Just a quick reminder:
If you haven’t filled out the brief survey I posted last week, would you please click HERE to do that? It will just take a few minutes.
I’d be toadally grateful…
Just a quick reminder:
If you haven’t filled out the brief survey I posted last week, would you please click HERE to do that? It will just take a few minutes.
I’d be toadally grateful…
I need a favor.
I spend quite a bit of time working on this blog each week, but in some ways publishing blog posts is like tossing text and photos into a void. To help me better understand who is reading blog posts and how those posts affect you, I have created a very short online survey that I hope you’ll take. This is a follow-up to a similar survey by Eliza Perry (former Hubbard Fellow) several years ago, but I’ve added a few extra questions.
Your responses will be completely anonymous, so you can be as brutally honest as you like. I’m hoping that your answers will help me make this blog even better, and also help me understand what kind of impact the blog might be having.
Even if you only read this blog now and then, or just skim it to look at photos, please take the survey. If you forward posts to friends or colleagues periodically, would you please forward this survey as well and encourage them to take it?
Please click HERE to take the survey.
THANK YOU for your help.
Much of the Central United States is emerging from an ice storm that glazed streets and closed schools. On the positive side, it also coated our prairies (and everything else) with a beautiful layer of ice. As the sun came up yesterday morning, I was walking through one of our local prairies, surrounded by glittering, sparkling prairie plants.
It was magical.
I had planned to walk around for an hour or so and take pictures, but ended up staying for four hours; leaving only because I got really hungry. I usually save my “Photo of the Week” post for Thursday or Friday each week, but I couldn’t wait to share some images from yesterday morning. I hope you enjoy them.
I’ve often said that Interstate 80 through Nebraska is a great population control mechanism for our state. While I actually enjoy much of the scenery along the interstate, it’s particular route helps feed the widely held stereotype that Nebraska is a big flat state with nothing to see but corn and cows. We certainly have lots of corn and cows, but if you take the time to explore beyond the interstate, you quickly see that Nebraska is anything but flat.
Now, don’t get me wrong, I’m not promoting Nebraska as a place that you should move to. In my personal opinion, we have plenty of people here already. I happen to love that there are still large areas of the state where I can drive for miles without ever seeing another human being. I’m sure that’s not a universally-held opinion among our tourism board or chambers of commerce, but that’s how I feel. I’m going to show you a few photos of a non-flat Nebraska today, but please don’t take those as a personal invitation to move to our state. I guess you could come visit, but you’ll be much happier living in your own state.
Anyway, I bet your state is really pretty too. You should live there. Thanks.
This post is written and illustrated by Katharine Hogan, one of our Hubbard Fellows.
In November, I visited the Valentine National Wildlife Refuge on Highway 83 south of the town of Valentine. There had been a burn several weeks previously at the refuge, and I enjoyed a little time wandering around and observing the effects of the fire on the vegetation and exposed sandy soil. In patches, some brave grasses had re-sprouted in defiance of the cooling autumn temperatures. In other areas, the patchy fire had not burned hot enough to do more than singe the thicker sunflower and forb stalks, and everywhere the rodents had wasted no time in churning up the exposed sand, leaving clean, cool piles in stark contrast with the surrounding black ash from the burned vegetation.
I had only been walking around for a few minutes when I came across something that, though strange at first, eventually astonished me in its scope across the landscape. I noticed a patch of flower stalks with some threads of spider silk, strung out from stalk to stalk, not forming an actual web but nonetheless running roughly parallel, using the burned stems as support. Upon further examination, however, I realized that this was not an isolated occurrence within the burn, and that this same patterning of silk strands stretched off in both directions across acres and acres of the burned vegetation.
Although these pictures don’t and can’t really accurately represent the scope of this phenomena, I was able to capture a couple that show, if nothing else, the impressive amount of silk that had been put out for some unknown reason by, one must guess, some very industrious arachnids.
