Category: Uncategorized (Page 2 of 3)

Two Women Devoted to Conservation – Top Finalists for $250,000 Indianapolis Prize

February 11, 2016 / Allison Cusick

Big congratulations to all six finalists of the 2016 Indianapolis Prize – the world’s leading award for animal conservation.

Joel Berger, Ph.D.: Wildlife Conservation Society, Colorado State University
Dee Boersma, Ph.D.: University of Washington, Department of Biology
Rodney Jackson, Ph.D.: Snow Leopard Conservancy
Carl Jones, Ph.D.: Durrell Wildlife Conservation Trust, Mauritian Wildlife Foundation
Carl Safina, Ph.D.: The Safina Center at Stony Brook University
Amanda Vincent, Ph.D.: Project Seahorse, The University of British Columbia

“Our world is unquestionably better off because of these heroes and we hope others will not only take notice of, but also join in their noble work to save wild things and wild places.” – Michael Crowther, president CEO of the Indianapolis Zoological Society.

Special Shout Out

In keeping with Woman Scientist themes, we want to give a special shout out to the two women scientists who are in the top six finalists: Amanda Vincent and Dee Boersma.

Amanda Vincent (University of British Columbia) was the first person to study seahorses underwater and started Project Seahorse to bolster conservation of these rare fish. She has also received support from National Geographic. Be sure to look through the photos, videos, and blog posts for more fascinating information about this woman’s career and research projects.

P. Dee Boersma (University of Washington) has documented the impacts of climate change on penguins and successfully stopped oil tanker lanes through penguin colonies. She has also received support from National Geographic. Read more about her career in the UW News.

Prize Award

Twenty-eight conservationists were nominated for this year’s prize and join the ranks of recognized conservationists making strides to save species. Six conservationists made it into the finals. To see the finalists from prior years since 2006 click the side tab year links.

From 2006 through 2012, winners of the Prize received an unrestricted cash award of US$100,000, which was increased to US$250,000 for 2014 and subsequent years. This is the largest international monetary prize given to an individual for the conservation of animal species – sponsored by the Eli Lilly and Company Foundation. Beginning in 2014, five other finalists each received a US$10,000 unrestricted cash award.

The presenting of the Indianapolis Prize and the Lilly Medal will take place during the biennial Indianapolis Prize Gala hosted by Cummins Inc. where the winner and finalists will be honored for their selfless dedication, scientific expertise and lasting success.

Previous Recipients

2014 Patricia Wright – Lemurs, Centre ValBio (The first woman awarded the Indianapolis Prize)
2012 Steven Amstrup – Polar Bears, Polar Bears International
2010 Iain Douglas-Hamilton – Elephants, Save the Elephants
2008 George B. Schaller – Multiple Species, Wildlife Conservation Society
2006 George W. Archibald – Cranes, International Crane Foundation

Thank you to all the dedicated conservationists out there who spend their lives saving the Earth’s endangered animal species!

Share this:
by

Women in Science Summit 2016 Recap

January 29, 2016 / Allison Cusick

On January 28th, 2016 a one-day Women in Science Summit 2016 event was hosted by Dr. Heather Tallis, The Nature Conservancy’s acting chief scientist, Dr. Meg Lowman, chief of science and sustainability at the California Academy of Sciences, and Dr. Rita Mehta, assistant professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at UC Santa Cruz.

Speakers included: Jane Goodall (Gombe Reserve), Sylvia Earle (National Geographic Society Explorer-in-Residence), Dawn Wright (ESRI), Pam Matson (Stanford University), Jane Lubchenco (former head of NOAA), Kathy Sullivan (the first woman to walk in space) and others.

The day was filled with 8 hours of discussions and panels between women (and some men!) in various fields at various stages in their careers. Thankfully the entire event was archived for our leisurely viewing pleasure.

If you didn’t get a chance to listen to this event live or archived, I wanted to share the tidbits that I took away from each session. Please feel free to skim through my bullet notes. They’re here for you!

Tidbits of Wisdom I Took Away From This Event:

Just because you take time off between undergrad and graduate school to make money does not mean you’re not a serious scientist. -Sue Rossner (6:05:20)

“I spend time thinking about how to be a better mentor than who can I find to mentor me. Its important to recognize that at different stages in our lives we need different kinds of mentors.” -Liz Hadly (3:50:36)

Remember, it’s important to share our struggles so we can learn from each other. You never know where you’re going to find allies and when you do, lean on them for support when you’re feeling challenged.

Make it a part of who you are to always ask questions and don’t be discouraged by those who say you’re “too this” or “too that”. Don’t listen to people who say you can’t do something. We are the beneficiaries of all that has been accomplished by those who came before. -Sylvia Earle (4:52:03)

When shaping this planet’s future, strive for excellence! And remember, there can be more than one way to do that! -Kathy Sullivan (4:49:00)

Time has its limits but hopefully our energy from love for what we are doing is unbounded. Learn to manage your energy. -Dawn Wright (7:07:07)

Unconscious biases. We all have them. Try to become aware of yours. And then speak up about them! This isn’t just about men vs women in the field of science. Men and women are not separate species. We are all individuals with personalities and biases, the more we can have open discussion and educate each other into embracing diversity, the better.

