Sometimes you get to travel for your PhD and last week was one of those times for me. This last week I was in France doing fieldwork with my colleague Antonietta Knetge, her co-supervisor Bernard Gomez, and his PhD student Axel Montigny. The purpose of this trip was to collect fossil specimens from Cretaceous localities around Poitiers, from the active quarries of Persac to the beaches of Ile d’Oleron.
Fig. 1: Ile d’Oleron at low tide. Left to Right: Axel, Catarina (me, hi!), and Bernard. Photograph by A. Knetge.
This trip, like all trips, was a learning experience. And everyone loves a list so today we’re counting down the Top 5 things I learned during fieldwork last week.
5. Gear isn’t everything, but it does make a difference
You don’t need to be decked out in Arc’teryx and have the latest in ~geological hammer technology~. However – a solid pair of boots and access to proper tools will absolutely make a difference.
Fig. 2: Drip. Photograph by Antonietta Knetge.
4. Finding Good Rocks is Good Pt.1
The debate of “Good Rock vs Good Stick” has been ongoing for as long as hominids have had the capacity to debate (citation needed). It can be argued that a good stick is more versatile than a good rock, however, in the presence of a large body of water, a Good Rock reigns supreme. Quarries, especially inactive ones, are usually home to small lakes. And paleontological excavations are known to produce some quantities of big rocks, especially if you’re trying to uncover a specific level. The conditions were perfect. If you ever need to raise morale on a dig, Good Rock Thrown Into Lake is sure to do the trick.
Fig. 3: Good rock found and expertly chucked at the Persac Quarry. Photos by A. Knetge, gif editing by C. Barbosa.
3. Wear sunscreen but most importantly cover yourself
The first time I ever did fieldwork, it was an afternoon in mid-June in Lisbon on a southwest facing cliff. This is to say, it was very very hot and there was no shade whatsoever. I wore a tank top and sunscreen but got a peeling sunburn the shape of the top on my back. This is not ideal. This time, I wore longer sleeves when the weather permitted and always had my shoulders covered. Spent the whole week in the sun, only got a little pink in the forearms the first day. I know it’s obvious, but it really can’t be stressed enough.
2. Nutrition
This is another obvious one but bear with me. Watchers of Dungeon Meshi will be familiar with the importance of balanced, tasty, and warm meals to keep your body healthy and yourself happy, but it really cannot be stressed how much eating well (and enough) will affect your mood. Making sure you’re getting enough water (and also electrolytes!) and enough carbs/protein/fats will keep your eyes and mind sharp and keep you motivated throughout the day. Not enough praise can be said for a hearty, warm meal after a hard day’s work.
1. Finding Good Rocks is Good Pt.2
Doing desk work and data analysis is all well and good but nothing beats the rush of cracking open a hunk of clay and finding a perfectly preserved leaf. Venations visible, margins intact, petiole and everything. Effervescent.
Fig. 4: Eucalyptus-like angiosperm leaves from Puy-Puy (Albian-Cenomanian, ~100.5Mya).
2nd year PhD Student in Botany. Carbon dioxide tracker and nature adventurer.
Hi, I’m Eleanor, and I am currently studying in Dr. Matthew Saunders plant ecophysiology lab. I look at carbon budgets in managed grassland systems on mineral soils in Ireland. Essentially I look at how much carbon dioxide is being released or sequestered and stored in animal agricultural systems in Ireland.
I would describe myself more as an environmental scientist than a botanist – but I am slowly getting better at my plant identifications. I love the intricacies of science communication. How do you tell people about this complicated niche piece of work you dedicate all your time to and get them to care? I think the art of storytelling in science should be utilised a little more. We all have that story of how we knew we wanted to become a scientists, that moment of this is what I’d love to do.
To be curious is to be a scientist. I hope by taking on a role as editor on this blog I can help you share you passions, ideas, theories, findings and maybe even just excited ramblings on something cool.
