Month: March 2013

Expiscor (29 March 2013)

/ Chris Buddle / 5 Comments

I’m starting a new feature on my blog, titled Expiscor. This latin word means to find out, to discover, or ‘fish out’. It also sounds nice, and is a very Harry Potter-ish word - which is fun. It also reflects the process by which I come across great stories each week. Interesting things that reflect my diverse interests, from spiders to the value of higher education, from teaching innovation to music. I will try, each Friday, to provide a summary of the discoveries that I fish out of my week. I will provide a series of short statements and links, with a general focus on biodiversity science, natural history, ecology, Academia, with a dash of the curious and quirky.

I hope you enjoy.

  • I’m reading about ‘How to write science’ thanks to this book. FINALLY I have a clear explanation (on page 54) about why it’s not OK to write: “We did this research because little is known on [INSERT TOPIC]”
  • Spring is arriving in the Montreal area. There were a heck lot of Turkey Vultures flying overhead this week! …run for the hills (or, rather, grab your binoculars)
  • My favourite key: I agree with Tom Allen from CBC - on Tuesday, on Shift, he argues the Key of G is “The gallant host. A key shared by all western instruments comfortable to play in for brass, wind and string. Come one come all G Major Welcomes you.”. A great key for Banjo, and I like it a lot for mandolin, too.
  • And on a lighter note, Coffee = Longer Life? OK! I’m in.
  • And on an even lighter note, check out this “flipbook” that is also a Passport. Finland - you win.

Seasonality of Arctic Beetles

/ Chris Buddle / 4 Comments

I’m excited to report on paper written by Crystal Ernst, PhD student in my lab, and well known as the “Bug Geek“. This paper is a product of the Northern Biodiversity Program (yes, it sure is great that the papers from this project are starting to appear!), and will be one of Crystal’s PhD thesis chapters. The paper is titled Seasonal patterns in the structure of epigeic beetle (Coleoptera) assemblages in two subarctic habitats in Nunavut, Canada

A very nice Arctic beetle! (photo by C. Ernst, reproduced here with permission)

A very nice Arctic beetle! (photo by C. Ernst, reproduced here with permission)

Here’s a plain-language summary of the work:

Although we often think of Arctic systems as cold and lifeless, Canada’s tundra habitats are home to a high diversity of arthropods (insects, spiders and their relatives). Beetles are important insects on the tundra - filling ecological roles as predators (feeding on other insects), herbivores (feeding on plants), mycophages (feeding on fungi), and necrophages (feeding on dead or decaying animals). In this research, we wanted to find out what happens to ground-dwelling Arctic beetles as a function of seasonality. We were curious about whether different species occurred at different times during the short Arctic summer, and whether the functions of the beetles changes over the summer. This is an important area of study because beetles perform important ecological functions, and knowing how these functions change over time may have broader implications for northern ecosystems. This is especially relevant in the Arctic since these systems have a short ‘active season’, and climate change is disproportionally affecting northern latitudes. If climate change alters an already short summer, what might happen to the beetles?

This research was done as part of the Northern Biodiversity Program (NBP) - a broad, integrative project about the diversity of insects and spiders across northern Canada. The NBP involved collecting samples at 12 sites in the Arctic, but at one of these sites (Kugluktuk, in Nunavut) we had an opportunity to do a more detailed collection over the entire summer of 2010. This involved setting out traps for the entire active season, from June through to August. These traps were plastic containers sunk into the ground - beetles that wander along the tundra fall unawares into these traps, which contain preservatives, and are trapped until a researcher collects the samples. Traps were placed in wet and (relatively) dry habitats so that we could compare the two habitats. After the collections were returned to our laboratory, the beetles were identified to species, counted, and the biomass of the beetles was estimated - biomass lets us determine what happens to the ‘amount of beetles’ on the tundra in addition to figuring out ‘how many’ (abundance) and ‘what kind’ (species) were in the traps. The beetles were also classified into their key ecological roles. The data were then compared as a function of when traps were serviced to let us assess what happens to beetles as a function of seasonality.

