Closing the knowledge-action gap in conservation with open science

Impacts of Fire-fighting Chemicals on Native Fauna and Ecosystems in Australia: Identification of Key Knowledge Gaps and Research Priorities

Increasing global wildfire frequency and intensity due to climate change has led to increasing use of fire-fighting chemicals (FFCs). While there is information relating to the environmental impacts of these FFCs in some regions, to date, there is little information on the impacts of FFCs on native fauna species and ecosystems in an extremely fire-prone country, Australia. We elicited input from a national-level interdisciplinary cohort of experts in fire research and management to identify fundamental gaps in knowledge and research priorities in the use and ecological impacts of FFCs in Australia. We used an anonymized online survey consisting of 21 close-ended, Likert-style and open-ended questions to collect expert opinion on the impacts and management of fire in Australia, focusing on the key knowledge gaps and research priorities relating to FFC use. Knowledge gaps and research priorities were identified in the areas of (1) the different types of FFCs recommended for use in Australia, (2) short and long-term effects of FFCs on fauna species and ecosystems, particularly in aquatic systems, and (3) interactions between FFCs and other environmental stressors. Addressing these knowledge gaps and research priorities will provide scientific-based evidence and recommendations for FFC use to inform future fire management practice and policy in Australia and can guide similar approaches in other countries requiring extensive FFC use for wildfire management.

Talking the same language: Co-production of a palaeoecological investigation to inform heathland management

There is a recognised role for the integration of palaeoecological data into conservation management, but its application remains hampered by a disconnect between academics and practitioners. We co-produced a palaeoecological investigation with conservation practitioners at an internationally important lowland heathland in the UK, to highlight the value of synergistic working between researchers and managers. We used a multi-proxy approach to reconstruct the site's ecological history over the past c.200 years, focusing on changes in vegetation, hydrology, and fire regimes, and translated the results into accessible visual and spatial formats to support management decisions. Our results reveal significant ecological changes, particularly a post-1950 shift from diverse wetland habitats to a drier, Birch-dominated landscape, linked to increased wildfire frequency and site acidification, as well as the decline of several conservation priority species. The spatial analysis highlights the need to consider site-specific heterogeneity in conservation planning. The management recommendations arising from the improved understanding of historical ecological conditions are focused on rare species conservation, increasing natural variability and the value of a rewetting programme to enhance resilience to climate change. The study highlights the value of a palaeoecological perspective for informing contemporary conservation management; in particular regarding in-site spatial considerations when making recommendations, as well as illustrating the importance of effective communication between researchers and land managers.

How will we prepare for an uncertain future? The value of open data and code for unborn generations facing climate change

As the impacts of climate change continue to intensify, humans face new challenges to long-term survival. Humans will likely be battling these problems long after 2100, when many climate projections currently end. A more forward-thinking view on our science and its direction may help better prepare for the future of our species. Researchers may consider datasets the basic units of knowledge, whose preservation is arguably more important than the articles that are written about them. Storing data and code in long-term repositories offers insurance against our uncertain future. To ensure open data are useful, data must be FAIR (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable and Reusable) and be complete with all appropriate metadata. By embracing open science practices, contemporary scientists give the future of humanity the information to make better decisions, save time and other valuable resources, and increase global equity as access to information is made free. This, in turn, could enable and inspire a diversity of solutions, to the benefit of many. Imagine the collective science conducted, the models built, and the questions answered if all of the data researchers have collectively gathered were organized and immediately accessible and usable by everyone. Investing in open science today may ensure a brighter future for unborn generations.

Good data relations key to Indigenous research sovereignty: A case study from Nunatsiavut

Although researchers are committed to Indigenous data sovereignty in principle, they fall short in returning data and results to communities in which or with whom they conduct their research. This results in a misalignment in benefits of research toward researchers and settler institutions and away from Indigenous communities. To explore this, we conducted a case study analyzing the rate researchers returned data to Nunatsiavut, an autonomous area claimed by Inuit of Labrador, Canada. We assessed the data return rate for all research approved by the Nunatsiavut Government Research Advisory Committee between 2011 and 2021. In two-thirds of projects, researchers did not return the data they had collected. Based on our results and their contextualization with researchers and Nunatsiavut Research Centre staff members, we compiled recommendations for researchers, academia, government bodies, funding bodies, and Indigenous research governance boards. These recommendations aim to facilitate data return, thus putting data sovereignty into practice.

Effects of protected area coverage and research on conservation status of primates globally

Conducting conservation research and establishing protected areas (PAs) based on research results are critical to biodiversity conservation. However, the effect of research and PAs on conservation of threatened species has rarely been evaluated simultaneously. We collected data on PAs from 2000 for 2021 and determined the number of publications on global primates (published from 1950 to 2021) to assess the effect of PAs, research, and biological and socioeconomic factors on the current International Union for Conservation of Nature endangered status and change in status. We used the MCMCglmm package to conduct a phylogenetic comparative analysis to control the phylogenetic relationship of primate species. The status of 24.6% (82 of 333) of species assessed at least twice declined. Only the black lion tamarin (Leontopithecus chrysopygus) had an improved status. Species with status declines mostly occurred on the south coast of West Africa and in Madagascar. PAs covered 22.1% of each species' range. Forest loss in PAs (5.5%) was significantly lower than forest loss within 5 km outside PAs (13.8%), suggesting PAs effectively mitigated forest loss. Both the median number of total publications and conservation publications on critically endangered species were higher than those of other categories. Models showed that PA coverage and number of publications or conservation-focused publications were not related to current status or change in status over time. A decline in status was not related to creation of PAs or increase of research since the last assessment. Our results suggest that current PAs and research are not reversing the extinction crisis of global primates. Doing more conservation-oriented research, strengthening management of current PAs, and expanding PAs will be needed to protect primates globally.