By Ryan Brennan (Research Assistant in Botany and lichen enthusiast)
rybrenna@tcd.ie.
My first ever encounter with the Lilliputian world of lichens was when I was around fourteen years old. Our biology class was covering the binomial system of naming organisms. The lesson began with differentiating kingdoms and working our way down to species. I remember raising my hand to ask my teacher a question that my immature self treated as a “gotcha”, while also making myself look smart. I asked something along the lines of: “What about lichen? Aren’t they one thing made up of two species? How can they fit into this system?”.
The question was not an original thought. The night before, I had watched Sheldon Cooper make some strange joke about lichens on The Big Bang Theory (note: the author does not think The Big Bang Theory is a good show, and prides himself on his now immaculate taste in media). My teacher hastily googled the answer, told me that lichen was a fungus, and I promptly forgot about lichens for another seven years. For most people, this is roughly the amount of headspace lichens will ever occupy. A fleeting thought about whether the apple tree in the garden is dying because of the weird stuff on its bark. A moment of concern over whether that stain on the wall is bird poo they would rather not sit on.
But occasionally, unfortunately in moments few and far between, people investigate further and realise what they are looking at, is a lichen. Then they notice a smidge of Xanthoria on the rubber seal of their car door. They realise the white and grey spots on the concrete path are in fact not chewing gum ironed into the ground by countless shoes. Soon, they can’t stop. They see lichens everywhere, and, importantly, begin to notice their absence.
This absence is not accidental. Lichens are remarkably tolerant of cold, desiccation, and starvation, even being able to survive attached to a space shuttle bound for the International Space Station. They lack roots, cuticles, and any meaningful control over what they absorb from the atmosphere. Everything they need, and everything that harms them, arrives dissolved in rainwater or drifting invisibly through the air, making them a barometer for environmental change.
This sensitivity has earned them a reputation as biological indicators, although this label often undersells their role. Lichens do not simply signal change, they record it. Shifts in species composition, growth form, and abundance accumulate over years and decades, quietly tracking alterations in air quality, nutrient inputs, and climate. When nitrogen-tolerant species spread across bark and stone, they reflect not only pollution, but a reorganisation of ecological opportunity. When communities disappear entirely, the absence itself becomes the message.
Despite this, lichens remain taxonomic outsiders. They are often introduced as curiosities, mentioned briefly in lectures on fungi or algae before being set aside. This marginalisation is not because they are unimportant, but frequently because they are inconvenient. Lichens complicate neat biological categories and challenge the idea of organisms as discrete, self-contained units. To take them seriously requires an acceptance of complexity and interdependence that is easy to acknowledge in theory, but harder to accommodate in practice.
Picture from British Lichens
Yet still, lichens are among the most persistent witnesses on the planet. Many grow slowly enough that a single thallus may span decades or centuries. They endure on rock faces, tree trunks, and walls long after other organisms have come and gone. In doing so, they integrate environmental conditions over time, bearing silent testimony to both stability and disturbance. Where rapid change favours short-lived species, lichens remain: absorbing, responding, and recording.
Perhaps this is why noticing lichens alters how landscapes are read. Pavements and walls become chronologies rather than backdrops. Trees become living records of atmospheric history. Clean air becomes visible, and polluted air leaves a biological trace. Lichens do not demand attention, but once seen, they are difficult to ignore. In a world defined by accelerating change, lichens offer a different perspective. They do not react loudly or dramatically. They persist, adjust, or vanish, and in doing so they tell a quiet, cumulative story about the planet we are shaping. All that is required of us is to learn how to listen.
Ireland was once home to a strong and internationally respected community of lichenologists. This is not immediately obvious today, given how rarely lichens appear in contemporary botanical discourse, but for much of the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries the island was an important centre for lichen study. Its mild, humid climate and relative lack of industrialisation produced landscapes rich in epiphytic and saxicolous species, drawing the attention of specialists from Ireland and beyond.