The bullies that exist are just a handful and they get away with it because we aren’t looking at the ideals of science, instead we are using organizational shortcuts to get certain places.We need to challenge the legacy of social constrictive beliefs. We need to articulate and keep approaches that work and toss out things that get in the way. -Carol Muller (4:04:11)

Young scientists need opportunitites to build self-confidence. Young women and young men need to believe in themselves. The best way to do that is to gain experiences. Building experiences builds the confidence needed to override hesitancy. – DC Randle & Rodolfo Dirzo

Recognize the importance of putting yourself in positions where you look like a leader. Ann Russell shared a revelation she had while working in the field of Oceanography. Typically, in this field the men were shown in leadership positions. The person driving the boat was in charge, the captain, the leader. A man. Sure, women were doing science, but they were not depicted as leaders. Then one day it dawned on her: If leaders were the ones driving the boat, then all one has to do is learn to drive the boat! Despite this being a scary undertaking, she persevered and gained this skill. It was at that moment she recognized the importance of looking like a leader.

Jane Goodall had a very supportive mother who allowed her to follow the career she did. Her mother told her, “You’ll have to work hard, take advantage of opportunities and never give up.” So Jane’s advice to us follows (44:29):

1) Don’t jump into any career unless you’re really truly sure its what you want to do.

2) Don’t be afraid to change direction if you’ve made a mistake.

3) Have the courage of your convictions. Listen to other views and think about them but if upon reflection you still think you’re right, don’t give up your own belief.

4) Follow your dreams by working hard, taking advantage of opportunities and never giving up.

Gender is not just male or female, there is a whole spectrum. If we continue to be courageous and diversify, positive things will come out of just about every situation. -Panel Discussion about direct and indirect perceptions of gender in science (1:14:00).

Remember: Not every scientist is a self-promoter, so when thinking of people to publicly recognize make sure to think outside the box and include those who aren’t good at self-promoting and who don’t get the same type of exposure to certain opportunities.

In an effort to get underrepresented communities into science its sometimes more about getting the parents on board. A lot of times these parents have no experience with higher education or science and may not understand why it would be good for their kid. Reach out … talk to families of young women in underrepresented communities. -DC Randal

In order to make cultural change in the sciences, we need to stop evaluating excellence only through our own looking glass. We need to set new metrics and measures to evaluate excellence. -Pam Mattson (5:17:13) Panel on building institutions that are more inclusive.

Jane Lubchenco reminds us:

In an age of science and technology, stories matter. “Those who wish to create a better world will have to make storytelling a center of their efforts, not an afterthought.” -James Murdock (2:40:00)

Re-envision what it means to be a scientist, and a woman in science. Choices for women in science these days are far different than back in the day.

Most students (undergrad/grad) are exposed almost exclusively to scientists in academia and this limits their thinking about possibilities. They need exposure to scientists in other walks of life across the spectrum.

“Alt-Ac” Careers are out there. Universities don’t necessarily prepare students for these alternate academic careers but that is the real world. Universities should provide better role models for students by bringing in outsiders who are not just from other universities but who are doing excellent valid science in sectors of NGO, consultants, government and federal positions, start-ups, etc. (5:42:14)

What should scientists do with a PhD? There are diverse career paths. When she was in grad school the only acceptable goal was tenured professorship. Academia was the path and there was much arrogance within the academic community. Today’s success in science should not be defined as becoming a professor at a University. Leaving academia should not be seen as failure. Stop using the term “leaky pipeline”. Men and women should be able to leave without criticism.

If you want to break out of academia look for resources in parallel worlds. There is a wealth of knowledge online so find people who have done something similar to what you want to do and take advantage of networking to get those skills.

What do we do about scientists in the pursuit of knowledge that stay in the Ivory Tower? Scientists should engage in society to know what knowledge is needed. To communicate in multiple non-traditional ways. Embrace your obligation to be in service to the global community.

How can you know what path is right for you? There are a lot of ways. Interact with established individuals in different worlds. Find internships.

Jane’s Continuing Advice

1) Don’t pigeon hole yourself, be open to new opportunities. Be entrepreneurial

2) Be creative in responding to challenges. Family is a challenge female and male professors deal with. Don’t let your job stop you from having a family. Find support in the work place. Choose your partner wisely. Be with someone who will support you. Assist each other in your passion. It will usually be the case that life may not be equally good for the both of you. So take turns on which choices are better over the years.

3) Seek out skills beyond academic training. Leadership, communication, writing, managing, negotiating skills. These skills are not typically taught but they will enhance your competitiveness.

4) Recognize smart ways to disrupt a system vs career killing ways to disrupt the system. Learn the community and the rules before you try to change them and then elevate others as you make innovative change so everyone is supportive of the new.

6) Remember the saying “One hand up and one hand down”. As you reach up to climb higher, reach your hand down to assist those below.

7) Learn to believe in yourself. Its OK to be different and think different and disagree with people.

An Alt-Ac speaks to us! Dawn Wright (6:49:00) was an academic for 17 years and now works in industry. Read her blog post on the courage to escape academia. Escaping or re-inventing yourself is freeing.

Kate Clancy (50:00) shares with us statistics on minority women participation in science. She says its so low, the National Science Foundation can’t even parse it.

Data for minority women who earned PhD in science and engineering still under 5% in 2010, under 6% in 2015.

Science and Engineering careers in academia and industry: white men (51%), white women (18%), asian men (13%), asian women (5%), “others” (other 13%).

