|Slides]] | |||
* Elizabeth Martin (Doctoral student, University of Florida, School of Natural Resources and Environment (SNRE)) | * Elizabeth Martin (Doctoral student, University of Florida, School of Natural Resources and Environment (SNRE)) | ||
** '''Preliminary Results on Survey about Reuse of Species Occurrence Data and Use of Web-based Information Systems by Professionals''' | ** '''Preliminary Results on Survey about Reuse of Species Occurrence Data and Use of Web-based Information Systems by Professionals''' | ||
::'''Abstract''': Understanding how academic and non-academic professionals conducting scientific research or working on natural resource activities use species occurrence data and Web-based information systems that provide such data is a prerequisite for assessing the effectiveness of Web-based biodiversity information systems in general. As part of my doctoral research project, I conducted an online survey of academic and non-academic professionals in the United States during spring/summer 2017 to gather baseline data and information on how scientists and natural resource professionals reuse species occurrence data and use Web-based species occurrence information systems in their work. Preliminary results from this survey will be presented at the workshop. | ::'''Abstract''': Understanding how academic and non-academic professionals conducting scientific research or working on natural resource activities use species occurrence data and Web-based information systems that provide such data is a prerequisite for assessing the effectiveness of Web-based biodiversity information systems in general. As part of my doctoral research project, I conducted an online survey of academic and non-academic professionals in the United States during spring/summer 2017 to gather baseline data and information on how scientists and natural resource professionals reuse species occurrence data and use Web-based species occurrence information systems in their work. Preliminary results from this survey will be presented at the workshop. | ||
:: [http://idigbio.adobeconnect.com/pys67j468xhl/ Recording] (time mark 36:15-50:15) | |||
:: [[Media:5_Martin_2017_survey_results.pdf|Slides]] | |||
=== Symposium Recordings === | |||
;Integrating Collections, Ecological Research and Conservation - Half-day Symposium (Part1) | |||
:http://idigbio.adobeconnect.com/pd8jpb2vqcau/ | |||
::David Tazik (NEON) (recording time mark 1:55-17:40) | |||
::Jenny McGuire (Georgia Tech) (recording time mark 19:54-35.22) | |||
;Integrating Collections, Ecological Research and Conservation - Half-day Symposium (Part2) | |||
:http://idigbio.adobeconnect.com/pys67j468xhl/ | |||
::Anna Monfils (CMU) (recording time mark 00:44-18:23)* no sound - slides only | |||
::Barry Sinervo (UCSC) (recording time mark 19:23-35:43) | |||
::Elizabeth Martin (UF) (recording time mark 36:15-50:15) | |||
== Some of our workshop goals == | == Some of our workshop goals == | ||
| Line 48: | Line 69: | ||
== ICER Documents in Progress == | == ICER Documents in Progress == | ||
*[https://www.idigbio.org/content/momentum-integrating-collections-and-ecological-research-expanding-collections-stakeholders The Momentum for Integrating Collections and Ecological Research: Expanding Collections Stakeholders -- Imagining Future Data Needs] ''a post-symposium blog post'' summarizing and outlining what we learned, and next steps | |||
*[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WsvDXJyqakjsCaP814r9Q1eTWK0T_zl1kxYFLMJaAOE/edit Current Vision Document]. Note this is a working (draft) document. | *[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1WsvDXJyqakjsCaP814r9Q1eTWK0T_zl1kxYFLMJaAOE/edit Current Vision Document]. Note this is a working (draft) document. | ||
*[https://docs.google.com/document/d/124HIZQQxRNn2KRBe5ZYLOpQAP-_kgklAYLZG3CeWWdc/edit 5 Year Plan]. Under construction. See rough draft. | *[https://docs.google.com/document/d/124HIZQQxRNn2KRBe5ZYLOpQAP-_kgklAYLZG3CeWWdc/edit 5 Year Plan]. Under construction. See rough draft. | ||
*[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sZQtgufR4cfzmzK99CFHEQ_j5QKCEQWg4jw6J5GhjAY/edit Ecology Groups] - list of ESA Sections | *[https://docs.google.com/document/d/1sZQtgufR4cfzmzK99CFHEQ_j5QKCEQWg4jw6J5GhjAY/edit Ecology Groups] - list of ESA Sections | ||
<br/> | <br/> | ||
IF you need to have edit rights to the above documents, please contact dpaul (AT) fsu (DOT) edu | IF you need to have edit rights to the above Google documents, please contact dpaul (AT) fsu (DOT) edu | ||
== ICER Workshops and Related Activities == | == ICER Workshops and Related Activities == | ||