Picture from British Lichens
Among the most significant figures in this tradition was Matilda Knowles, whose work laid much of the foundation for modern Irish lichenology. Knowles was meticulous, wide-ranging in her surveys, and deeply committed to recording the lichen flora of Ireland at a time when such work was neither fashionable nor well supported. Her collections and publications documented species distributions that, in many cases, no longer exist in the same form today. Knowles was not working in isolation. She was part of a broader network of naturalists who treated lichens as worthy of serious attention, contributing to floras, herbaria, and field clubs. This community understood that lichens were not marginal organisms, but integral components of Ireland’s landscapes. That tradition, however, has steadily eroded.
In the decades that followed, lichenology in Ireland began to dwindle. The reasons are not unique to lichens. Increasing specialisation, shrinking taxonomic training, and the prioritisation of more economically visible organisms have all played a role. Lichens are slow to study, difficult to identify, and resistant to quick results. They do not fit neatly into grant cycles or undergraduate syllabi. As expertise retired or passed on, it was rarely replaced. The consequence of this decline is not merely academic.
Without people trained to recognise and record lichens, changes in their communities often go unnoticed. In a country where air quality, land use, and climate are all shifting, this represents a blind spot in our understanding of environmental change.
Yet the tools to reverse this are modest. Lichenology does not require expensive equipment or remote field sites. It begins with attention. With looking closely at tree bark, stone walls, roofs, and pavements. With learning a handful of common genera, then a few species, and allowing curiosity to do the rest. This was how earlier lichenologists began, and it remains how most expertise is built. There is also something quietly radical about noticing lichens. It is an act that resists speed and spectacle. It asks for patience, for familiarity with place, and for an acceptance that meaningful change is often gradual.
If lichens are the heralds of an ever-changing planet, then we must decide if they are held up high enough to be heard, their story continuing to be recorded either way. Ireland’s landscapes still carry their stories, written in grey crusts, leafy rosettes, and orange stains on stone. The challenge now is not to rediscover lichens, but to remember that they were always here, waiting to be seen.
If you are curious to learn more about lichen, please let me know! Just beware that I may not stop talking about them once I start. Feel free to stop me to chat whenever you see me or send me an email at rybrenna@tcd.ie.
And we’re finishing off the academic term with our annual botany and zoology symposium.
This year we had topics ranging from the shift in plant chemistry, to the impact of artificial light on nocturnal pollinators. With 34 presenters, we had a jam packed audience over the two days. First year students presented for five minutes with everyone else for ten minutes.
The importance of showcasing our research as postgraduate students cannot be highlighted enough. It provides the opportunity to bring together postgraduate research (PGR) within and across departments.
An attentive audience in the Maxwell!
Research can often be a solo pursuit as we venture down the rabbit hole on root dynamics or the mechanics of tendons. It is good to remind ourselves that other people are just as fanatic as we are and to share our research passions with others.
Dr. Matthew Saunders, head of the School of Natural Sciences, said of the symposium:
“…the symposium is a great way to showcase all the fantastic work our PGR are doing. It represents a wonderful opportunity to explore and enjoy the diversity of research across the school. This highlights the need for continued cross departmental collaboration, and not be siloed into our research groups. The standard of research was fantastic to see and I am excited for the new research coming out in SNS”.
We were extremely lucky to have two esteemed guest speakers. On day one, Dr. Martin Möllhoff from the Dublin Institute for Advanced Studies spoke to us on using ground vibrations to track Fin Whales in Ireland and beyond, merging geoscience and marine mammal research. The engaging talk stirred up much conversation about using techniques from one field to study another, and with beautiful videos of Fin whales, what was not to like!
Assistant Professor Sate Ahmad (UCD) presented on day two, investigating ecological processes and developing indicators for functional restoration on fens in Ireland. Botany is well known for being full of bog lovers and Sate’s lively talk presented fantastic in depth knowledge into these systems, which can help shape many PG’s research in the future.
Sate Ahmad presenting his work on ecological restoration.
