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!
It’s been three years since we’ve had transition year students pass through the door of the Zoology building to take part in a week long work experience programme. A huge thank you to everyone who made this possible and to Prof. Nicola Marples for organising another successful ‘Zoology TY Week’.
The Zoology TY Week is dedicated to exposing transition year students from around Ireland to what it is like to study Zoology in Trinity College Dublin, and to show them the opportunities that come with it. This year we had almost 100 applications, that was whittled down to 24 students, who were then invited to attend the course. The winners got to experience life as an undergraduate zoology student, attending lectures, researching in the lab, conducting fieldwork, having discussions, siting and chatting with new friends over coffee and meeting the cohort who work in Zoology everyday.
And importantly, applications for next year’s TY week are open now until 1st December 2023!
This year, we asked the students to write about their experience of zoology. The following blog consists of paragraphs written by the Zoology TY class of 2023, reflecting on their last day as a zoologist.
“I really enjoyed my time here and the opportunity to be able to participate in this course, meeting others with the same interests as me and meeting the zoology department team. My view on zoology since before I started this course has definitely changed. I wasn’t expecting this course to have such a vast variety of topics to possibly specify if you were to take this course. I learnt that zoology covers nearly all living organisms, right down to bacteria and parasites, and up to big blue whales.“
by Sean Keating
“I have really enjoyed my TY zoology week, I wish it would never end. I learned so much from all the lovely people here and they are all much friendlier than I expected…although I don’t know what I expected. During the week I learned about cells, parasites, how animals work and much more. We did experiments in the science labs which I loved because it was very hands-on and we got to do more than just theory classes.
In my opinion one of the most helpful things was speaking to people who have just finished their degree or are almost finished. They spoke about where they have travelled to, the pros and cons of this course path and what they do as a career from studying zoology. This got me thinking about what career I would like to do after college too.
If you are thinking of doing the TY zoology programme next year I would definitely recommend it as it’s more beneficial than I thought it would be. If you have an interest in ecology, the natural world or animals in the wild etc.. then this is perfect and very ideal for you. I’m walking away from this course with lots of information that I didn’t have before and I’m delighted I did it.”
by Caoimhe Dunne
“My experience in the TCD Zoology TY course has been one of the best things I have done in recent years. I learned so much during the week from fascinating owl pellets to intriguing parasites. It was a truly magical experience and has given me a great view into what it is like to be a zoologist. This course is a must do for anyone who has an interest in zoology. You learn so many intriguing things, I for one never knew the amount of little critters living in the rivers – fascinating! As I reflect upon the week, there was not a moment where I was bored. Everything we did was fascinating, fun and taught by such kind and caring Zoologists. If you have an interest in zoology this is the course for you and I would highly recommend it.”
by Charlie Maher
“I loved my week in the zoology department at Trinity. I loved all the practical work and the experiments we got to do – in and outside the classroom. I never knew there was so much diversity in the types of jobs you can do in zoology, but I learnt about things like parasites to extinct birds to how sharks are monitored and tagged. It’s not just sitting in a classroom learning about different animals. We got to learn about genetics, how PhDs work, the different opportunities zoology can give you and we got to even pull parasites out of fish! When I signed up for this week, I didn’t think I’d actually enjoy zoology to the level I did and I’m now wondering if I should try to do it after school. There’s so many things you can do and places you can travel to by doing zoology. Due to this week, I’m extremely interested in sharks and marine life, and want to know more about what I could do with that after school.”
by Katie McBride
“Overall I really enjoyed this zoology work experience. Zoology is one of my favourite areas of science and I’m so glad I got a chance to experience what it would be like to study this subject in Trinity. I liked how we got to talk to some students, asking them questions to learn more about zoology and how we got experience working in a lab. On the first day we were told the story of the elephant skeleton in the Zoological Museum called “Prince Tom.” The story stuck with me because it was incredibly sad how the elephant was mistreated. We learned how he was forced to carry people on his back when his ribs were damaged, and when he started acting strangely due to the pain he was tied up and kept away from the public in case he tried to hurt someone.
What interested me most about zoology is that you get to travel around the world for fieldwork and get to see animals in person in their natural habitat, rather than just hear about them in lectures. I really like travelling and this is definitely something I would like to do, especially since most of my favourite animals are not found in the wild in Ireland.