My knowledge regarding spiders and their habits is utterly basic. I have a high appreciation for them as fascinating creatures and as ecological players, but my ongoing efforts of understanding have simply not focused on them, focusing instead on plants in part because plants don’t, you know, suddenly relocate on you for inscrutable reasons. At the time, I could only wildly guess as to what caused this phenomenon to occur. Apparently it involved a presumably large number of arachnids deciding more or less in tandem that changing location was a really good idea, but why? And what type of spiders? Were they moving towards or away from something? Was this movement related to the recent fire? What about the decreasing autumn temperatures and daylight?
I did a little digging and came up with a couple potential situations that could describe at least in part what I saw. As always, I would welcome the insights of readers of this post with a better idea of what’s going on! I would love some help in solving this web of mysteries.
I found references to spiders of two families that sometimes exhibit tendencies that could explain silk strands such as these. Jumping spiders (family Salticidae) leave “safety lines” of silk behind them as they jump between plants; however, this does not explain the massive amount of silk, nor why it was all aligned in the same direction across the landscape.
The other possible explanation I found was with regards to spiders, not exclusively but predominantly of the genus Erigone, that, according to a 2005 article in the Bulletin of Entomological Research, will sometimes display what is called “mass ballooning”, where large numbers of spiders in tandem migrate short distances across landscapes, leaving behind “spectacular amounts of silk on the ground” (J.R. Bell et al.). The reasons for this behavior are still largely not understood, but hypothesized explanations have included sudden changes in temperature, humidity, and other factors largely dependent upon the microclimate of the population in question.
Several other studies during the 70s and 80s also supplied some evidence that the propensity of spider populations to balloon was correlated with the “predictability” or stability of their habitats. In the case of Greenstone (1982), populations that selected for habitats subject to more frequent change, e.g. open spaces near water sources, were more likely to balloon than species that favored prairie habitats. If habitat changes are positively correlated with the likelihood of a spider population ballooning, could this suggest the recent prescribed burn as a causal factor in the event whose aftermath I witnessed at the wildlife refuge?
I honestly don’t have a clue. Other interests and appreciations aside, I am very much a “plant person” and feel uncomfortable coming to any conclusions regarding a group of organisms about which I know so fabulously little. I do know, however, that the scope of the phenomena I witnessed was truly impressive, and thus I gained a little more appreciation and awareness of the unseen lives of the tiny critters around us. As always, input on the matter would be much appreciated. If any of you readers have any insights on the matter, please let us all know in the comments! Thanks!
Bohan, David A., et al. (2005) Ballooning dispersal using silk: World fauna, phylogenies, genetics and models. Bulletin of Entomological Research 95, 69-114.
Greenstone, M.H. (1982) Ballooning frequency and habitat predictability in two wolf spider species (Lycosidae: Pardosa). Florida Entomologist 65, 83–89.
Can you guess what this is a photo of?
While the photo does look like leaping chicken ballerinas (according to my wife), that isn’t the correct answer. Unfortunately, I have never had the opportunity to photograph leaping chicken ballerinas, though it is a lifelong goal of mine.
If you guessed it’s actually a photograph of Oenothera rhombipetala (fourpoint evening primrose) just after a rainstorm, you get the prize. Treat yourself to something from your cupboard. Chocolate, if you’ve got it.
The primrose photo was taken at the Niobrara Valley Preserve last summer. Below is another photo from the Preserve, showing the same primrose species from a very different perspective, and with some other company.
I hope your 2017 is off to a great start. I also hope we all get the opportunity to see some leaping chicken ballerinas real soon.
As a scientist and science writer, I’m concerned about the way science is perceived by the public. I think some big misunderstandings about how science works are creating distrust and dismissal of important scientific findings. That’s a huge problem, and I’d like to try to help fix it.
Let’s start with this: Science is a process that helps us understand and explain the world around us. That process relies on repeated observations and experiments that continuously change our understanding of how things work.
Scientists often come up with results that conflict with those of other scientists. That doesn’t indicate that something is wrong; it’s exactly how science is supposed to work. When scientists disagree about something, more scientists get involved and keep testing ideas until a consensus starts to emerge. Even at that point, ideas continue to be tested, and either gain more acceptance (because of more supporting evidence) or weaken (because conflicting results are found).
