It’s been a busy few days of science, eating great Norwegian food, catching up with old friends, and meeting new ones: The Scandinavian Association for Pollination Ecology’s 31st annual meeting is over. As I’ve reported in previous years – for example here and here and here – it’s been a whirlwind of great presentations and interesting discussions, far too much to summarise in a single blog post. But here’s my top 5 personal list of things that I discovered during SCAPE 2017:
- The hills are alive with microclimatic heterogeneity! Lisa-Maria Ohler introduced us to how variable ground temperature can be on a very local scale and how this might influence plant-pollinator diversity. Especially impressive was the fact that this was based on Lisa’s BSc thesis!
- Removal of abundant and well connected plant species (“hubs”) from a plant-pollinator network can affect insect visitation rates and pollen deposition (Paolo Biella). It was particularly good to catch up with this project as I’m one of the collaborators on it!
- Several very interesting talks discussed scent variation between Lithophragma populations and how this does not seem to correlate with flower shape and with the moth and bee pollinators, including this one by Mia Waters:
- Some invasive plants have much higher levels of pollen protein content than native plants which may be a reason why they are so successful – they attract more pollen-collecting visitors (Laura Russo).
- Old ideas of why heteranthery (flowers with two different types of anthers) have evolved may not be correct (Kathleen Kay). This is a question that vexed Darwin and still seems to be vexing pollination ecologists!
I also got some really useful ideas and feedback on my own presentation, which is one of the best things about small conferences such as SCAPE: just over 70 people took part. Next year will mark a break in tradition for SCAPE when, for the first time in its history, the 32nd meeting will take place outside of Scandinavia, in Ireland. Watch this space for more details next year!
Thanks to our Norwegian hosts for making the conference so welcoming; I’ll finish with some general photos of the conference and of the lovely town of Drøbak, where the meeting took place, and its aquarium:
Not all of the poetry that I write – such as these pieces – is serious and high-minded, some of it is whimsical, funny, or just plain dumb. Today I taught a morning class on flower structure and pollination, so in its honour here’s an example of the latter:
A Bad Botanical Pun
“Don’t become a gardener – there’s no fuchsia in it!”
Not a great pun, but I’ve heard worse.
However, it may be pedantic, but I have to point out
That the genus Fuchsia was named in honour of Leonard Fuchs
(A sixteenth century Bavarian botanist, as you ask).
His name is pronounced as a definite, Germanic “fucks”,
Not a prim, Victorian “fewsh”.
So, don’t become a botanist – it’ll Fuchsia!
Scientists blog for many reasons. Some of these reasons are highly personal, other reasons are purely professional. For most of us it’s a mix of the two. But despite all of the scientific blogging going on there’s actually very little been written in the scientific literature about the advantages of blogging for the professional scientist. As a step towards remedying that situation a group of co-authors and myself have today published a paper entitled “Bringing ecology blogging into the scientific fold: measuring reach and impact of science community blogs“. It’s published in the open access journal Royal Society Open Science. Just follow that link and you will be able to read it for free.
I’m rather proud of this paper as it’s a collaboration between active ecological bloggers, most of whom don’t know each other personally. However we share an interest in blogging and in the belief that blogging is a legitimate scientific medium for communication of ideas, data, and professional advice. That is, blogging for the science community rather than (just) for science communication to the general public.
One of the most pleasing things about this paper is that it received two of the best reviews any of us have ever had in our careers. The reviewers were incredibly supportive and complimentary, and asked for virtually no changes. That’s hugely gratifying and suggests to us that we are saying something important; let’s hope the readership likes it as much!
The co-authors, their Twitter handles and links to their blogs are below. If you click through you’ll see that we have posted coordinated pieces on our blogs about our own reflections on the collaboration and what the paper means to us.
Manu Saunders () Ecology Is Not A Dirty Word
Simon Leather (@EntoProf) Don’t Forget the Roundabouts
Jeff Ollerton (@JeffOllerton) Jeff Ollerton’s Biodiversity Blog
Steve Heard (@StephenBHeard) Scientist Sees Squirrel
Meghan Duffy (@duffy_ma) Dynamic Ecology
Margaret Kosmala (@margaretkosmala) Ecology Bits
Terry McGlynn (@hormiga) & Amy Parachnowitsch (@EvoEcoAmy) Small Pond Science