As a second year PhD (Eleanor), and my first symposium it was great to see the wide depth and breadth of research even within Botany and Zoology, and to get to see new faces and what they are up to. It provides not only an opportunity to work together and connect with fellow researchers but to pick up tips on how they are approaching a problem, and how they are presenting their topic to others. It’s extremely valuable and a lot of fun to take a few days away from the computer!
I’m in my first year PhD (Aoife), and it was really encouraging to see the wide range of research we’re all doing to solve different environmental problems and understand plant and animal dynamics. The presentations were extremely interesting, along with stimulating questions and discussions to follow. The symposium also really highlighted the potential for collaboration in a lot of our projects, and I hope we continue to connect over the next few years!
Phoebe Dibben-Dean presenting research on light responses in roots.
Grace Aspell discussing the findings of multiple stressors on native oysters.
Congratulations to our winners for this year’s symposium:
5-minute presentation: Hazel Craven
10-minute presentation: Emily Symington
Overall presentation: Grace Aspell
Massive thanks to our organisers, fellow PGR students Ailis Wynne, Clodagh Moriarty, Faolán Doecke Launders, and Sorcha Hennigan for organising this year’s symposium which is no easy feat around TCD’s busy schedules. Already looking forward to next year!
After a short hiatus, EcoEvo will be back up and running for the next year. Firstly, a massive thank you to the previous Editors, Dr Niamh McCartan and Josua Seitz! Wishing them the best of luck and we’ll hopefully hear from them in future blog posts.
Aoife
Hi everyone! I’m Aoife Molloy, a first year PhD student within the Buckley Lab in the Zoology Department. I have previously been working here as a Research Assistant, assisting with field and lab work, data management, and policy work.
I am interested in the intersection of climate and biodiversity policy. My current research focuses on how existing evidence can be mobilised to support robust, science-based decision-making in policy and practice. This includes examining nature-based solutions alongside complementary approaches to address pressing societal challenges, particularly in the areas of climate adaptation and mitigation.
The TCD Botany-Zoology Postgraduate Symposium made its annual return this month on the 7th and 8th of March for its 13th edition. This is a time when postgraduates and research assistants from the departments in the School of Natural Sciences could showcase their work and gain valuable experience presenting to peers. There was a diverse range of talks spanning from climate change, to fossilised plants, and a post-doctorate discussion panel. We also had the pleasure of hearing from the two keynote speakers Anja Murray who has had an extensive career in policy and media and talked about her expansive career and her new book. Secondly, Dr. Cordula Scherer works with the Trinity Centre for Environmental Humanites and is currently in charge of the IRC funded project Food Smart Dublin. She discussed branching the gap between science and humanities.
The keynote speakers and 2024 organising committee: (from left to right) Antonieta B. Knetge, Clinton Haarlem, Anja Murray (keynote), Cordula Scherer (keynote), Kathleen Conroy, and Simon Benson.
Day One
The first day kicked off at lunchtime on the 7th with a fascinating talking from Anja Murray. She started by discussing how her early career was mainly in policy making, aiming to make a difference with her ecologist perspective and knowledge. She then discussed her move into media hosting RTE’s “Eco Eye” for 11 years before its ending, writing “Wild Embrace: Connecting to the Wonder of Ireland’s Natural World” during lockdown, her podcast “Root and Branch” and weekly piece “Nature File” on RTE Lyric FM, and her column in the Irish Examiner. It gave us a great perspective on how to communicate what we, as scientists, know to a broader audience.
Anja Murray presenting her presentation about her career.
In the afternoon we heard from Thibault Durieux a third year PhD student who talked about analysis of plant stems to reconstruct plants from the early Carboniferous period. Next was Niamh McCartan a third year PhD who discussed how cold snaps can influence disease in the Daphnia system. Following Niamh, was Ian Clancy a second year PhD student who taught us about greenhouse gas fluxes (CO2 and CH4) from grassland on peat soil. Next was Antonietta B. Knetge, a 2nd year PhD student who showed us plant fossilisation and diversity at South Tancrediakløft, Greenland, across the end-Triassic biotc crisis. The final talk of the day was from Catarina Barbosa, a 2nd year PhD student who told us about dominant and rare genera (groups of plant) in the same area as Antonietta’s study.