I think this experience has made me excited to go to university as I will get to study a topic of my choice rather than studying everything like in secondary school.”
by Elia Ross
“After spending a week in the zoology department of Trinity College, I have learnt so many new things. One of which being exactly what a course and career in Zoology entails. We heard about this from many different people from the undergrads, to the PhD students to the faculty members. We also got to experience first hand what it’s like being a zoology student through lots of field work. One morning, we went to the Dodder river and learnt how to take samples of insects within the river. Afterwards, we brought the samples back to the lab and looked at them under a microscope, to determine what species they were. We learnt that you could tell a lot about the cleanliness of a river by looking at what insects inhabit it. Zoology is a very broad subject and during the week we learnt about everything from mammals, to parasites, to birds and to even skeletons and bones.”
by Emilie Duffy
“When I applied for this program I didn’t think my perspective of zoology would differ. I do love science, but I’ve never really had an interest in zoology, but I just thought “why not”. Ever since taking part in this program my opinion has changed immensely. There’s so much more to zoology than I thought. We took an interactive museum tour and we learnt about different animals, extinct and existing. I’d never heard about the auk bird and learning about its extinction was very interesting. We also had the privilege to hear from undergraduate and postgraduate zoology students. It was very helpful to hear about their journey and the process of studying a science subject at Trinity. My favourite modules were Pepijn’s Parasites and Teeny Tiny Organisms. I knew what parasites were but I learned about how they spread and the way they control their victims’ brains. We got to look at different kinds of parasites in real life and we dissected a worm parasite out of a small fish. It was quite disgusting but very intriguing. For Teeny Tiny Organisms we collected different small organisms from the river and when we brought them back, we examined them through microscopes and identified them. I felt like a real Trinity student! I also learnt other things I didn’t know, for example, how different coloured foods affect bird’s eating habits and how shark data is collected by marine biologists. Overall participating in this programme really changed my view on zoology and I feel more encouraged to apply to Trinity College in the future.”
by Naomi Abu
“The Zoology TY Week was an opportunity not to be missed. This week far exceeded my expectations in so many ways. We were exposed to many different areas of zoology, giving a well-rounded experience of what studying zoology would be like. We were exposed to a broad range of animals, for example, insects, mammals, birds, and parasites in a variety of experiments, both in the lab and in the field. The activity that I most enjoyed was the invertebrates of rivers. We took samples of invertebrates in the Dodder river to gauge how pure the water is in that river. We then took our samples back to the lab and identified them under a microscope. I found this very interesting as I had never seen any of the invertebrates up close before, and it’s certainly not an opportunity that would be available to me in school. I learned in this activity the importance of insects in our ecosystem and definitely have an increased appreciation for them now.”
by Arianna Petley
“One thing I really enjoyed about the Trinity TY zoology course was the bird race. I was amazed how many birds we were able to find in such a small area. That had been a common trend this week. I’ve been amazed by so many aspects of zoology. From the impressive museum and massive elephant to the equally massive laboratory and the gross parasites we saw living there. I’ve learned so much about zoology and science as a whole, and learned what life on campus can be like.”
by Derry Flanagan
“My favourite part of the first day was in the Zoological museum when we were told the story of the Great Auk. We also learned about ‘Prince Tom’ a royal elephant who had an incredible and diverse life. I had to try very hard to not say “Let’s talk about the elephant in the room”, but I managed to persevere .Day 3 was probably my favourite day. The first thing we did was learn about Mini-Mammals with John Rochford. That was my favourite part of the week. It was interesting to see how to trap the animals safely for testing and then to release them back into the wild. We also looked through owl pellets and looked for the bones of little animals. I found the skull of a mouse. We also went to St.Stephen’s Green and tested if seagulls would eat bread if it was a different colour. That was quite fun and we analysed the data later on. What I loved at this experience that was unrelated to zoology was the lunch breaks and tea breaks because I got to socialise with everyone and know my peers better. I would recommend this course to anyone even if you’re not too interested as there is a wide range of things to learn and you will enjoy most of it. All in all a great experience.”
by Euan Flanagan
“I came to the placement with one friend from my school, and within only a few minutes in the Zoology building I had made many more. The friendships that were fostered between others and myself were greatly encouraged by the games and activities that we do, not only on the first day but in the week throughout. As someone who came into TY not really knowing what I wish to do with myself, as I would probably guess most people to be – the sheer scope of Zoology as a whole made it extremely interesting, even if you’re not particularly interested in Science or Geography. For example, History is probably my favourite subject in school and I wasn’t really expecting this week to have much to do with history, but the Zoology Museum viewing with Professor Linnie and the general evolutionary studies that we carried out also brought what I believed to be my main interests to the fold. It’s an extremely hands-on experience, so if you like wading through rivers or cutting up fish I think you should consider! The miny mammals class with Professor Rochford was completely new and was a subject that greatly made me want to look into zoology as a career after school. He showed us the different traps used in field studies to allow Zoologists to study the environment and ecology of a specific area and also explained to us how his students are granted the opportunity to work all over the world in places like Canada and New Zealand, working with species that most of us have only seen in the wild on our TVs. This practical element of Zoology began a genuine interest to pursue doing something similar.”