There is no endpoint in science. Instead, ideas move through various steps of acceptance, depending upon how much evidence is collected to support them. You can read much more about how the process works here.
We are lucky to have easy access to immense amounts of information today. However, it can be be very difficult to know which statements are supported by good science and which are just opinions amplified by people with an agenda and a prominent platform. Today’s world, for example, still includes people who earnestly believe the earth is flat, despite overwhelming evidence to the contrary.
Media coverage of science often increases confusion. How many times have you heard or read a media story about how a particular substance either cures or causes cancer? In most cases, the scientist being interviewed tries to explain that their work is just one step in a long process of evidence gathering and doesn’t prove anything by itself. That scientist might as well be talking to an empty void. The headline has already told the story and pundits are shaking their heads and complaining about how scientists can’t ever agree. (Please see paragraph three above.)
Unfortunately, confusion about how science works means the public often doesn’t pay attention when scientists actually do agree on things. Loud voices can easily sway public opinion on important topics because it’s hard to know who to believe. Often, we believe those who say things we want to be true.
Let me ask you three questions:
Do you believe that childhood immunizations are safe and effective?
Do you believe that rapid climate change is occurring as a result of human activity?
Do you believe that food derived from products containing Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) is safe for human consumption?
The scientific community has clearly and strongly stated that the answer to all three of these questions should be yes. Despite that, many people will answer yes to one or two of these questions, but not all three. If you’re one of those people, I have another question for you.
If you trust the scientific community and the scientific process on one or two of these topics, why not on all of them?
This post is not about vaccines, global warming or GMOs. I’m not trying to tell you what to think. Instead, I’m inviting you TO think.
If you’re a scientist, are you spending enough time thinking about how to talk to a public that is skeptical of science? Being right isn’t enough when there are louder voices shouting that you’re wrong. How do you expect the public to find the real story when your results are hidden in subscription-only journals and written in technical jargon-filled language? What can you, personally, do to help others understand what science is, why it’s important, and what it can tell us?
If you’re someone who believes the science on some topics, but not others, are you comfortable with the reasons behind that? Do you think science has been polluted by money and agendas, or do you think money and agendas are trying to discredit science? Have you spent enough time reading articles that contradict your position and evaluating the credentials of those on each side? Is it possible that long-held beliefs are preventing you from looking at evidence with clear eyes?
While individual scientists may have biases, the scientific process has no agenda other than discovery. Scientists are strongly incentivized to go against the grain – both employers and journal publishers get most excited by research that contradicts mainstream ideas. Because of that, ideas that gain overwhelming scientific consensus should be given extra credibility because they have withstood an onslaught of researchers trying to tear them down.
Can scientists be wrong? Yes, of course – scientists are wrong all the time, and they argue back and forth in pursuit of knowledge. That’s a good thing. Saying that science is untrustworthy because not all scientists agree is like saying that we shouldn’t eat fruit because some of it isn’t ripe.
We desperately need credible science in order to survive and thrive on this earth. Sustaining that credibility is the responsibility of both scientists and the public. Scientists must provide accessible and clear information about what they’re learning, but the public also needs to be a receptive and discerning audience.
There is a torrent of news and data coming at us every day. As you process that information, think like a scientist. Question everything, including your own assumptions. Form an opinion and then test it by looking for information that might disprove it. Most importantly, even when you’re confident in your viewpoint, keep your mind open to new evidence and alternate perspectives.
Finally, remember that science is a continual and cumulative process. Conflicting research results don’t indicate weakness, they drive scientists to keep looking for answers. Science shouldn’t lose your trust when scientists disagree. Instead, science should earn your trust when scientists reach consensus.
Special thanks to Anna Helzer for helpful feedback on this piece.
