Directed Research SFS 4910

Directed Research

SFS 4910

Dr. Sigrid Heise-Pavlov Associate Professor Dr. Justus Kithiia Dr. Catherine Pohlman

Office hours by appointment

The School for Field Studies (SFS) Centre for Rainforest Studies Queensland, Australia

This syllabus may develop or change over time based on local conditions, learning opportunities, and faculty expertise. Course content may vary from semester to semester.

Center Research Direction The Centre for Rainforest Studies’ research plan addresses the question: How can the future of the Wet Tropics in a changing world be ensured? Staff and students of SFS-CRS investigate this topic by engaging in research under three core components:

1. Understanding ecological and social systems; 2. Conflict, vulnerability and change; 3. Effective response to change.

Through our research, we aim to assist a range of stakeholders and research partners. These include local landholders; non-government conservation organisations conducting rainforest restoration or having a special interest in flora and fauna; several levels of government, particularly local and state government; regional research organisations, including universities and the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation.

We aim to improve stability, sustainability, environmental awareness, and concern for natural resources in the Wet Tropics, in particular on the Atherton Tablelands. Our goal is to strengthen research, technical and practical collaboration between SFS-CRS and other research organizations, governmental agencies and non-governmental organizations to carry out this agenda. Course Overview The aim of this course is to provide students with the opportunity to apply ecological, biological, and/or social-scientific methods to a field research project that addresses a local issue related to the environment. This course prepares students to distinguish hidden assumptions in scientific approaches. We will also investigate the ways that various methods and theories differentiate (or do not) fact from interpretation, cause from correlation, and advocacy from objectivity. Through the Directed Research projects, students will contribute to a growing body of scientific research that informs local conservation and resource management decisions and furthers the Center’s research agenda.

Each student will join a faculty-led team that will carry out field research, data analysis, and communication of results in one or across several of the following disciplines: ecology, natural resource management, and social sciences. The Directed Research course is designed to build on the information students have learned in the topical courses as well as Directed Research lectures and workshops specifically designed to assist students in understanding the scientific process, testing hypotheses and presenting results in both written and spoken formats (see below for these courses).

Some of the research projects being conducted this semester are still being finalized, pending discussions with collaborators and the outcomes of Scientific Purposes and ethics applications.

Please be aware that the following DR topics are from the previous semester and may change in future terms based on local conditions, research permits, learning opportunities, and faculty expertise.

1. Project Supervisor: Catherine Pohlman

Dr. Catherine Pohlman will continue research on Topic 1.4.1: Dynamic rainforest boundaries and the enigma of wet sclerophyll forests.

Rainforest and savanna are considered to constitute two alternate stable ecosystem states in many tropical landscapes, with boundaries between these two states mediated by fire. Rainforest has been observed to be expanding into savanna around the tropics over the past half century, although the causes of this expansion are still hotly debated. Leading hypotheses include (1) changes in fire regime (e.g., due to the discontinuation of Indigenous burning practices, or changes in land management practices), (2) overgrazing, and (3) increasing atmospheric pCO2 providing a competitive advantage to rainforest over savanna.

In Australia, an additional ecosystem type sometimes occurs between the boundaries of rainforest and savanna. Wet sclerophyll forests, also known as tall open forests, have puzzled scientists for many decades. These forests occur in a thin strip on the western edge of rainforests that extends from northeastern Queensland to the southernmost parts of Tasmania. The canopy of these forests is composed of very tall Eucalyptus species (e.g., E. grandis, E. regnans, E. obliqua, E. delegatensis, E. pilularis, E. viminalis, E. resinifera, E. pellita), while the understorey may be composed of grasses and sclerophyll shrubs, or even immature rainforest species. Scientists are divided on whether wet sclerophyll forests represent (1) the tallest and wettest variety of sclerophyll forests and woodlands (widespread flammable vegetation that dominates most of Australia), (2) the driest variety of rainforest (fire-sensitive vegetation), or (3) a transitional state between flammable sclerophyll vegetation and fire-sensitive rainforest.

For this project, we will examine the vegetation structure, floristic composition and plant functional traits of (1) transects between savanna, wet sclerophyll and rainforest and (2) transects between savanna and rainforest (i.e., ecotones where wet sclerophyll vegetation does not occur) on the Atherton Tablelands. We will also attempt to reconstruct a preliminary fire history across these transects. This project falls within Component 1 of the CRS five-year research plan (Understanding social and ecological systems). We will attempt to address some of the following questions:

• How are species composition and vegetation structure related to fire history? • Are all types of wet sclerophyll vegetation functionally similar? A number of different plant assemblages have been classified as “wet sclerophyll” but these assemblages are known to differ markedly in species composition and vegetation structure. Perhaps these assemblages also differ in their functional traits and ecology? • Some scientists have expressed concern that rainforest may be “colonizing” wet sclerophyll forest. Are these concerns warranted, or are we merely observing a normal part of the ecology of these forests? What are the historical patterns of rainforest colonization of wet sclerophyll forests? Are these driven by changes in fire regimes, or perhaps by increasing atmospheric CO2, or both? • Is wet sclerophyll vegetation expanding into dry sclerophyll and savannah vegetation, perhaps in a manner similar to the expansion of rainforest into wet sclerophyll? • What ecological patterns and processes are involved in the expansion of rainforest into savanna (with or without the presence of wet sclerophyll vegetation)?