by James Meehan
“I’ve really enjoyed experiencing what it is like to learn like an undergraduate student of zoology. My favourite part of the week was when we collected freshwater invertebrate samples from the river. We put on wellies and used nets and buckets to collect samples from the river. I liked being out in nature and experiencing everything that we had spoken about the day before. We then took these samples back to the lab and studied them under the microscope. It made me feel like a proper scientist, since we were wearing lab coats and latex gloves. The whole week was just a great experience, and I hope next year’s TYs enjoy it as much as I did.”
by Elisa Terry
“As someone who has always been fascinated by the animals and ecosystem of the natural world, this past week at the zoology week at TCD has been such an eye opening experience. We covered many different topics and carried out experiments that definitely deepened my knowledge of the workings of animals. We even got the opportunity to extract real parasites like liver fluke from fish through dissection. Identifying invertebrates under a microscope was one of my favourite activities of the week, as we got to collect them from the Dodder. It made me realise how little I knew about my local rivers and insects. Having the professors there to answer our questions, help us understand and share their experiences on the different topics has only deepened my interest and passion for zoology.”
by Éadaoin Cullen
Thank you again to everyone involved in this year’s Transition Year Zoology Experience. It was greatly appreciated by the students, as you can see from the above excerpts. If you would like to be a part of next year’s TY week applications are open until the 1st December 2023!
How unlikely it is to think that many people who decided to dedicate themselves to a natural sciences-related field wondered at least once about the life of an eighteenth-century naturalist?
Picture Alexander von Humboldt, Charles Darwin or Joseph Banks expeditions, or René Malaise and Gustav Eisen‘s impressive efforts in gathering human specimens and artefacts. How about Roderick Murchinson and his geological surveys around the world, or Hans Sloane, whose collections contributed to the foundation of London’s beloved British Museum? The imaginaries of explorers crossing oceans towards yet unknown territories, observing and sampling specimens never seen before, naming and using them to interpret the world, are striking, to say the least.
Nevertheless, other narratives are growing beside these settled imaginaries. It is increasingly recognised how those exact figures were far from the idea we have of them: solitary geniuses and intrepid explorers, nothing related to the politics and economies of their time. Instead, their journeys would rest on the routes of British imperialism, making use of the slave trade in the case of Sloane,1 or be sponsored by intelligence operations on foreign valuable minerals and local policies such as the case of Murchinson2. Even an important institution such as the Royal Botanic Garden in Kew now acknowledges how the boost that botanical research saw at the time was supported by interests in new profitable plants3. Likewise, it is recognised how the global network of botanic gardens emerged not only to create pleasant green spaces but also to have experimental facilities dedicated to researching those exotic new plants for valuable products. As a matter of fact, the search and cultivation of plants such as the rubber tree, a source of such a profitable material, or the Cinchona tree, from which the compound quinine was isolated and used against malaria by the occupying forces in the tropics, have been central to the expansion of the British empire4. The very same collection of animal, plant and human samples can be considered to be driven by similar dynamics. What was discovered in the colonised territories was taken, shipped to the collectors’ homelands, and then housed in centres that, in turn, expanded to accommodate the increasing flow of materials, being a source of knowledge for the benefit of their host institutions. This colonial dimension of the sciences that study nature remained unaddressed in the mainstream imaginaries, although some already glimpsed it. Like Sir Ronald Ross, a doctor engaged in the fight against malaria in the Sierra Leone colonies, who in 1899 publicly expressed how the success of imperialism in the following century would largely depend on success with the microscope 5.
Much has been written about “how modern sciences were built on a system that exploited millions of people, at the same time justifying and supporting it to an extent that greatly influenced how Western people view other ethnic groups and countries”6. At the same time, others point out that “one should not fall into the prospective error of asking nineteenth-century men to reason with post-colonial categories developed after World War II” 7. Likewise, those who work or are interested in these fields today might easily feel far from this legacy, either because of the time that has passed since that era or because of the desk-based nature of their research. Why think about it then? Wasn’t this a blog just about ecology and evolution?