We collected over 2500 beetles, representing 50 different species - remarkably, 17 of these species represented new Territorial records. This means that 17 of the species that were identified had never before been recorded in all of Nunavut! Although many ecological functions were represented by the beetles we collected, most were predators. We documented that wet habitats had different kinds of beetle species than the drier tundra habitats, even though the actual number of species between the habitats did not differ. We also uncovered a seasonal affect on the functions of beetles in the system - as the season progressed, the beetles tended to be represented more by predators compared to earlier in the season, which was dominated by beetles representing a diversity of functions. The mean daily temperature also related to the seasonal change that was observed in the beetles.

PhD student Crystal Ernst, happily working on the Arctic tundra.

PhD student Crystal Ernst, happily working on the Arctic tundra.

This work is one of the first to carefully quantify how beetles change during short Arctic summers. We found a diverse assemblage of beetles, filling a range of ecological roles. These ecological roles, however, do not stay the same all summer long, and the shifts in the beetles were related to mean daily temperature. Given that Arctic systems will be significantly affected by climate change, this is worrisome - if temperatures increase, or become more variable, this may affect ecosystem functions that are mediated by beetles. This is more evidence supporting the need to track climate change in the Arctic, and play close attention to the small animals of the tundra.

Reference:

Ernst, C., & Buddle, C. (2013). Seasonal patterns in the structure of epigeic beetle (Coleoptera) assemblages in two subarctic habitats in Nunavut, Canada The Canadian Entomologist, 145 (02), 171-183 DOI: 10.4039/tce.2012.111

Ten tips when asking for a letter of recommendation

/ Chris Buddle / 15 Comments

Academics get asked to write a lot of letters of recommendations, and we are pleased to do this! Letters of recommendations can be really, really important when students are applying to grad school, or applying for scholarships. Strong letters can make a big difference, and that means it’s essential that students approach this with seriousness, maturity and professionalism.

When asking for a letter of recommendation, here are ten things to do, more or less in chronological order:

1) Plan ahead: Ask for letters well ahead of the deadline! Never, never assume your Professor will have the time or inclination to write a strong letter if the deadline is two days away. Give lots of advance warning (at least several weeks).

2) Ask nicely. Approach your Professor (in person, if possible; with a telephone call, or over email), explain what you are applying for (and why), and ask whether s/he might be willing to write you a letter of support.

3) Ask what kind of letter you might get! You need to know whether it’ll be a strong letter, or one that is perhaps less in-depth. In many cases, if I’ve only met a student in one class, and only have a grade to base a letter on, then I won’t be able to write a strong letter. You deserve to know this, and it may affect whether or not you should ask someone else. Don’t worry - most Academics are able to be honest (and nice) about what kind of letter they might be able to write. You must find out, early on, so that your chances of success are as high as possible.

4) rite gud. In all correspondence with the person who is writing a letter for you, ensure there are no grammatical or spelling errors. Be professional, respect credentials (e.g., don’t start with Hey prof Dude….), and make sure what you write is readable. Avoid common writing mistakes. This makes a big difference. Sloppy writing, poor grammar and spelling mistakes make me think less of a candidate and will affect the strength of a letter.

5) Include ALL the relevant details, in one well-composed e-mail:

a) What you are applying for (in appropriate detail - don’t just say “I’m applying to do a Master’s in Biology”)

b) When you don’t know your Prof. all that well, remind them who you are: it is helpful to state what course(s) you might have taken with the Professor, in what context, how you did in the class, and anything else to help those old minds recall who you are!. You may think that your instructors remember you well, but this is not always the case (we see hundreds of students each year, and we are all getting older…),

c) Provide a ‘statement of interest’ to give some context to why you are applying for a particular position or scholarship,

d) Provide an informal transcript, or at least your GPA so your Prof doesn’t have to ask for this later, and possibly your CV.

e) Provide the deadline for the letter! I can’t tell you how many times I’ve had to email a student to ask them what the deadline is. It’s annoying having to deal with email overload, especially when it is avoidable.

f) If there are PDF fillable forms, or web-links for the reference, make sure to include these!

g) if the Professor is going to get an e-mail from an Institution to which you are applying, make it clear that they should expect this.

6) Follow-up! If you haven’t heard anything within a week of when you sent your one e-mail, stop by the Prof.’s office, or give a phone call, to make sure that s/he received the details.