Day Two (Morning)
Day two started off with a talk by Kathleen Conroy a third year PhD student, who showed us how Bayesian Belief Network models can help land managers make decisions based on ecosystem services. Next, Simon Benson, a third year PhD student, talked about his work on identifying kelp functional traits in North Atlantic kelp species and their use in industry. After Simon, Aoife Molloy a Research Assistant showed us how to identify and assess best practice nature-based solutions for climate action in Ireland. Following Aoife, Josua Seitz a 2nd year PhD student talked about his work on modelling grassland turnover in the land surface model QUINCY.
After a quick coffee break we jumped right back in with Charlotte Morgan, a second year PhD student who taught us about the threat of emerging herbicide resistance in Irish weeds. Next, Emma King a Research Assistant told us about using Natural Capital Accounting to identify how to manage wind farms to increase biodiversity. After Emma’s talk, we heard from Kate Harrington, a third year PhD student, who told us about factors driving the diversity and composition of floral and insect communities of young, native woodlands in Ireland. Next up was Vivienne Gao, a Research Assistant who showed us how polyphenolic content in seaweed, an important property for the food and pharmaceutical industry, varies with cultivation method and between species.
To finish off the session we heard from the post-doctorate Charlotte Carrier-Belleau who gave us an inspiration session about her journey so far. She began with how she began studying communication before realising science, and more specifically multiple stressors in the environment was her calling. This was followed by a Q&A with a panel of post-doctorates who gave great advice and honest answers to any curious people considering a post-doc.
The post-doctorate panel answering questions. (From left to right) William Matthaeus, Edward Straw, Saté Ahmad, and Charlotte Carrier-Belleau
Day Two (Afternoon)
After a delicious lunch the final session kicked off, we heard from MacDara Allison a 1st year PhD student who works on modelling plankton transport in Irish coastal areas using ocean current models. Next, Lauren Sliney, a Research Master’s student who showed us how studying tendon development in mice can help us uncover possibilities of tendon repair and regeneration in humans suffering from tendon and ligament damage. After Lauren, Whitney Parker, a third year student who discussed the varying host specificity and resistance between 200 Daphnia genotypes. The final postgraduate short talk was given by Moran Mirzaei, a first year PhD student who told us about using eddy covariance data to assess the impact of management practices on CO2 dynamics in Irish grasslands.
To end the day the second keynote speaker Dr. Cordula Sherer discussed how she had to learn a new perspective of working when she joined the humanities looking at marine ecology in history. One such project she recently worked on was adapting historical seafood recipes to the modern palette to encourage more seafood consumption and published “One Year of Irish Seafood: Traditional, Historical, Sustainable” while the recipes themselves are available on the Food Smart Dublin webpage.
Dr Cordula Scherer presenting her work on encouraging the consumption of seafood
The Winners
Finally, the winners for the talks were announced:
MacDara Allison won best 5-minute talk, Charlotte Morgan won best 10-minute talk, Emma King won best overall talk and Simon Benson won audience choice. Congratulations to them!
The winners (from left to right): MacDara Allison, Emma King, Charlotte Morgan, and Simon Benson.
Until Next Year!
We want to say a huge thank you to the committee members for putting on such a friendly and supportive event! And congratulations to all the speakers, with a special mention to the winners again!
Finally, a quick reminder that if you have any EcoEvo news, research updates, or think pieces you’d like to write about, please get in touch. We’d love to hear from you and share your piece on the blog!
We are living in a biodiversity crisis, with many species shrinking in numbers and at risk of going extinct. To put a stop to, or at least slow down this seemingly inevitable fall into the abyss for many of the world’s species, one action that is considered effective is establishing protected areas.