Yet, systems linked to colonial trauma continue to shape the experience of many ecologists, naturalists, biologists, and even anthropologists, today. At the same time, many narratives are still influenced by worldviews that see the advances in the natural or biological realm as carriers of better health, civilization or culture. The consequences of these processes are tangible. A perspective article in Nature Ecology and Evolution8 speaks of colonialism in the mind first, referring to the way a Western scholar might relate to knowledge. From the simple use of language, as when talking about the Neotropical region (new to whom?), or the overwriting of Latin names, sometimes derived from the names of their European discoverers, to the traditional names by which some species are recognized, often more informative about behaviours or characteristics of that species. It could be through devaluating local knowledge, oral traditions, and artefacts that made it possible to navigate an environment in a surprisingly (for us) detailed way, relegating them to folklore or anecdotes, going so far as to claim scientific discoveries, for example, medical properties of plants, already known and shared by local communities for a long time. Fuelling the idea that any active ingredient or species is only really discovered when it enters Western scientific literature, even if they come from a non-systematic and oral knowledge that a population held for centuries.
Figure from Trisos et al. (2021). Map showing the minimum estimate for each country of the number of bird species for which the Latin binomial name is based on a European person.
Other than the mindset, inequalities are also visible on a very practical level: the scientific subordination of formerly colonised countries to researchers of the so-called Old World, better known as parachute or helicopter science. The role of local scientists has often been reduced as labourers employed in data analysis and collection for Western scientists. Adding to this, there are the issues with accessing that same knowledge produced in the ‘Global North’, either because samples or data are stored in museums or servers far away from the places they were collected, the absence of high-speed internet, the lack of the right networks, visa issues for accessing conferences9, or simply the high costs of publishing or even accessing scientific literature. Other ways in which parachuting occurs are through drawing on the traditional knowledge of these countries, when this is not belittled, cataloguing and publishing information without mentioning the contribution of local curators and experts.
Figure from Asase et al. (2022). Summary of the relationship between the number of authorships (i.e., representation as author or coauthor) on 9935 papers on “ecology” or “conservation” in Web of Science, for 2015–2020 versus per-capita gross domestic product (GDP).
Another important discussion is about climate change mitigation and rewilding projects when benefits that will be experienced globally demand costs to be felt locally, especially when adequate resources and support are not provided, or when measures impose worldviews external to local values and needs. The same article brings the example of a no-fishing zone established in French Polynesia which was detrimental to local fishermen’s needs, thus ending in simply not being respected and ultimately not helping the conservation efforts on the target fish stock. Top-down management of this kind proved itself to be not only erosive for people’s self-determination but also undermines the very objective of the project.
Many of the difficulties in the field of land management and nature conservation stem right from the relationship with local communities: other risks beyond not considering them (as in the case above), is romanticising them, possibly falling into the Western myth of the good savage, or assuming that indigenous people are willing to do what we ask. Rather, it would be important to recognize that like any human community, the local people we encounter during our work as scientists might have legitimate political, cultural and economic aspirations that could differ from our expectations.
Decolonizing the natural sciences is not a trivial matter. It certainly does not mean throwing away all that has been learned so far and starting afresh, making only use of ancient artefacts and indigenous tales. For many, it is a matter of reflecting critically on their profession, on the political context that allowed the development of each one’s work, on the power structures to which science might have contributed, taking dignity away from some bodies more than others. To “take a stand and recognize ourselves as part of the system we wish to describe, rather than as neutral actors, becoming aware of how backgrounds and training influence the questions that are asked, trying to understand how the data is interpreted and how our work might intersect with the power of companies or extractive interests over a place” 8.
Decolonization would not only be a matter of awareness but also make sure that research methods and implications are not in contrast with local values and management. This would certainly restrict researchers’ access or capacity for action, but it would be an important trade-off for all those who repeatedly had to give up their territories or lifestyles.
Discussions like this are indeed taking root. It happens when researchers use local languages alongside the traditional binomial taxonomic system, or initiatives are taken from established institutions, such as the case of the American Ornithological Society and its statement for changing harmful and exclusionary English bird names thoughtfully and proactively for species10. Or like the Biodiversity Heritage Library, now working to make their materials available in languages other than English11, the Pitt Rivers Museum12 and London’s Natural History Museum13, with their projects aimed at sharing the stories of colonialism behind their collections. More and more resources are becoming available for establishing healthy stewardships with indigenous communities14 or addressing parachute science15,16,17, or simply engaging with diverse experiences from diverse scholars18, 19.
On a side note (but not really), it is also worth mentioning the call for an intersectional approach to these challenges. Noticing how an individual’s capacity to contribute to public and scholarly discourse does not only rely on race/ ethnicity, but similar power dynamics might be in place based on gender, nationality, indigeneity, wealth, spirituality, sexuality, parenthood/dependencies and other identities. “An intersectional approach to practising ecology recognizes the multiple barriers and opportunities facing those working together”8.
These discourses might seem marginal to someone working now on their own seemingly unrelated passion project. Nevertheless, reflecting on how plants, animals, environments, and people intersected and influenced each other in different directions is indeed relevant.