A scoping review on what constitutes a good research culture

Background

The crisis in research culture is well documented, covering issues such as a tendency for quantity over quality, unhealthy competitive environments, and assessment based on publications, journal prestige and funding. In response, research institutions need to assess their own practices to promote and advocate for change in the current research ecosystem.

Aims

The purpose of the scoping review was to explore ' What does the evidence say about the 'problem' with 'poor' research culture, what are the benefits of 'good' research culture, and what does 'good' look like?'

Methods

A scoping review was undertaken. Six databases were searched along with grey literature. Eligible literature had relevance to academic research institutions, addressed research culture, and were published between January 2017 to May 2022. Evidence was mapped and themed to specific categories. The search strategy, screening and analysis took place between April-May 2022.

Results

1666 titles and abstracts, and 924 full text articles were assessed for eligibility. Of these, 253 articles met the eligibility criteria for inclusion. A purposive sampling of relevant websites was drawn from to complement the review, resulting in 102 records included in the review. Key areas for consideration were identified across the four themes of job security, wellbeing and equality of opportunity, teamwork and interdisciplinary, and research quality and accountability.

Conclusions

There are opportunities for research institutions to improve their own practice, however institutional solutions cannot act in isolation. Research institutions and research funders need to work together to build a more sustainable and inclusive research culture that is diverse in nature and supports individuals' well-being, career progression and performance.

Advances and challenges in ecological connectivity science

Maintaining and restoring ecological connectivity will be key in helping to prevent and reverse the loss of biodiversity. Fortunately, a growing body of research conducted over the last few decades has advanced our understanding of connectivity science, which will help inform evidence-based connectivity conservation actions. Increases in data availability and computing capacity have helped to dramatically increase our ability to model functional connectivity using more sophisticated models. Keeping track of these advances can be difficult, even for connectivity scientists and practitioners. In this article, we highlight some key advances from the past decade and outline many of the remaining challenges. We describe the efforts to increase the biological realism of connectivity models by, for example, isolating movement behaviors, population parameters, directional movements, and the effects of climate change. We also discuss considerations of when to model connectivity for focal or multiple species. Finally, we reflect on how to account for uncertainty and increase the transparency and reproducibility of connectivity research and discuss situations where decisions may require forgoing sophistication for more simple approaches.

Applying XGBoost and SHAP to Open Source Data to Identify Key Drivers and Predict Likelihood of Wolf Pair Presence

Wolves have returned to Germany since 2000. Numbers have grown to 209 territorial pairs in 2021. XGBoost machine learning, combined with SHAP analysis is applied to predict German wolf pair presence in 2022 for 10 × 10 km grid cells. Model input consisted of 38 variables from open sources, covering the period 2000 to 2021. The XGBoost model predicted well, with 0.91 as the AUC. SHAP analysis ranked the variables: distance to the closest neighboring wolf pair was the main driver for a grid cell to become occupied by a wolf pair. The clustering tendency of related wolves seems to be an important explanatory factor here. Second was the percentage of wooded area. The next eight variables related to wolf presence in the preceding year, except at fifth, eighth and tenth position in the total order: human density (square root) in the grid, percentage arable land and road density respectively. Other variables including the occurrence of wild prey were the weakest predictors. The SHAP analysis also provided crucial added value in identifying a variable that had threshold values where its contribution to the prediction changed from positive to negative or vice versa. For instance, low density of people increased the probability of wolf pair presence, whereas a high density decreased this probability. Cumulative lift techniques showed that the model performed almost four times better than random prediction. The combination of XGBoost, SHAP and cumulative lift techniques is new in wolf management and conservation, allowing for the focusing of educational and financial resources.

TrackdAT, an acoustic telemetry metadata dataset to support aquatic animal tracking research

Data on the movement and space use of aquatic animals are crucial to understand complex interactions among biotic and abiotic components of ecosystems and facilitate effective conservation and management. Acoustic telemetry (AT) is a leading method for studying the movement ecology of aquatic animals worldwide, yet the ability to efficiently access study information from AT research is currently lacking, limiting advancements in its application. Here, we describe TrackdAT, an open-source metadata dataset where AT research parameters are catalogued to provide scientists, managers, and other stakeholders with the ability to efficiently identify and evaluate existing peer-reviewed research. Extracted metadata encompasses key information about biological and technical aspects of research, providing a comprehensive summary of existing AT research. TrackdAT currently hosts information from 2,412 journal articles published from 1969 to 2022 spanning 614 species and 380,289 tagged animals. TrackdAT has the potential to enable regional and global mobilization of knowledge, increased opportunities for collaboration, greater stakeholder engagement, and optimization of future ecological research.