7) Make it easy: Always make the process of writing a letter of recommendation as easy as possible. In many cases PDF fillable forms have parts that are to be filled out the by candidate ahead of time - do this! For hard copies, make sure to fill in parts that you are supposed to, and always include a stamped envelope with the address written out. It’s YOUR job to ensure the letter gets sent by the Professor, and you don’t want their Department to have to pay for postage! If you are required to pick up the letter and send it in as an entire application package, provide two envelopes - one for their confidential letter, and another that they can slip the official envelope into - arrange a system by which you can pick up the letter.

8) Send a reminder... A few days before the deadline, send ONE reminder e-mail - politely remind your Professor that the deadline is approaching. For me, this is absolutely critical! I am usually aware of the need to write a letter for a student (it’ll be in my ‘to-do’ list), but that little reminder will stir me into action.

9) Say ‘Thank you’ - It is classy and professional to say thanks to whoever writes letters of recommendation for you. If your application ends up being successful, or you get that scholarship, you can even send a post-card, or a short thank-you letter (yes, in the mail!) - that leaves a very positive and lasting impression (and you never know when you will need another letter…). As a minimum, send a short ‘thank you’ email.

10) um, sorry, I don’t actually have a tenth tip. Except, perhaps, be sure to follow the nine that are written above! (maybe you have a tenth?)

…I hope this helps!

Students: you will get a better letter if you follow the tips.

Teaching Innovation: Opportunities and Challenges

/ Chris Buddle / 4 Comments

I just returned from a terrific visit to the UK - part vacation with my family, and part work. The work part included a trip to University of Hull, to visit with my colleague Dr. Graham Scott (you may recognize his name as he visited McGill almost a year ago). Graham and his Bioscience Education Group have an impressive track record of publishing about teaching in Higher Education, including papers about the value of field work in University.

I gave a seminar in the Biology Department at Hull about the use of social media and mobile technology in a field course I teach (St Lawrence Ecosystems), and I had plenty of time to discuss with Graham and his colleagues about teaching and the ways to improve teaching. In this post, I wanted to reflect a little bit about some of the ideas that resonated strongly as I visited Hull.

My souvenir from Univ. Hull - a wool scarf. It'll remind me of pedagogy and that's a good thing.

My souvenir from Univ. Hull - an official wool scarf. It’ll remind me of pedagogy and that’s a good thing.

1. It is important to talk about teaching. Academics are very used to talking about our research, but we seldom get a chance to reflect in detail upon our own teaching. When agreeing to give a seminar about my teaching, this caused me to seriously consider why I adopt specific strategies with my teaching, and whether or not these strategies actually work (i.e., impact learning!). This presented many challenges, especially because I sometimes don’t fully know why I selected certain teaching strategies, and I began to recognize that some of my own teaching strategies come from trial and error. A solution to this is my second point of reflection:

2. I should be reading the education literature. Graham is deeply involved with pedagogy and publishes often in the education literature. When discussing teaching ideas with him, he would often tell me how that particular idea was well discussed in paper X, Y, or Z. It takes a lot of energy to change teaching approaches and strategies, and it takes a lot of risk - things just might not work and this has real and important consequences for students, and for the instructor. Reading the education literature could help to avoid reinventing the wheel, and also help guide the development of teaching strategies. I’m going to try to find a bit of time to get into this literature - I am sure it will be time well spent.

3. Teaching innovations cross disciplines. This seems obvious, but I think it’s easy to forget that we can learn a great deal about teaching from colleagues from very different background and disciplines. I had lunch with a microbiologist from Hull and she told me about her use of short, weekly, private ‘blogs’ from students. She used these reflective blogs as one way to assess how students were getting along with content, and as a way for students to benchmark their course goals (and whether or not they met their goals). These short posts were a great idea for her to assess whether students were on track in the course, how they were handling the course material, and whether her expectations were reasonable. This great idea did not depend on discipline. Another good reason to embrace interdisciplinarity.

4. My challenges are common challenges. It was incredible to see that despite different systems between the UK and Canada, different undergraduate programs, and an entirely different context, the challenges of teaching remain similar. It’s comforting to know that everyone struggles with finding the right way to assess students with large classes without depending on multiple choice exams, or how to help students improve writing skills, or how to convince administrators that there is value to field biology courses. So many challenges are shared, and we can learn a great deal from each other…all the more reason to talk about teaching more often, both within our own institutions and among institutions.