# of women in color in faculty positions has decreased, even as white women in STEM increase. Women from underrepresented minorities pay the highest penalties in science.

Poor arguments that are out there for why this may be include 1) Women must have lower abilities, 2) Women have different work/life expectations and don’t want it as bad, 3) Science is an unwelcome environment that stops people who disrupt quid pro quo, 4) If you’re not recognized by your peers, your accomplishments are meaningless, 5) Only you can promote yourself, 6) Women who choose to have children experience a gap in publications so they fall behind, 7) Specialists get more recognition than inter-disciplinarians but women choose more interdisciplinary and collaborative projects, 8) Women aren’t putting in the time (but of course they are! In fact, of the work time they do put in, they are bogged down with more teaching and service than their male counterparts.)

At some point we’ve realized how people perceive competence based on gender and race and other identities. She discusses an interesting anecdote at 1:04:29: We are still catering to a man’s world. These experiences of feeling professionally undervalued and having a lack of confidence in our competence shape a woman’s career!

We need broader change to acknowledge importance of scientists being recognized for teaching, research, and also outreach and engagement with society. -Jane Lubchenco

Emily Graslie (1:40:10) is The Field Museum’s ‘Chief Curiosity Field Correspondence’ and ‘Host and Writer’ of the educational YouTube Channel called The Brain Scoop, one of the largest science channels on the internet hosted by a woman. Emily claims she was “too lazy to become a scientist” but she has a deep passion for art and science communication. Growing up she watched a lot of science educators and communicators, most of which were men. One of the biggest female role models she wanted to emulate was actually Ms. Frizzle of Magic School Bus! When reality set in that Ms. Frizzle was an animated character, she set out on a mission to put women’s faces in the media limelight. Below I’ve posted one of her most viewed episodes, “Where My Ladies At?” which talks about the lack of women in these educator/science communicator roles. Be sure to check out all her other videos!

Diversify your networks. Maintain reality by having feet across a lot of boundaries and borders. Link those boundaries. Keep your feet in as many networks as possible. -Jose Fregoso (7:41:52)

2-minute video recap:

Big thanks to California Academy of Sciences for putting on this event. Obviously there are so many more invaluable points that were discussed during this event which could have been added to this post. We look forward to Women in Science Summit 2017.

To the future!

Share this:
by

Young Ladies And Their Brilliant Ideas – Recent News

August 12, 2015 / Allison Cusick

This month I heard about two young ladies who have created brilliant ‘why-didn’t-I-think-of-that-already‘ ideas (yes, I’m holding back envy while simultaneously full of admiration).

Kina McAllister used Kickstarter to developed “Stem Box”

Cindy Wu developed “Experiment” to be the new Kickstarter-like platform for science projects

The interesting thing is that both stories involve crowd-source funding platforms.

I wanted to share these two stories with you in hopes that they inspire YOU to feel confident about your ideas and find ways to speak up about them!

Kina McAllister and Stem Box

Photo source: http://lifeisbeautiful.com/speakers/kina-mcallister/

Kina McAllister created Stem Box – kits you can order that are filled with cool and gross science experiments. She used the crowd-source funding platform Kickstarter to raise $22,943 and funded her campaign to disseminate kits around the country with the hope that they will attract more girls into science. Kina is in her twenties and is a research technician at the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center in Seattle Washington.

Read the full story about how she started her idea.

Cindy Wu and Experiment

Photo source: NY Times – Women in the World

Cindy Wu, in her early twenties, created a crowd-source funding platform called Experiment specifically designed for funding scientific research. A recent college graduate from University of Washington, Cindy wanted to take her research further. She was frustrated this wasn’t a possibility because of the restrictions from government agencies: she was young, didn’t have a PhD and she wanted less than $25,000. She wondered why a crowd-funding platform like Kickstarter or Kiva didn’t exist specifically for scientific research, so she dropped out of graduate school to create it herself. With a quick pitch of her idea she raised $1.2 million dollars.

3-minute pitch

Experiment funding website

Read the full story of the birth of her idea

You Have Good Ideas Too

These ladies had some fantastic ideas they executed and made into realities.

We all have good ideas (even if you think you don’t)! Truth moment: For whatever psychological reasons, I am the type of person who constantly feels inspired to have ideas, but then gets frustrated that they never seem to arrive; Alternatively, I feel like everything has already been thought of so what genius ideas could possibly be left for me to think.

I’m not telling you this to get you to join my pity party, I’m telling you this because 1) I know I’m probably not alone in these thoughts and 2) I want you to feel supported and confident with your ideas, because we can additionally think, “Holy cow! These women had ideas that they might have thought weren’t worth pursuing, and yet, they created resources they wanted simply because they needed them and wouldn’t accept that they just didn’t exist.”

What do I wish existed and can I do something today that might make the slightest change in what I think is important for the world?

They didn’t give up on their ideas or put them aside. They played with them until they created their reality.
Share this:
by

No Shame in Self-Promotion

July 11, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Self-promoting scientists? Usually, strategic marketing and promotion skills are reserved for the business world, for businesses and entrepreneurs. Not for scientists. They don’t have a brand, they aren’t selling anything for consumers to buy, so they have no reason to self-promote.

… Or do they?

