Search Results
A Diverse View of Science to Catalyse Change
Valuing diversity leads to scientific excellence, the progress of science and most importantly, it is simply the right thing to do. We can value diversity not only in words, but also in actions. From the structure of DNA,1 to computer science,2 and space-station batteries,3 several key scientific discoveries that enhance our lives today, were made by marginalized scientists. These three scientists, Rosalind E. Franklin, Alan M. Turing and Olga D. González-Sanabria, did not conform to the cultural expectations of how scientists should look and behave. Unfortunately, marginalized scientists are often viewed as just a resource rather than the lifeblood that constitutes science itself. We need to embrace scientists from all walks of life and corners of the globe; this will also mean that nobody is excluded from tackling the life-threatening societal challenges that lie ahead. An awareness of science policy is essential to safeguarding our future. Science policy deals with creating the framework and codes of conduct that determine how science can best serve society.4-6 Discussions around science policy are often accompanied by anecdotes of “good” and “bad” practices regarding the merits of diversity and inclusion. Excellence and truth, which flow inexorably from diversity and inclusion, are the bedrocks upon which science should influence political and economic outcomes. A vital area of science policy is to support the professional development of marginalized scientists, an objective that must be acted upon by scientific leaders and communicators...
Responses of fish and invertebrates to floods and droughts in Europe
Floods and droughts, two opposite natural components of streamflow regimes, are known to regulate population size and species diversity. Quantifiable measures of these disturbances and their subsequent ecological responses are needed to synthesize the knowledge on flow–ecosystem relationships. This study for the first time combines the systematic review approach used to collect evidence on the ecological responses to floods and droughts in Europe with the statistical methods used to quantify the extreme events severity. Out of 854 publications identified in literature search, 54 papers were retained after screening and eligibility checks, providing in total 82 case studies with unique extreme event—ecological response associations for which data were extracted. In this way, a database with metadata of case studies that can be explored with respect to various factors was constructed. This study pinpointed the research gaps where little evidence could be synthesized, for example, drought event studies and fish studies. It was demonstrated that in many cases the studied metrics (abundance, density, richness, and diversity) showed statistically significant decreases after or during the event occurrence. The responses in invertebrate density and richness were in general more negative than the corresponding responses in fish. Biota resistance to floods was found to be lower than the resistance to droughts. The severity of extreme events was not found to be an important factor influencing ecological metrics, although this analysis was often hampered by insufficient number of case studies. Conceivably, other factors could mask any existing relationships between disturbance severity and biotic response.
Drivers of diversity and community structure of bees in an agroecological region of Zimbabwe
Worldwide bees provide an important ecosystem service of plant pollination. Climate change and land-use changes are among drivers threatening bee survival with mounting evidence of species decline and extinction. In developing countries, rural areas constitute a significant proportion of the country's land, but information is lacking on how different habitat types and weather patterns in these areas influence bee populations.This study investigated how weather variables and habitat-related factors influence the abundance, diversity, and distribution of bees across seasons in a farming rural area of Zimbabwe. Bees were systematically sampled in five habitat types (natural woodlots, pastures, homesteads, fields, and gardens) recording ground cover, grass height, flower abundance and types, tree abundance and recorded elevation, temperature, light intensity, wind speed, wind direction, and humidity. Zero-inflated models, censored regression models, and PCAs were used to understand the influence of explanatory variables on bee community composition, abundance, and diversity.Bee abundance was positively influenced by the number of plant species in flower (p < .0001). Bee abundance increased with increasing temperatures up to 28.5°C, but beyond this, temperature was negatively associated with bee abundance. Increasing wind speeds marginally decreased probability of finding bees.Bee diversity was highest in fields, homesteads, and natural woodlots compared with other habitats, and the contributions of the genus Apis were disproportionately high across all habitats. The genus Megachile was mostly associated with homesteads, while Nomia was associated with grasslands.Synthesis and applications. Our study suggests that some bee species could become more proliferous in certain habitats, thus compromising diversity and consequently ecosystem services. These results highlight the importance of setting aside bee-friendly habitats that can be refuge sites for species susceptible to land-use changes.