Among all, it is the field of ecology and evolution that explores the relationships between living beings and the environment in which they live. Acknowledging diversity, not only in biological terms but also within systems of knowledge, solutions and stories of the people who are part of it – including their gender, ethnicity and nationality – is certainly a way to widen one’s lens on the world.
Figure from Trisos et al. 2021. Actions that support reformulating research questions and processes for a decolonizing ecology. Credit: Keren Cooper (illustrations).
I am a visiting researcher at Trinity College Botanic Garden, working on the establishment of its long-term environmental monitoring program and interested in the human dimension of ecological systems dynamics. I wrote this post from the perspective of a western, female, early career researcher, and by no means do I wish to take ownership of the views of those who experience inequity and discrimination on a daily basis, nor do I believe this offers a complete or global understanding of such a complex problem. Rather, I hope to contribute to mainstreaming such an ongoing struggle, thanks also to the encouragement coming from discussing and comparing with peers.
Trisos, C.H., Auerbach, J. & Katti, M. (2021). Decoloniality and anti-oppressive practices for a more ethical ecology. Nat Ecol Evol 5, 1205–1212. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41559-021-01460-w
Das, S. & Lowe, M. (2018). Nature Read in Black and White: decolonial approaches to interpreting natural history collections. Journal of Natural Science Collections 6, 4 ‐ 14. https://natsca.org/article/2509
Asase, A., Mzumara-Gawa, T. I., Owino, J. O., Peterson, A. T., & Saupe, E. (2022). Replacing “parachute science” with “global science” in ecology and conservation biology. Conservation Science and Practice, 4( 5), e517. https://doi.org/10.1111/csp2.517
Singeo, A., & Ferguson, C. E. (2022). Lessons from Palau to end parachute science in international conservation research. Conservation Biology, 00, e13971. https://doi.org/10.1111/cobi.13971
Ramírez-Castañeda, V., Westeen, E., Frederick, J., Amini, S., Wait, D., Achmadi, A., Andayani, N., Arida, E., Arifin, U., Bernal, M., Bonaccorso, E., Bonachita Sanguila, M., Brown, R., Che, J., Condori, F., Hartiningtias, D., Hiller, A., Iskandar, D., Jiménez, R., Khelifa, R., Márquez, R., Martínez-Fonseca, J., Parra, J., Peñalba, J., Pinto-García, L., Razafindratsima, O., Ron, S., Souza, S., Supriatna, J., Bowie, R., Cicero, C., McGuire, J. and Tarvin, R. (2022). A set of principles and practical suggestions for equitable fieldwork in biology. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 119(34). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2122667119
The wildflower meadow outside the front gates of Trinity College Dublin.
In February 2020, a Trinity Green Campus poll was held amongst Trinity College Dublin (TCD) staff and students to convert the lawns of Front Gate into a wildflower meadow. Of the 13,850 people who voted, 12,496 voted in favour, a 90% majority. This was the largest number of participants that Trinity Green Campus had ever had, likely due to the extensive communications regarding the campaign, with features being included on local, national, and international news channels. The project has been deemed a success with support from both the public and TCD community and it continues to flourish outside the historic Front Gate of TCD. The TCD wildflower meadow is one of many similar “rewilding” projects that are currently being undertaken to increase biodiversity in urban and rural spaces but why are they such a popular rewilding choice? And how can we ensure their success?
Let’s take it that any project, ecological or otherwise, can be deemed successful if it has fulfilled the goals that it set out to achieve. The majority of rewilding and restoration projects aim to introduce species to an ecosystem as a way of restoring ecosystem functions and re-establishing natural processes that existed previously. In the case of wildflower meadows, the species being introduced are herbaceous plants and the ecosystem functions that they aim to restore usually relate to pollination or biodiversity, although this is not always the case. Even the broadest generalisation of the aims of wildflower meadows lacks clarity on the type of ecosystem functions that are expected to be restored. This is due to the aims of any restoration effort being dependent on the social and cultural views of the people carrying out or interacting with the project. Therefore, each individual wildflower meadow project must define the unique aims pertaining to it before a decision can be made on its success.
The two most documented spatial differences are between North America and Europe. In North America, the landscapes that were present before European colonisers have long been idolised and perpetuated as the “perfect wilderness,” with many attempts being made to conserve and restore these ecosystem types. As such, projects which aim to restore pre-colonisation landscapes are often deemed to be successful and are well received by the public. Large wildflower meadows that are re-planted in areas that previously were inhabited by similar species and vegetative communities are also deemed successful and serve as a reminder of the great prairies and grasslands of 1500’s North America. However, when urban wildflower meadows are planted many North Americans question whether it is truly restoration, since there were no previous wildflower meadows present here which can be said to be restored. Therefore, if the aim of this example is to be an act of restoration or rewilding the project is unable to be successful.