Many people are doing amazing research. I personally love hearing about it, I’m sure the public would love to know about it as well as other aspiring scientists, and government and philanthropic funding agencies should know about it. Government funding is becoming more scarce nowadays and scientists are forced to think more creatively about getting noticed. We can no longer hide behind our beakers and stick to our solitary interests expecting fame and wealth to come from only NSF or NIH. We have to embrace the attitude and spirit of promotion and marketing and we can learn a lot from those in the business world.

As an example, Bill Nye The Science Guy, recently put out a Kickstarter Campaign asking for $200,000 from the public to create a solar sailing space craft. What’s a scientist doing asking the general public for money?! If you watch his videos you realize he is embracing his inner nerd, putting out a message he thinks is important to research and he is asking citizens to help fund it because government funding isn’t enough. I admire that he did this! He understands that ultimately to further research possibilities, exposing yourself on social media, blogs, and other news sources may help those goals by tapping into additional funding sources from philanthropic agencies and even the general public.

But Self-Promotion Seems so Slimy and is Not My Style.

There are many reasons a scientist may not be interested or even good at self-promotion: These could include wanting to avoid harsh scrutiny, having insecurities about being exposed, not knowing how to make a presence outside of the lab, being too busy writing grants to do so, being too lazy to care about this aspect of outreach, or feeling silly exposing your passion and nerdiness.

If you are of the latter, then I want you to watch this video by Marie Forleo, a self-made multi-million dollar business woman who I take advice from:

The question is: How do you speak well of your brand (or your science) and let the passion shine through? How do you unabashedly blow your own trumpet? How do you do this without feeling like you’re bragging?

“Shameless self-promotion implies there should be shame in self-promotion. [… ] Where did we learn that self-promotion is bad? And why do we accept that as the truth? […] If we speak about something we do or have done, why is that a bad thing? Is joy and confidence and pride something to be shameful about?”

Marie Forleo brings in a great perspective on this issue. She is speaking to entrepreneurs in the business world and I think it can translate to us scientists in our world.

I summarize her points below, but don’t short-change yourself: Go watch the video!

If you do something great focus on what you can give, not what you can get. The world needs that special gift that only you have and if you hold back from self-promoting you hold back from those who need you most. You never know if someone needs to hear about what you do.

Stop caring about what other people think. We are afraid people wont like us, they’ll judge us, we’ll be scrutinized as being poor scientists. People already judge you, so just ask yourself who are you living your life for? Who are you doing your science for?

Do not be a broken record when you promote yourself. Have other things to talk about. Have variety in different topics. And make sure you celebrate other people!

The world needs more scientists to get out there. Do you think Bill Nye felt shameful about promoting his idea and asking citizens for their help in funding it? No! His ultimate goal goes beyond his ego. He’s doing it for the science!

If you’re in science, and you love what you do, then share it with the world!

Share this:
by

How to Choose a Good Scientific Problem

July 10, 2015 / Allison Cusick

How does a scientist choose a project or a scientific problem?

In E O Wilson’s auto-biography Naturalist he reveals his motivation in becoming a myrmecologist (specialist in ants): As a young boy he blinded himself with the spine of a poisonous fish and after surgery and treatment he was left with 20/10. He lost his stereoscopic vision but was able to see fine print and small hairs on the bodies of insects.

“I noticed butterflies and ants more than other kids did, and took an interest in them automatically.”

His reduced ability to observe mammals and birds led him to concentrate on insects ultimately leading him down the path to becoming the world’s leading expert on ants (among many other topics including biodiversity and sociobiology).

If he had not blinded himself, would he had chosen these same scientific problems to research? Perhaps not.

“The projects that a particular researcher finds interesting are an expression of a personal filter, a way of perceiving the world. This filter is associated with a set of values: the beliefs of what is good, beautiful, and true versus what is bad, ugly, and false. Our unique filter is what we bring to the table as scientists.” -Uri Alon

Uri Alon, a Professor and Systems Biologist at the Weizmann Institute of Science, gives us his perspective on the matter in this excellent article which you can read here:

Share this:
by

Things That Glow In The Dark

May 6, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Remember that glowing night scene in Avatar when the two blue aliens bonded under Pandora’s magical forest? I was hypnotized. I wanted it to exist on Earth. I wanted to be there. It reminds me of my childhood: sitting under the glowing blue Christmas tree lights, chasing after fireflies with my grandparents in New York, carrying around my Glo Worm doll (please tell me you had one too.). I’ve started to compile a list of places and things that exist on Earth which glow in the same magical Pandora-esque way. To please the child within.

TURTLES

Newest discovery, by David Gruber, a National Geographic Emerging Explorer, shows that hawksbill sea turtles bio-fluoresce! Read more.

SCORPIONS

ARX3PR Scorpion (Hadruus arizonensis) under a black light. Image shot 2004.

During an entomology class in college I discovered scorpions glow in the dark under UV light. Overturn any number of rocks and see what you find! Why would scorpions glow? Apparently David Gaffin has figured out some answers. “Gaffin and co-workers have tested scorpion activity under different light wavelengths (including UV-light) with eyes covered or not. The results suggest that scorpion cuticular fluorescence actually may be involved in their perception of light and contributes to orientation and light-avoidance behavior (e.g. helps the decision to stay in their burrow until outside light conditions are optimal for avoiding predators etc.).” Take a look at the article in Discover Magazine.