Welcoming More Participation in Open Data Science for the Oceans

Open science is a global movement happening across all research fields. Enabled by technology and the open web, it builds on years of efforts by individuals, grassroots organizations, institutions, and agencies. The goal is to share knowledge and broaden participation in science, from early ideation to making research outputs openly accessible to all (open access). With an emphasis on transparency and collaboration, the open science movement dovetails with efforts to increase diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging in science and society. The US Biden-Harris Administration and many other US government agencies have declared 2023 the Year of Open Science, providing a great opportunity to boost participation in open science for the oceans. For researchers day-to-day, open science is a critical piece of modern analytical workflows with increasing amounts of data. Therefore, we focus this article on open data science-the tooling and people enabling reproducible, transparent, inclusive practices for data-intensive research-and its intersection with the marine sciences. We discuss the state of various dimensions of open science and argue that technical advancements have outpaced our field's culture change to incorporate them. Increasing inclusivity and technical skill building are interlinked and must be prioritized within the marine science community to find collaborative solutions for responding to climate change and other threats to marine biodiversity and society.

Open science

The term 'open science' refers to a range of methods, tools, platforms and practices that aim to make scientific research more accessible, transparent, reproducible and reliable. This includes, for example, sharing code, data and research materials, embracing new publishing formats such as registered reports and preprints, pursuing replication studies and reanalyses, optimising statistical approaches to improve evidence assessment and re-evaluating institutional incentives. The ongoing shift towards open science practices is partly due to mounting evidence that studies across disciplines suffer from biases, underpowered designs and irreproducible or non-replicable results. It also stems from a general desire amongst many researchers to reduce hyper-competitivity in science and instead promote collaborative research that benefits science and society.

Five approaches to producing actionable science in conservation

The knowledge produced by conservation scientists must be actionable in order to address urgent conservation challenges. To understand the process of creating actionable science, we interviewed 71 conservation scientists who had participated in 1 of 3 fellowship programs focused on training scientists to become agents of change. Using a grounded theory approach, we identified 16 activities that these researchers employed to make their scientific products more actionable. Some activities were more common than others and, arguably, more foundational. We organized these activities into 3 nested categories (motivations, strategies, and tactics). Using a co-occurrence matrix, we found that most activities were positively correlated. These correlations allowed us to identify 5 approaches, framed as profiles, to actionable science: the discloser, focused on open access; the educator, focused on science communication; the networker, focused on user needs and building relationships; the collaborator, focused on boundary spanning; and the pluralist, focused on knowledge coproduction resulting in valuable outcomes for all parties. These profiles build on one another in a hierarchy determined by their complexity and level of engagement, their potential to support actionable science, and their proximity to ideal coproduction with knowledge users. Our results provide clear guidance for conservation scientists to generate actionable science to address the global biodiversity conservation challenge.

Revisiting the challenge: perspectives on Canada’s freshwater fisheries policies three decades after the Pearse Report

A seminal report by Peter H. Pearse (1988; Rising to the Challenge: A New Policy for Canada’s Freshwater Fisheries, Canadian Wildlife Federation, Ottawa) outlined 62 policy recommendations focused on the management of Canada’s inland fisheries. Over three decades later, freshwater ecosystems and inland fisheries in Canada are still facing similar challenges with many emerging ones that could not have been foreseen. Here, we reflect on the contemporary relevance of the Pearse Report and propose recommendations that policy makers should consider. Broadly, our recommendations are: (1) manage fishes, fisheries, and habitat using a holistic co-management framework, with clearly defined fishery jurisdictions and partnerships with Indigenous governments; (2) engage in transparent, inclusive, and agile research to support decision-making; (3) facilitate knowledge co-production, involving interdisciplinary projects with diverse groups of actors and sectors including Indigenous Peoples, anglers, policy makers, scientists/researchers, governments, and the public; (4) embrace technological advances to support freshwater fisheries stock assessment and management; and (5) align policy and management activities in Canada with global initiatives related to increasing the sustainability of inland fisheries. We advocate for an updated comprehensive report such as the Pearse Report to ensure that we embrace robust, inclusive, and sustainable management strategies and policies for Canada’s inland fisheries for the next 30 years. It is time to again rise to the challenge.

Can I afford to publish? A dilemma for African scholars

With open-access publishing authors often pay an article processing charge and subsequently their article is freely available online. These charges are beyond the reach of most African academics. Thus, the trend towards open-access publishing will shift the business model from a pay-wall model, where access to literature is limited, to a pay-to-publish one, where African scholars cannot afford to publish. We explore the costs of publishing and the ability of African scholars to afford to publish via open access in top journals. Three-quarters of the 40 top ecology journals required payment for open-access publishing (average cost $3150). Paying such fees is a hardship for African scholars as grant funding is not available and it is not feasible to pay the fees themselves as salaries are low. We encourage funders and publishers to facilitate an equitable publishing model that allows African scholars to make their research available through open-access publishing.