“A protected area is a clearly defined geographical space, recognised, dedicated and managed, through legal or other effective means, to achieve the long term conservation of nature with associated ecosystem services and cultural values.” IUCN Definition, 2008
When we imagine a protected area, we typically picture a pristine natural environment with gorgeous landscapes, thriving diversity of wildlife, and no human beings. The reality, however, is strikingly different, especially in Europe where very few locations have never been used by humans. In fact, most protected areas are under pressure from human activities.
The pressure comes in different forms: from farming to roads, from urbanization to hunting, from mining to logging etc.. We may expect that some of those threats are more harmful than others. We may also expect that some of those threats are more “central” than others. In other words, that some threats may be sources of other types of pressures. A classic example is roads, which favour the spread of invasive species and increase hunting. New roads make it easier for hunters to access more land to hunt on. If we want to reduce hunting, we could well reduce access to areas that host endangered species.
In the European Union (EU), protected areas are managed through an integrated network called Nature 2000, which includes over 27,000 land and marine protected areas and covers over 1.1 million square kilometres, an area almost four times the size of Italy. The EU collects an impressive amount of information about its protected areas. For example, data on protected species, habitats, what management actions are carried out, and importantly human activities. Remarkably, all this data is made openly available (it can be downloaded here)!
We used this data and we tried to identify relationships between human threats, hoping to provide guidance for a better management of these sites.
Map of the terrestrial Natura 2000 sites used in the study, shown in dark green colour.
By analysing the data from the EU, we found that many of the human threats recorded within the Natura 2000 network are related with each other. For example, as introduced earlier, we observed that the presence of ’roads, paths and railroads’ is strongly related with ’hunting and collection of wild animals’. We also observed that ’Urbanised areas, human habitation’ is related threats such as ’Fire and fire suppression’, ’Introduced genetic material, GMO’, and ’Taking/removal of terrestrial plants’, among others. In these examples, roads and urban areas are likely acting as sources of the other types of threats. Generally, we found that threats related to agriculture and urbanization are more frequently related with other threats. In practical terms, it means that if we are going to eliminate, or at least reduce the presence, of those types of human activities we will be more likely to also reduce other threats that are associated to them. We can kill two birds with one stone, but now the birds are nasty human activities that harm ecosystems and biodiversity. Minimizing threats that are strongly related with others should be prioritized.
The full article “Examining the co-occurrences of human threats within terrestrial protected areas“, published in Ambio, can be accessed here.
In December 2023 the discipline of Zoology in the School of Natural Sciences, Trinity College Dublin were awarded a green certificate from My Green Lab after achieving a phenomenal score of 97%! This was a major effort thanks to a dedicated committee led by Emma King.
My Green Lab Committee (from left to right): Ebru Talak Bastürkmen, Aoife Molloy, Prof Paula Murphy, Emma King, Niamh McCartan, Grace McNicholas, Simon Benson, Aedín McAdams, Clinton Haarlem, Alison Boyce, and Grace Aspell.
What is My Green Lab?
My Green Lab Certification is awarded by My Green Lab to encourage sustainability in a lab-based environment. It has been recognised by the United Nations Race to Zero campaign as a key measure of progress towards a zero-carbon future. Even Science Foundation Ireland is encouraging participation recently provided support for applications. This can be undertaken by a single lab group or can even be carried out as a co-ordinated effort across a whole Discipline or School, as we did! Finally, once awarded, the certification lasts for two years and then needs to be reapplied for. Sustainability is a continuing process and there are always ways to improve!
On top of certification, there are many of programmes run by My Green Lab to encourage sustainability. These programmes provide guidance and inspiration to improve specific operations such as ultra-cold freezers and green chemistry. We have also previously partaken in the freezer challenge which was a big help in maximising our energy efficient use of freezers!
Our Journey
Way back in December 2022 a Green Lab committee was formed with at least one person representing each lab group. We first met to find out what My Green Lab certification was all about. We then completed a survey asking all sorts of questions in areas like travel, purchasing, and water. After returning the surveys we received a baseline score (of 55% which is still a bronze certificate so not bad aye). From here we could target where we could improve our sustainability and how to implement changes.