OWLS

Photo snagged from Glenn Bartley

When I was a field biologist studying birds, I was told owl wing feathers glow under UV light. I didn’t believe it, so I looked it up and sure enough it is a novel technique scientists use to age juvenile owls. You an also read about it in this scientific publication.

“You can imagine that trying to assess the quality of feathers under dim light from headlamps, incandescent or fluorescent bulbs is something of a challenge, but until the mid 1990’s, this was simply how it was done. In 1982, researcher, Bruce A. Colvin discovered that porphyrin in the newly molted feathers of Barn Owls fluoresced under UV light. This organic compound fades over time and with exposure to light, making different generations of feathers easily identified using a UV light.” -Ann Nightingale

CORAL REEFS

I recently watched a PBS documentary showing coral reefs fluorescing under UV light! “There are several theories provided by scientists, and perhaps the most likely reason is that it acts as a kind of “sun block” for the coral protecting the zooxanthallae inside the coral from the harmful rays of the sun . Marine Biologists say that this property could perhaps protect shallow coral from bleaching or provide deeper coral the ability to absorb the UV light from the sun and reflect it back to the zooxanthallae allowing them to photosynthesize in the absence of sufficient sunlight.” Being a diver, this makes me want to go night diving immediately. Who is with me?

FLOWERS

From R-L: The same flower with human vision, only UV vision (bright = UV), simulated bee vision (UV+G+B), simulated bird vision (tetrachromatcic: UV+R+G+B). (Photos: (c) Dr Klaus Schmitt, Weinheim, Germany, uvir.eu ) See more photos here.

Bees see flowers in a much different cloak than our human eye can detect. The guide patterns are caused by UV-absorbing substances and provide visual pollinating clues directing the bees to the center where they can find the flower’s pollen.

BIOLUMINESCENCE

To see more beautiful photos, click the squid above.

National Geographic did an awesome article about bioluminescence, called Luminous Life in their March 2015 issue. “Evolving to make light seems to be relatively easy—it has happened independently in at least 40 different lineages.” -Olivia Judson

If you ever get a chance to go out on the water during a new moon and look at the bioluminescence, you will be blown away. It truly is a magical experience.

There are way more fluorescing treasures I did not highlight here, so be sure to take a look. With all this glowing talk I feel inspired to throw a black light party for the humans!
Share this:
by

Oceanography Cruises: Boats and Acids

April 9, 2015 / Allison Cusick

My Easter Sunday was unusual.

Sure, I ate the traditional spiral ham for dinner, but I was at sea and my family was nowhere in sight.

I was with eight strangers aboard the R/V Clifford A Barnes cruising around the Puget Sound for six-days of research monitoring ocean acidification, referred to as OA for short.

In honor of the sea and the nature of the project, I feel I should have been eating oysters for Easter dinner!

What is this Ocean Acidification you keep talking about?

If you’ve never heard of this term, and want to know more about it (which you should want to), I will redirect you to the links found on the University of Washington’s College of the Environment’s host website. Spend some time here familiarizing yourself with the globally important terms and what it means to our environment’s health:

What is OA?

What about OA in the Pacific Northwest?

Below are some great graphics illustrating the important fluxes occurring in the environmental system. Take a good look at all the arrows and think about your personal experience with each. Images are from NOAA PMEL.

Changing Oceans, Changing Biology

It is easy to think of the ocean as a big vast body of empty water that doesn’t need much attention. Maybe you’ll think of a couple animals that live there like whales, sharks, and coral reefs. You’ll easily identify with currents and tides washing up on the beach if you’re a tide-pool lover or beach comber. The beauty of the oceans is that there is so much more than that. What most people take for granted is all of the intricate dynamic exchanges occurring between land, air, and water which perfectly tie biology, chemistry and geology together!

Currently, a lot of attention is being directed to a particular exchange: atmospheric carbon dioxide with the oceans. The carbon dioxide being released into the atmosphere (yes, predominately due to human needs for fuel) is absorbing into the oceans. This absorption into the ocean is a natural process as the gases in the ocean below like to be in equilibrium with the gases in the air above. However, once that carbon dioxide gets into the water it reacts with the water molecules setting off a whole chain of chemical reactions which lowers the ocean’s pH, termed ocean acidification. This rapid change we are seeing, which has been calculated to be escalating since the time of the Industrial Era, has us concerned about the chemistry and life in the oceans.

“If carbon dioxide continues to rise unchecked, computer models show that acidification will deplete carbonate ions in much of the ocean by 2100, turning the waters corrosive for many shell-building animals.”

From The Acid Test www.nationalgeographic.com

Why are we doing this cruise? … Because oysters.

No seriously, the reason us scientists are out here monitoring the waters comes from the birth of the Blue Ribbon Panel in 2011. This was enacted because, as in Governor Christine Gregoire’s own words, “Our shellfish industry employs thousands of people, and brings in millions of dollars to our state on an annual basis. Continued success depends on healthy ocean water.” The Blue Ribbon Panel is “a panel of science and policy experts to address the effects of ocean acidification on WA’s shellfish resources.”

Science will save the oysters!

In 2013 the Blue Ribbon Panel spawned the Washington Ocean Acidification Center (WOAC, sounds like ‘whoa-wack’) . The legislature requires the Center to execute five priority actions. The cruise I am currently on exists in response to the second bullet point listed within the actions. We are not directly dealing with oysters but monitoring the health of the Puget Sound builds upon our knowledge of the areas which are pivotal for successful oyster growth and harvesting:

Establish an expanded and sustained ocean acidification monitoring network to measure trends in local acidification conditions and related biological responses. This monitoring will allow detection of local acidification conditions and increase our scientific understanding of local species responses.