Contrasting to this, European rewilding does not explicitly try to recreate a single period, owing to the long established agricultural and industrial disturbance that has been occurring in the area since ~7000 B.C.. Therefore, the matter of projects emulating an exact period does not cause the same obstacles to success that are seen in North America. Instead, a range of dates are replicated, from Pleistocene to pre-industrial. There is a much lesser demand for projects on the large scales seen in North America, with the reintroduction of large carnivores causing public outcry. When concerning wildflower meadows, small pockets of pre-existing meadows or similar habitats are still naturally established in Europe, such as hedgerows and agricultural wildflower meadows. Thus, it is easier for people to view wildflower meadows projects as restoration.
Education also plays a key role in the success of wildflower meadows. Some studies have shown that the public perceives nature as consisting of trees and forested areas, and so projects that remove trees, even for positive environmental reasons, are perceived negatively. Other studies, however, have shown contrasting results, recording preferences towards annuals over larger trees or fruit plants. Interestingly, this same study also recorded that 54% of participants did not know what wildflowers were. This indicates that asking the public whether they prefer wildflowers over trees may not give accurate data as the responders are much more familiar with one subject over the other. Where images were shown, participants revealed a preference for wildflower meadows over images of herbaceous and formal bedding styles. The degree to which they preferred wildflower meadows over other bedding styles increased with an increase of plant species richness. This is a positive sign for those who wish to use wildflower meadows to restore pollinator and biodiversity functions, as it suggests that there should be public support of the projects if the public are adequately informed on wildflower meadows.
The TCD wildflower meadow project had clear goals, aiming to demonstrate that grass lawns were not the only option for planting in a formal setting. By prioritising the goal of informing the public on the project aims, TCD reduced arguments that may have otherwise arisen over the success of the project. Notably, before the project began, the idea was put to a vote by the staff and students at the college. As mentioned previously, the poll was hugely successful likely due to the amount of publicity it received. In order to combat any doubt surrounding the use of non-native species, information was provided about the reasoning for including non-native species and why they would be beneficial to the project, for example, the increased pollination potential of the site and the aesthetic benefits of the species chosen. The clear communication regarding the project appears to have ensured the wildflower meadows success. The public support for a wildflower project in the heart of the capital city centre could also in part be due to the site being in Europe. Alternatively, the public support could be due to the project being planted shortly before the Covid-19 pandemic, which has been hypothesised to have increased public appreciation for green spaces. Many of the questions posed remain unanswered due to the modernity of the topic and rapidly shifting public opinions. As developments occur, both academically and publicly, more light will be shed on the success of wildflower meadows and how projects can be best implemented. However, for now, debates on the topic should be encouraged and the public should be involved in the conversation. Wildflower meadows have a huge potential to educate people about their environment and can be implemented on many scales, being made suitable to whichever environment is present. The people managing these projects should consider the ecological and social environment within which they work and make efforts to adapt to the unique environment in which they may find themselves. There is plentiful research into the social dynamics of rewilding and restoration projects and so it can be concluded that the issue lies with project managers and a potential lack of consideration of the social factors at hand.
Aoife is a final year Environmental Sciences student at Trinity College Dublin who recently completed her undergraduate thesis with Dr Piggott and Dr Penk. She is interested in urban rewilding and quantitative ecology and hopes to work in these areas in the future.
When Melissa Jeuken was appointed to her new job as a shepherd to a 25-strong flock of old Irish goats on Howth Head last September, the news caught national and international attention. A rare breed of feral goats was being employed in an innovative attempt to keep the heather in check to curtail wildfires at the Dublin beauty spot, a natural solution to an increasingly destructive environmental problem. Utilising ecosystem processes such as grazing livestock to restore biodiversity is second nature to Melissa who grew up on her father Harry Jeuken’s farm in Lough Avalla, Co. Clare. Burren farmers such as the Jeukens have for many years used the seasonal movement of grazing animals to maintain the landscape’s rich grasslands, whose range of wildflowers from orchids to gentians gives this special area of conservation its unique floral diversity. Over 300 Burren farmers are now paid directly to protect biodiversity under such results-based payment schemes (RBPS).