This was a team effort which involved regular meetings to keep on top of our progress and ensure we were improving steadily. We learned from each other and the co-operation and communication ensured that the learnings were spread across the whole discipline. Committee members then reported back to each of their lab groups to see what can change and be improved internally. Our score was also greatly improved by finding out a lot of information, this included finding relevant policies which were already in place departmentally. This endeavour was mainly taken on by our wonderful Senior Technical Officer Alison Boyce and Department Head Prof Paula Murphy.
Then in November 2023 the committee filled out the final survey. We completed it at the same time so if anyone had a question it could be answered immediately. This is where we scored 97%!
My Green Labs green certificate for the Discipline of Zoology
It has been an extremely rewarding journey, and one we are proud of! If any of you readers are interested in getting involved the committee would be happy to give some directions. Just email us (ecoevoblog@gmail.com) and we can send you on to the right people!
As usual, if you have any questions or ideas about a blog, please feel free to get onto us via Twitter, Instagram, Facebook or email.
We’ve all been there, trying to get some out of reach object only to dejectedly ask for the assistance of another. Turns out, this behavior has been with us for most of our lives. It is known that children as young as 12 months will start to point at certain objects that they desire but are, for obvious reasons, unable to obtain (Figure 2). This behaviour is known as imperative pointing and, as it turns out, you don’t even need to point to be able to do it. In fact, gaze alteration, the process of looking between the desired object and a specific individual, is seen as an analog of this in our four-legged friends, the canines. This behavior has been widely examined in domesticated dogs, who humans have a long history of cohabitation with. Indeed, many of us can probably offer anecdotal evidence of this in our own dogs, be it looking at treats on a shelf, or their favourite toys on kitchen tabletops. However, surprisingly, it has never been studied in wolves, the wild relatives of our beloved pooches. In 2016, Heberlein et al. set to change this, and their findings have some important implications, not least concerning our understanding of the very domestication of dogs itself.
Figure 2: A cartoon of imperative pointing in infants
The experimental premise was relatively simple. A group of grey wolves (subspecies: timber wolf) and a group of dogs (breed not given), were both obtained from animal shelters in Europe and were raised from puppyhood with daily human interaction. When the canines were around 2 years old, the experiment began with a pre-feeding and training phase. This involved an experimental room with 3 boxes (Figure 3), each too high for the canines to reach by jumping, the poor guys. In this phase, food was first shown to the animals, one animal at a time, and then clearly placed in each of the boxes. If the animal looked at the box and then at the human, the human would automatically get the food for them. The wolves and dogs were then introduced to 2 new humans, a mean competitor who would steal the food, and a helpful cooperator, who would share any food the animals identified. This whole process would serve to inform the canines that the humans could provide them with out of reach food, but that only the cooperator would actually give them any of it. Why go through all this trouble you may ask? Well, turns out there were some very clever scientists involved in the experiment. Those involved wanted to avoid the possibility that gaze alteration for food could simply be the result of a food human association, i.e., if I stare at a box and then a human, then the human must give me food. If gaze alteration reflects some true communicative intention on the part of the animals, then one would expect that they should ask for help mainly from the cooperative human, I know I definitely prefer working with cooperative humans. Once trained, the test was ready to begin.
The actual experiment involved a tasty sausage being presented to a lone wolf/dog and then being hidden in one of 3 boxes located in the room, the same room used in pre-training. Then, either the cooperative human or the competitive human, the same humans the animals had been trained with, entered the room. They would passively observe the animal for 1 minute after which they would go to the box they believed the animal was looking at. If correct then the sausage would wither be given to the animal, if the cooperator was present, or eaten by the human, if the competitor was present. The process was repeated a total of 4 times, twice with each type of human.
Figure 3: The experimental setup. Stars represent the food boxes, the circle is where the human was positioned, and D is the rooms door.