Read more about progress on this priority action.

Below is a photo map of all the stations we will be visiting on this trip. The stations highlighted in pink are the specific locations my boss is interested in (more about that below). The ‘P’ indicates these are stations included in PRISM , the Puget Sound Regional Synthesis Model which sends biannual cruises within the greater Puget Sound to collect oceanographic time-series data. The network NANOOS was created as a place to hold more detailed scientific information and comprises over forty entities researching the Puget Sound as part of the ocean observing system.

All Hands on Deck – How We Sample

The contraption to the left is referred to as a CTD. This is a little package of sensors that measure Conductivity Temperature & Depth. It rides on the metal frame lined with gray Niskin bottles which we call a rosette.

The CTD comes up on deck full of sea water collected from different depths in the water column and we begin sampling for many different variables:

oxygen

dissolved inorganic carbon

nutrients

chlorophyll

RNA/DNA

Rachel is the first to crack open the Niskin and takes a sample of seawater for oxygen measurements. It is important to get the sample stored into the bottle as soon as possible to limit the amount of time the sea water from depth is exposed to the atmosphere.

These two bottles, pictured below, contain sea water from Hood Canal. Chemicals are added which grab on to the oxygen within the water and create a precipitate (the orange color). The left sample is from the surface and has more oxygen which creates more precipitate making it orange. The right sample is from depth and has less oxygen which creates less precipitate making it less orange (whitish).

Next, the plankton nets are deployed. On this cruise we run three types of tows: vertical, horizontal, & oblique.

Plankton net tows give back valuable information about the biological community of zooplankton. One species of particular interest are the pteropods, endearingly known as sea butterflies who’s shells are visibly suffering from increasing CO2 conditions:

The smooth shell of a healthy pteropod is seen at left. The pteropod in the center was exposed to elevated CO2 conditions in a laboratory, to mimic conditions researchers saw in the wild. And at right, a shell with holes and pits, also produced by laboratory conditions, corresponds to some of the most extreme damage scientists expect to see with elevated CO2. From The Seattle Times SEA CHANGE stories.

I am a research technician on this ship representing my Principal Investigator, Monica Orellana, with the Institute for Systems Biology. A portion of her research aims to understand ocean acidification effects on the phytoplankton community at a genetic level using next-generation sequencing tools. When I am not collecting my own samples, I help out collecting samples for the head technician, Rachel Vander Giessen.

Feature Woman – Physicist/Oceanographer Rachel Vander Giessen

On this cruise I would like to highlight the lady in charge: Rachel Vander Giessen. She is the technician for the head scientist, Jan Newton, and was on the ship running the science show. She has a bachelor’s degree in physics, spent time on chartered yachts as a naturalist, wanted to become a captain through the Maritime Academy, was a bartender and a barista, and is now a research technician in oceanography. She is the epitome of someone who is highly involved and doing cool shit without having a PhD. You have to read more about her in her interview (link coming soon).

Want more photos of the trip aboard the R/V Clifford A Barnes?

Click here for Spring 2015 and here for Fall 2015.

Want to know even more about Ocean Acidification? Click any of the easy-follow links listed on WOAC’s site:

20 Facts About Ocean Acidification (updated November 2013)
Ocean Acidification in the Pacific Northwest
Ocean Acidification Center Another Example of State Leading the Nation
Blue Ribbon Panel on Ocean Acidification

NANOOS/APL

Share this:
by

A sassy entrepreneur and philanthropist.

March 27, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Eighty year old Stephanie Shirley’s story is incredibly inspirational to women who want to make change in the world.

You may wonder why I think a TED talk about successful entrepreneurial business women would be within the scope of the WOMAN SCIENTIST site; I use a lot of examples of business entrepreneurs because I think the same strategy and passion they’ve found can absolutely apply to careers in the scientific world. I’m trying to encourage you ladies to be creative about how you weave your passion for science into a career. There are sooooo many alternative choices we don’t hear about in college. Hopefully this video will tune you in to your gut and inspire you to make something for yourself. Thats what it did for me.

Without further adieu, please take 14 minutes to watch this sassy straightforward woman talk.

Dame Stephanie Shirley is the most successful tech entrepreneur you never heard of. In the 1960s, she founded a pioneering all-woman software company in the UK, which was ultimately valued at $3 billion, making millionaires of 70 of her team members. In this frank and often hilarious talk, she explains why she went by “Steve,” how she upended the expectations of the time, and shares some sure-fire ways to identify ambitious women …

She challenged so many conventions of her time even to the point of changing her name to Steve just to get through the door before anyone realized “he” was a “she”!

Stephanie believes that young women of today have “got it dead easy” compared with those of her own generation. Women have nothing to complain about, as all the legal obstacles holding them back have been removed; it is their own reluctance to fight in the workplace that is the real problem.

My favorite part is at 8:12

“When I started my company of women, the men sort of said, ‘How interesting, because it only works because it’s small.’

And later, as it became sizable they sort of accepted, ‘Yes it is sizable now, but of no strategic interest.’