5. We must find systems that enable Academics to work on innovative teaching ideas. There are numerous, excellent arguments for Academics to work on teaching innovation, but it’s not entirely clear how to go about this. Many institutions have “teaching and learning” units that help Professors with strategies to improve teaching, but many of the workshops or services offered by these units are short in duration, and don’t typically involve deeper projects about pedagogy. A secondment at a “teaching and learning” unit might be a good idea but this would only be possible if an Academic on such a secondment was given relief from other duties (e.g., applying for research grants, or administrative duties). Alternatively, it is possible to devote a sabbatical to pedagogy, but this would require a culture shift since sabbaticals are most often linked to research interests that don’t normally involve pedagogy. I do believe strongly that taking ‘real’ time to improve teaching would be valuable, but I will be honest in saying that I don’t see a clear path forward with this. Ideas are welcome.

In sum, my visit with Graham Scott and colleagues offered a chance to reflect on teaching, discuss teaching, and allowed time to really think about the opportunities and challenges when considering different ways to modify and hopefully improve my own teaching. I sincerely thank Graham Scott and his colleagues at Hull for being an inspiration, and a model.

Let’s keep the discussion going, and please share your thoughts.

Ten fun facts about Daddy Longlegs

/ Chris Buddle / 5 Comments

Animals with many names: Harvestmen, Daddy longlegs, Shepherd Spiders, Grandfather Greybeard, Phalangids, Opiliones.

Cousins of other Arachnids, but an Order all to their own. Over the past 11 months, I’ve been on a journal of discovery about these amazing creatures.

After nearly 300 tweets, and over 600 pages of text in Pinto-da-Rocha et al.’s book on Harvestmen, the Opiliones Project (in the way it was originally conceived) is over. To recap – this was a twitter-based project in which I shared content from that weighty textbook with anyone who cared to follow along (using the hashtag #OpilionesProject). Many folks followed along, notably my twitter friends Derek Hennen, Jaden Walker, Matthew Cobb, and many, many others…

A lovely Harvestmen - photo by B. Valentine, reproduced here with permission

A lovely Harvestmen - photo by B. Valentine, reproduced here with permission

I learned a lot along the way – and will take this opportunity to highlight ten fun facts about Harvestmen – all of these were part of the Opiliones Project.

Did you know that…

1. Salvador Dali featured Harvestmen in his work! It’s true – check it out: “Daddy Longlegs of the Evening”

2. Harvestmen can breath through their legs! Spiracles in harvestmen are located just posterior to the coxae of the 4th pair of legs and this supply of oxygen to Harvestmen legs (e.g., after they are removed) contributes to the duration of twitching

3. Harvestmen have been around for at least 400 million years! Phenominal! And Harvestmen from the Rynie chert have an extensive tracheal system - the oldest record of such tubes of ANY arthropod

4. Harvestmen are NOT venomous! They don’t have venom glands! A common urban myth.

5. Over 60 chemical compounds have been isolated from Harvestmen secretions (e.g., the secretions that are often used in chemical defense)

6. At least a dozen species of Harvestmen are known to be parthenogenetic (females lay eggs that produce only females)!

7. Harvestmen often show aggregation behavior, and the largest aggregation recorded is 70,000 individuals on a candelabrum cactus!

8. Unlike other Arachnids, Harvestmen males have a penis!

9. In some Harvestmen species, males use their chelicerae to offer oral secretion to female – a type of nuptial gift!

10. In some species, Harvestment moult even after they are have reached adulthood!

So there you have it. Many fascinating and fun facts about Harvestmen (and there are many, many more) – you can access all the tweets from the Opiliones Project here (all 24 pages of them).

There were some other notable Harvestmen events over the past year, and it was fortunate this project coincided with these events. For example, the Taxonomy Hulk burst onto the scene, and highlighted an article depicting a mix-up between a spider and a Harvestmen (a common mistake…). Also, a truly HUGE harvestmen species was discovered – this sucker had a 13 inch legspan. As May Berenbaum said over twitter…that’s a Daddy Loooooonglegs!

So, to finish - a big THANK YOU to everyone who followed along. I hope this project was a fun for you as it was for me.

Screen Shot 2013-02-26 at 4.05.02 PM

Another lovely Harvestmen, photo by B. Valentine, reproduced here with permission.

A special thanks to Brian Valentine for permission to use his Harvestmen photos on this blog!