The results were incredibly interesting. In most cases, the canines, both wolves and dogs, showed the correct food location to the cooperator but not the competitor (P = 0.006) (Figure 4). Importantly, there was no difference between this behaviour between the two species (P = 0.24). As an aside, P values are statistical values that tell you if there is a significant difference between two things. All you need to know is 1) Any P value less than 0.05 means that the event is unlikely to have happened by chance and 2) That scientists are very fond of including them in their papers. In any case, what’s even more interesting is what these results can tell us about their evolutionary histories. While both directed the cooperative human to the food box, wolves spent more time looking at the food itself when compared to the dogs (P = 0.03). This may reflect a higher food motivation present in wolves. Intuitively this makes sense, as, while some of us would surely like them to be, wolves are not pets and so need to hunt for food themselves. In addition, the ability of dogs to referentially communicate with humans was thought to be a result of their domestication and close association with us ever since. The results of this experiment would, however, suggest that this ability was at least present in the common ancestor of the wolves and domestic dogs. Therefore, rather than this communication being a product of domestication, it is more likely that the skill of referential communication had evolved in canines to promote the social coordination needed for group living, i.e., living in their packs. In other words, the common ancestor of today’s canines may have also been a good boy.
Figure 4: A graph comparing the percentage of showing behaviour, i.e., gaze alteration, in wolves and dogs towards competitive and cooperative humans.
In summary, dogs, are not alone in their ability to ability to referentially communicate with us. This ability is shared with the grey wolf and the choice to work with a cooperative human over a competitive one provides evidence that there is some conscious thought in this decision-making process (both in dogs and wolves). While this raises important questions about the evolutionary histories of these animals, more intriguing questions remain. Namely, what other well-known traits of dogs are also present, but undiscovered, in wolves. Personally, I am very much excited to find out.
Figure 5: Grey wolf puppies playing next to their mother.
For more information on this topic, you can read the paper discussed here(free of charge)
Blog written by Niall Moore, a final year undergraduate student, as part of an assignment writing blogs about an animal behaviour paper!
We would like to say a big thank you and goodbye to the 2022/2023 editors Aedín McAdams and Luke Quill. Throughout the year they have provided a wide variety of posts including saying goodbye to Prof. Celia Holland and the annual 2023 Botany-Zoology Postgraduate Symposium. They were also responsible for the revival of the annual Photo Competition, which we will continue next year! We want to wish them both the best of luck and hopefully they will keep us updated with their works in future blog posts.
But now it’s time to introduce ourselves to you – hello, it’s Josua and Niamh here – the new editorial team for 2023/2024! We are super excited to be a part of this blog and we are looking forward to bringing you the latest research, ideas, opinions, and advice from Trinity’s EcoEvo contributors and to keep making this blog a centre of science and innovation.
Niamh
Hi there, I’m Niamh Mc Cartan a Dublin native, and a 3rd year PhD student in the Sick Water Flea Lab led by Dr. Pepijn Luijckx. I graduated from Zoology here in Trinity in 2019 (went to Queen’s University Belfast for a 1-year MSc in parasitology and pathogen biology) and then returned to Zoology where I have been studying disease and climate change since 2021. I am particularly interested in looking at how extreme temperature variation (heatwaves and cold snaps) affect disease using the model organism Daphnia magna and its parasite Ordospora colligata. In my free time I love reading and knitting, and the pub with friends!
Josua
Hi everyone, I am Josua (he/him). I started my PhD in the Botany Department, TCD in January 2023. I work with Prof. Silvia Caldararu on modelling carbon dynamics in grasslands within QUINCY, a land surface model. Before coming to Ireland, I did a Master’s at Umeå University, Sweden where I studied Earth Sciences with a focus on biogeochemistry. In my free time I love hiking and camping!
If you have any questions or ideas about a blog, please feel free to get onto us via Twitter, Instagram, Facebook or email (ecoevoblog@gmail.com).