And later, when it was a company valued at over $3 billion and I’ve made 70 of the staff into millionaires they sort of said, ‘Well done, Steve.'”

“If it were easy to be successful, we all would be.”

“It’s one thing to have an idea for an enterprise, but as many people in this room will know, making it happen is a very difficult thing and it demands extraordinary energy, self belief and determination. The courage to risk family and home. And a 24/7 commitment that borders on the obsessive.”

What do you envision for your career in science? What do you spend your time doing? What key elements of your being does it include? Really listen to yourself. Write it down! Keep it folded in your pocket. Refer to it often. Change it up! It exists for you. Make it happen. If you keep this bigger vision in mind of what you want to accomplish then it will be easier to understand how different opportunities will help build your tool set and keep you on course.

And for gosh sakes if anyone tells you you can’t do what you are thinking of doing just give ’em the finger and keep going!

My family loves birds.

More follow up reading here at ‘Success has a cost. Women today are so naive’

Visit her home site here.

Read more about her struggles with raising an autistic son and the charitable trust fund,The Shirley Foundation, she started because of it here.

To the outside world, my life was to be hugely envied, and I was an unmitigated success. Those who knew me, however, would not have swapped places with me for the world.

Needless to say, I would have traded all the wealth and professional accolades for Giles to have been an ordinary child, with a happy, uncomplicated existence.

Share this:
by

Interweaving The Inner Artist & The Inner Scientist

March 26, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Ellen has experience in anthropology, medical illustration, exotic animal care and stop motion animation and entrepreneurial endeavors. She has found what seems to be a lucrative way to weave her art with her academic biological interests….synthetic taxidermy!

Talk about blending your diverse interests; Check out Ellen Jewett‘s work!

“Over time I find my sculptures are evolving to be of greater emotional presence by using less physical substance: I subtract more and more to increase the negative space. The element of weight, which has always seemed so fundamentally tied to the medium of sculpture, is stripped away and the laws of gravity are no longer in full effect.”

Her sculptures are dreamlike. She states that the unconventional look and feel of her work is a phenomena arising from the desire to avoid using toxic materials which are the most commonly available to artists. She is conscious to “source the natural, the local, the low impact and, always, the authentic.”

How does she do it?!

“Each sculpture is handmade and painted with no more tools than fingers and a paint brush. By virtue of this primal process, each creation is completely unique and produced in a fluid and intuitive manner. The process begins with a handmade metal armature over which light weight clay is sculpted. The painting is executed with acrylic, mineral and oil pigments and the embedded eyes are glass. When complete the whole piece is glazed to intensify colour and strength. With inspiration derived from animal physiology and a love of the fantastic, grotesque and absurd, each sculpture is unique and personable. The detailed craftsmanship is rich and thoughtful and never cast molded or replicated.”

You HAVE to check out her site to read more. Perhaps I’ll also pick her brain and interview her on blending art and science for this site!!

all images via Ellen.

I found some of her older work shown on Visual News here and Laughing Squid here.

Other Talented Science Artists I know:

Nina Arens – blending art, science, and museums

Allison Kudla – blending art, science and technology

Ellen Jewett – blending sculpture, art, science and animal physiology

Arie van ‘t Riet – blending nature with X-Rays
Share this:
by

Dont get a PhD right away. Its OK to take time off.

March 25, 2015 / Allison Cusick

Disclaimer: This post is a personal musing about the last decade that I have spent being a biological technician and why I haven’t yet wanted a PhD. For now, I hope you enjoy the read and take comfort in knowing you don’t HAVE to get a higher degree until you want to.

Over the past ten years I have managed to fulfill my passions for experiencing many diverse biological projects without having a PhD. I know a lot of other people who have as well. If you’re just out of undergrad and wondering what to do in life, I’m here to tell you that you CAN take time “off” and explore the science world without going directly into a doctoral position. In my 10 years of experience I would say, if you are waffling over whether or not you should get a higher degree, just go explore in the work force. You won’t regret it and graduate school will always be there for you.

Since 2006, I have been a busy worker bee buzzing around the world. I love doing research related to animals, nature, and the environment. I especially love being a field-biologist when I get the opportunities. I love terrestrial ecology and I’ve discovered I really love oceanography and marine biology. I’m fascinated by the rain-forests as well as the polar regions. I want to understand all the biospheres! How am I suppose to blend these all into one career?

I knew I didn’t want to go to graduate school right after college. I knew that maybe some day I might go, but that time wasn’t then or any time in the near future. What would I go for? There are so many things I’m interested in. Seemed like a waste of time and resources if I didn’t have a clear reason. So, I chose to be a technician, year after year, after year. It has now been 10 years since I graduated with a Bachelor’s. I value the experiences I’ve gained along the way and I am now also starting to see the ceiling in my current position. Looking forward, going back to school may be the next beneficial career move.

Even though most of my positions have been as a technician, I don’t think of myself as “just” a tech. I think technicians, or “associates” as we are sometimes respectfully referred to, are pivotal to the progress of research. We cost less (I wish I could make more than $43,000 a year in the not-for-profit world), and we’ll do anything you tell us to–or at least, we’ll try! As an example, the institute I have worked at for the past 5 years showed us their statistics on the majority of positions that made up the institute. I’m working off memory, but I noticed there were 48 research associates, 5 graduate students, 46 postdocs, 20 senior scientists, 12 faculty, and probably 100 or so administrators. Clearly, post-docs and research technicians made up a bulk of the research work-force. The point is, technicians are just as important as any other position needed to get the science job done!