Following accession to the EEC in 1973, the modernisation of Ireland’s agriculture sector led to increased intensification and environmental problems – more agricultural pollution from run-off and fertilizer, erosion of upland areas from over-grazing and habitat loss from land-use change. The mid-1990s saw agri-environmental schemes such as REPS attempt to address the growing imbalance between intensification and environmental issues. In areas with unique landscape features such as the Burren, however, the one-size-fits-all approach of REPS was found wanting, with a lack of buy-in from local farmers who felt the Burren’s unique set of needs were excluded. This led to one of the first RBPS in Ireland in 2004, the Burren LIFE programme, funded under a European Union scheme for climate action and the environment. There are now at least 8 other RBPS, whose efforts to conserve species range from the corncrake and hen harrier in the northwest and mid-west to the pearl mussel in the south. The majority of schemes are located in the west as a larger proportion of high nature value (HNV) farms are found there.
RBPS come under the general umbrella of Payments for Ecosystem Services (PES), of which there are hundreds globally, and are viewed as an important component of farmland biodiversity conservation not least because they directly involve farm owners in the protection of important ecosystems. However, a criticism of early agri-environmental schemes such as REPS was that payments to farmers were not yielding biodiversity results. So are RBPS any different?
There are accepted pros and cons to the results indicators used in scorecards indicating ecological integrity in RBPS. The indicators have worked well in the Burren, where scores have risen for fields assessed and this has directly led to improvements in the conservation of species-rich grasslands. The presence of nests is an indicator of the conservation of farmland birds, and this is seen as a beneficial element of the scheme as it raises awareness of biodiversity among farmers and builds ownership. However, the presence of a nest does not guarantee chicks will fledge successfully. Therefore, the conservation outcome for any particular results indicator may not always be transparent, causing challenges when it comes to assessing the biodiversity impact.
Indeed, annual survey results for hen harrier reveal a 25% decline in the bird’s six habitat ranges since being designated within a Special Protection Area, with the burning of heathland and land-use change to forestry and windfarms the chief causes of the decline. On the other hand, changes in farmland practices such as delayed mowing initiated through Corncrake LIFE may be producing, in the absence of scientific studies, at least anecdotal increases in corncrake numbers.
With a third of Ireland’s farmland definable as HNV, the potential exists for RBPS expansion. HNV areas also include half of the country’s Natura 2000 sites, meaning efforts to increase the uptake of RBPS would also assist with the management of designated sites. However, there is a need to develop reliable indicators to assess improvements in farmland biodiversity and the mechanism may not exist within existing RBPS to achieve this.
The principles underpinning RBPS – locally-led, farmer-centred, results-based, adaptable – make them attractive for wider agricultural adoption only if more flexible structures are introduced in national and international policies. Environmental NGO reaction to the latest round of Common Agricultural Policy strategic planning has been unequivocal on the ongoing biodiversity challenges, with BirdWatch Ireland asserting that only between 2 and 5% of the €9.8 billion Irish CAP budget will be spent on ‘effective measures for biodiversity’ and that targeting of actions on HNV farmland, in particular is required. And these concerns seem justified. A 2020 study of the effects of increased afforestation found 13 of 44 birds of conservation concern had over 80% of their habitats afforested, resulting in a shift in avian community composition there.
RBPS are locally-led, multi-stakeholder conservation interventions which work from the bottom-up and include local communities in decision-making. They are an important, albeit currently marginal, element of the EU’s strategy to conserve biodiversity in agriculture. Being a relatively recent development, their contribution to restoring biodiversity has yet to be adequately quantified on an EU-wide scale. That they are producing initial positive results in certain locations may help avert further extinctions brought about by Ireland’s ensuing biodiversity crisis. However, with most Irish farming taking place outside HNV areas, the effect of RBPS on restoring biodiversity may be limited nationally, and many farmers could still find themselves choosing between continued intensification and abandonment as a result of current EU agricultural policies.
Traditionally, Irish agriculture has been extensively managed; large hedgerows, semi-natural grasslands, wetland habitats, and low-input arable systems supported a complex assemblage of farmland biodiversity. Agricultural intensification on the back of ill-informed government subsidies has resulted in large scale habitat destruction and degradation. Agriculture is one of the main drivers of biodiversity loss in Ireland. One in five species in Ireland is threatened with extinction, demonstrating the severity of the situation. Solving this issue is critical.
Agri-environment schemes
The interconnectedness of agriculture and nature has been recognized on a European scale. Since 1994 it has been compulsory for all EU member states to provide an agri-environment scheme, in which farmers receive payments to support the restoration and maintenance of biodiversity in agricultural landscapes. This led to the introduction of Ireland’s first agri-environment scheme- the Rural Environment Protection Scheme (REPS). Like the majority of agri-environment schemes in Europe, REPS was designed as an action-based scheme. Within such schemes, farmers are paid to complete generic tasks with little importance placed on actual results. This action-based system has continued in subsequent nationwide schemes, including Ireland’s current scheme, GLAS. Despite major investment in action-based schemes within the EU, farmland biodiversity continues to decline, creating questions regarding the suitability of this approach.