Kim and I have made it an annual tradition to spend part of our holiday break at the Niobrara Valley Preserve. Our kids were with other relatives for part of this year’s break, so we had a few days to rest, relax, and explore by ourselves. The weather was variable during our time there, including fog, rain, snow, hail, strong wind, and warm sunshine. Perfect. We watched bald eagles soar effortlessly over the river and bluffs, flushed cottontail rabbits out of the brush, saw white-tailed deer, mule deer, bison, turkeys, and the tracks of many other animals. We enjoyed the diversity of plants we saw as well, even though most of them were brown and dormant. It was a great trip, although we both wished we’d been serenaded by coyotes at least one evening. Maybe next year. Here are some photos from the visit.
Trips like this help me realize how fortunate I am. I’m lucky to have a wife who enjoys winter hiking and remote vacations away from people and noise. I’m lucky to have a job that allows me access to places like the Niobrara Valley Preserve and the time to explore them. And I’m lucky to have this platform for sharing photos and stories with people who appreciate them and share their perspectives back with me. Thank you. Happy New Year!
As I was putting together my slideshow of favorite photos of 2016, there were two photos I considered including but didn’t, mainly because they were in a vertical (portrait) format. The two photos were taken within just a few minutes of each other on a beautiful June morning in the Nebraska Sandhills.
My friend Gerry and I were out looking for flowers to photograph and I ran across a patch of larkspur (Delphinium carolinianum) bathed in golden light from the rising sun. After playing around with several different flowering stems and compositions, I finally got one I really liked. I took versions with and without the horizon line showing behind it and decided later I liked the one with the horizon better.
As I was getting ready to leave the larkspur patch and look for something else to photograph, I noticed a flowering stem without any blossoms on it. I bent down to take a closer look and found a pretty little green caterpillar with a satisfied look on its face. Based on some quick internet searching, I’m thinking it’s likely a looper moth caterpillar, but I’m hoping someone will recognize it and either confirm or correct that. Regardless, I liked the cut of the caterpillar’s jib, and was happy to be able to get a reasonably good photograph of it.
Everyone’s gotta eat, right? Flower-feeding caterpillars can be seen as pests in gardens when gardeners are working hard to produce flowers or vegetables, but in the wild, they’re just another cog in the machine. Caterpillars eat flowers, but in turn provide food for birds and other animals who also need to eat. I’m happy to have opportunities for up-close views of the whole process.
This is the 114th post on The Prairie Ecologist in 2016, and the 770th since I started back in 2010. As always, I’m humbled and grateful that anyone besides me cares enough about prairie conservation, management, and/or photography enough to read this blog. Thank you very sincerely. I can hardly believe we’ve reached nearly 3,000 subscribers, and that there are many others who just check in regularly.
I’ve picked out a few posts from this year that I’m particularly proud of, and have provided links to them below in case you missed them or just want to revisit them. Below that, you’ll find a slideshow of some of my favorite prairie photos from this year.
If your financial situation allows, please don’t forget this is a good time of year to support the conservation organization of your choice. I’m a little biased, since one in particular pays my salary, but support whichever organization does the work you most appreciate. Thanks.
Natural History Posts
Plants on the Move – Timelapse images showing plants moving between years.
Crappy job – Dung beetle natural history.
Sage hopper – A grasshopper perfectly camouflaged for its favorite food plant.
Prairie Management/Restoration Posts
Role of history – History shouldn’t necessarily drive management decisions.
Don’t just manage for plants – It’s dangerous to forget about the needs of animals.
Mechanics of conservation – A thoughtful post about how best to influence conservation.
Milestone in restoration – A celebration of our proven ability to defragment prairies.
Another otter post – in which I finally saw an otter, but not on the Platte River.
Toadal mystery – how did a toad imprint get in a concrete parking lot?
An accomodating prairie dog – a prairie dog inexplicably lets my daughter and me get close.
Here are my favorites from the thousands of prairie photos I took this year; you can click on the arrows within the slideshow to make it go faster….
If the slideshow doesn’t work for you, below is a four minute YouTube video with all the same images. If you can’t see the video automatically, try clicking on this link. Feel free to share this post or the YouTube link with others who might appreciate them.
Enjoy the remainder of 2016 and a have a great 2017. We can make this world a better place by working together with empathy and purpose.