Luckily I’ve never married my worth and competence in science to the type of degree I hold. We all have to decide for ourselves what success looks like and what truly matters to us. I know I can do cool science and go all over the world without having a PhD. I’ve been happy with that decision so far.

It is true that if you want to be in certain fields, or at certain levels within a field, you do have to play by certain rules …. But, I also believe you can create something unique for yourself and have some awesome experiences along the way.

Why being a tech has outweighed going to graduate school so far:

A mix of conscious decision and subconscious psychological excuses:

1) I don’t want to commit 5+ years to something if I just sorta like it. That seems like a waste of time. If I’m going to go to graduate school to become an expert at something I want to have a damn clear vision on what I intend to do with that degree. In the meantime, I’ve been interested in so many things I felt being a technician was the most responsible choice. Plus, I’m holding out for the Right project and the Right mentor at the Right time. If they don’t exist, then I don’t want to do it just to say I have a PhD.

2) This might be a myth, but it feels like there are far more employment opportunities as a biology technician than there are for those with higher degrees who might be seen as being “over qualified” for a lot of the position that I have been attracted to. The only downside to this is you get stuck in a certain pay bracket only having a Bachelor’s even as the years pass and you gain more experiences.

3) I want the flexibility to jump ship if a position or project is no longer working for me. As a technician, I can put in the hard work, stay the long hours, and commit as much of my energy to project as I see fit. If one day comes, and life sends me on another course, I can say its time to move on and leave. Obviously there are proper etiquettes on how to go about doing this, which I always adhere to (no use in burning bridges), but I like knowing I have outs and an infrastructure won’t collapse because I’ve left. That sounds like I don’t want to be relied on. Thats not what I’m saying. Rely on me all you want while I’m your tech, but if I need to get out or mix it up, I have allowed myself that freedom.

3) I don’t think I’m a good enough writer. Most higher academic degree holders spend 90% of their time writing grants to get research and salary money. I don’t want to be writer, I want to do the actual grunt work. I like the execution process involved in progress. Plus, my thoughts are always jumbled and I am no good at professional talk. Why can’t we just talk to each other like normal people? Why do we have to be so stuffy when it comes to the scientific professional world? I’ve never worn that well. Not that I’m NOT professional. I am, completely, I just don’t like to be forced to sound that way and put a barrier between my real self and the work I want to do in the world. Can’t I just be me?!

4) I don’t want the responsibility of finding funding. What I mean by that is I don’t want to have to take my work problems home with me unless I truly love thinking about them. I like being the one who executes the plans, not the one who has to come up with all the plans in the first place to be funded. Why don’t I want to be the one who comes up with the plans? Its intimidating! Sometimes you may just not feel creative. Or maybe I’m still struggling as a human being to find my voice and that’s how it manifests itself in my professional life. I haven’t delved too deep into that psychological nuance of mine. As I mature and grow in my science career I think these skills come over time and truthfully I do ultimately think the ability to write your own grants and come up with your own ideas is a sign of independence as a scientist. Someday I do hope to get there.

There are cons to being “just a tech”

1) What if you have a crappy boss. (A: Suffer or find a new one.)

2) What if you hate the project? (A: Watch your soul slowly dissolve or find a new one.)

3) What if you want more money? (A: Go into biotech, NOT into environmental projects, non-profit or academia.)

4) What if you’re seen as disposable and get laid off? (A: Keep your skill set diverse.)

5) What if no one treats you with respect? (A: Don’t work for people who act like that.)

As I get older I find myself wondering if I am “growing out of” the tech position. With ten years experience behind me, I am now 32. I feel I’m getting close to the line of intentionally sandbagging. I will admit the last two years I have even been toying with the idea of heading off to graduate school.

GASP! I know.

I still have no clue what exactly I’d go for. This paralysis comes from the collision between big vision, desire for interdisciplinary work and a lack of clarity on who or where to get that mentoring from.

Currently, I am finding three things frustrating about where I am at in my scientific career: 1) My last exposure to formal education was 10 years ago. There are areas of science I am craving exposure to and going back into formal education would provide the deeper understanding and new connections that I’m looking for. 2) The lack of being able to make justifiably more money than I made ten years ago just out of college (this could simply be due to the fact I work in the non-profit/academic world), at some point it would be nice to get paid more for the experiences I have gained, 3) I’m starting to have ideas of my own and develop my own style of progress which can sometimes be de-railed when you ultimately have to answer to “The Boss” in charge of you, and 4) The fear I may not be able to make as big of an impact in the world as I’d like to if I remain a technician for another decade. Live big.

Either way, my aspirations are no longer matching the reality of my current employment opportunities.

What do I want to do next ? Find a higher position at a new job with more opportunities to grow, go to graduate school or start my own business. Or a blend of all three!

Why limit myself?

I honestly don’t have a good answer but I take comfort in knowing it’s worth thinking creatively about.

At this point, I feel like I’m part of a freelance industry.

“Can the very paradigm of how we do science research be changed to […] a new paradigm that reflects the diversity of individual capacity and offers the opportunity for genuine life choices.” – Sharon Bell

Share this:
by

« Older posts Newer posts »

Follow Me

Categories

Recent Posts