An alternative approach to agri-environment schemes is a results-based payment system. This is an output-based system in which farmers are paid for the results they produce. This differs from the input-orientated system of an action-based approach, which focuses on the actions performed. In Ireland, the results-based approach was first implemented through locally-led agri-environment schemes, which have been used to address local problems with context-appropriate solutions. These schemes, such as The BRIDE project in the River Bride catchment and The Burren LIFE Programme in Co. Clare does not conform to the broad-stroke approach of previous nationwide schemes and has been found to be extremely effective in enhancing farmland biodiversity.
The influence of locally-led schemes, coupled with a push from the EU towards results-based agri-environment schemes to provide greater cost-effectiveness, has resulted in the creation of Ireland’s first nationwide results-based agri-environment scheme, aptly named Results-Based Environment-Agri Pilot Project (REAP). REAP will trial the use of a results-based payment in achieving biodiversity outcomes and will directly influence the implementation of this system on a larger scale in the Irish Rural Development Plan 2023. Will results-based schemes prove to be the silver bullet in solving Ireland’s biodiversity loss?
Questioning results-based schemes
Before tearing up the current script and implementing a full-scale results-based payment scheme, the advantages and disadvantages of this system must be understood. There are advantages of results-based schemes that address some of the problems associated with action-based schemes. A results-based scheme makes a clear link between biodiversity outcomes and payments. Furthermore, it does not specify the action in which this result must be obtained, allowing farmers to integrate the production of the desired outcome into their existing management practices. This freedom facilitates adaptability and allows farmers to draw on their existing wealth of local knowledge and skill, which is essential in integrating the importance of biodiversity into long-term farming practices. A results-based system is cost-effective, as it incentivizes farmers to select only the biodiversity outcomes on the land in which it can be achieved and to strive for improvement year on year.
Although results-based schemes are mostly depicted in a positive light, there are disadvantages that should be made clear. Result-based schemes are limited to circumstances in which the relationship between agricultural practice and biodiversity outcome is established and can be represented by indicators. The freedom of farmers to innovate in these schemes is greatly influenced by advisory support, without which farmers may not have the ability to achieve the desired outcomes. It is important to note that a results-based approach carries a financial risk to farmers, as the desired outcomes can be influenced by factors outside of the control of farmers. In addition, results-based payment schemes carry a high initial cost, requiring an adaption of the management system, advisory support, training, and repeated monitoring of results.
Future of payment schemes
A result-based payment approach cannot be perceived as a silver bullet given its drawbacks. However, the business-as-usual approach is not an option. Instead, a results-based approach would represent a positive step in restoring Irish farmland biodiversity, which is achievable in previous locally-led results-based schemes. To mitigate the financial risk to participants, a hybrid results-based system that incorporates action payments could be implemented. The targeted actions within a hybrid approach can complement the results-based payments. The key to success with any payment scheme, results-based or otherwise, is farmer participation. These schemes are not obligatory for farmers, and so the unwillingness of farmers to properly engage will cause the programme to fail. Creating a results-based agri-environment scheme that works for farmers as well as biodiversity will be the key to success.
“Most people who bother with the matter at all would admit that the English language is in a bad way, but it is generally assumed that we cannot by conscious action do anything about it.”
So George Orwell began his 1946 essay Politics and the English Language, which is still relevant today as both a guide and a warning. Reading it now (the whole thing is available online courtesy of the Orwell Foundation), it strikes me that the decline Orwell saw in the English language might be blamed on science as much as politics. Three of his “five specimens” of poor writing come from academia (one of them written by a prominent zoologist), and many of the specific writing habits he criticises are ones I see regularly in modern papers. One of our recent “NERD Club” discussion sessions was based on Orwell’s essay and related topics, as we looked for the conscious actions that might help us to write clearly and accurately.
Sexual conflict between males and females is well documented in the animal kingdom. Often, the best strategy for one sex is not the optimum for the other. In mammalian species, lactation of new mothers suppresses ovulation. Therefore, males gain a reproductive advantage (earlier mating opportunity) by forcing early mother-offspring separation. On the other hand, females benefit from prolonging care for their current young, so it has been hypothesized that they adopt counter-tactics to avoid premature separation from their offspring.
Camouflage is all about staying hidden. Hiding is useful for animals because they’re less likely to get eaten – or are better able to sneak up on prey! So why do some animals display “flash behaviour”, making them temporarily more obvious and undermining their camouflage?
This short short story was first published in the March 2020 issue of The Niche, the magazine of the British Ecological Society, as part of their “Horizons” ecofiction series. “Horizons” aims to use fiction to help visualise a better future aided by ecological science.