2. Project Supervisor: Sigrid Heise-Pavlov

Professor Dr. Sigrid Heise-Pavlov will offer Directed Research projects linked to the SFS-CRS Strategic Research Plan Topic 3.2: Monitoring the outcomes of Ecological Restoration

Since 2016 CRS-SFS collates and maintains a database on revegetation projects on the Atherton Tablelands (Stieglitz 2016). While the database was originally GIS based, a more user-friendly database in MS Access was developed in Wet 2018 (Collins et al. 2018). This semester’s DR project will add spatial data from older revegetation sites that haven’t been included in the GIS based database, and will increase the effectiveness of the created MS Access database by linking it to information of the spatial database.

Because the created databases aim at the identification of best-practice restoration principles, monitoring of the development of the sites is essential and should follow systematic methodological protocols. Results of monitoring will be part of the databases and this semester’s DRs will aim at piloting the monitoring of floristic and faunal elements of restoration sites. Although protocols for monitoring site conditions, forest structure, plant composition and bird communities are available (Kanowski et al. 2010) there is a lack of pre-defined methodologies to monitor other fauna elements on rainforest revegetation sites. However, previous DR projects of CRS investigated the compositions of various invertebrates on restoration sites (Burgio 2009; Morrison 2009; Cathcart 2009; Reynolds 2010; Myers 2010; Farr 2013). These DRs shall be a starting point for a review on methods that had previously been applied to rainforest revegetation sites to develop a tool kit that can assist in monitoring the colonization of restoration sites by invertebrates and vertebrates in a cost-and time efficient way.

Outcomes of these DR projects will improve the existing databases on rainforest restoration projects of the Atherton Tablelands and will lay the baseline for the development of a systematic monitoring program of rainforest restoration sites that can be implemented through citizen science projects in future years. Results will help to demonstrate the magnitude and effects of rainforest restoration projects on the Tablelands and will therefore also strengthen CRS’s contribution to community- driven restoration work on the Tablelands.

Burgio, K. (2009) Ant genera composition in differently aged restoration sites. - Directed Research CRS-SFS

Cathcart, E. (2010) Assessing the suitability of revegetation sites for microchiropteran species in the Wet Tropics.- Directed Research CRS-SFS

Collins, K., Hunsaker, W. and Kohlruss-Reuman, P. (2018). A tale of two databases. - Directed Research CRS-SFS

Farr, M. (2013) Impact of forest edges on microhabitat preferences of skinks within restoration sites in the Australian Wet Tropics. - Directed Research CRS-SFS

Morrison, K. (2009) Investigations into the connection between spider assemblages and restoration sites in the Wet Tropics of North Queensland, Australia. -Directed Research CRS-SFS

Myers, R. (2010) Microhabitat requirements and behaviours of ant functional groups that allow for their co-existence: a recommendation for restoration practices. - Directed Research CRS-SFS

Kanowski, J., C. P. Catterall, K. Freebody, A. N. Freeman, and D. A. Harrison (2010). Monitoring revegetation projects in rainforest landscapes - Toolkit version 3. Reef and Rainforest Research Centre Limited, Cairns.

Reynolds, T. (2010) Ants as bioindicators: genera richness, abundance and coexistence in Australian rainforest restoration sites. - Directed Research CRS-SFS

Stieglitz, N. (2016). Creating a GIS database to assist revegetation projects in the Atherton Tablelands. - Directed Research CRS-SFS

3. Project Supervisor: Justus Kithiia

Associate Professor Justus Kithiia will offer a Directed Research project linked to the SFS-CRS Strategic Research Plan Topic 3.3: Sustainable human communities and industries

The notion that a person’s experience with weather related phenomenon provides a potentially important route to engagement with climate change has often been suggested (see Lorenzoni and Pidgeon 2006; Weber 2010). Climate change is itself not directly observable and is really only understood through mathematical models and scientific measurements. However, individuals can experience and observe the climate through seasonal events and weather, in which case, they can judge the changes occurring due to changes in climate. Both phenological research (recording of seasonal events) and individual observations of certain events/behaviours have proven useful in verifying, clarifying and documenting the impacts of climate change. Hence, understanding the links between local weather events and climate change is a useful strategy for increasing concern and action in addressing the impacts of climate change. Furthermore, relating local events to climate change may have perpetual and behavioural impacts, to the extent that these help make the issue less distant; and if local people are able to relate to potential consequences of the impacts, then they may be more likely to feel that their behaviours can lead to changes in these impacts. Indeed, most researchers agree that directly or indirectly, what the public thinks has a great deal of influence on policy making (Boston et al 1994; Kempton et al 1995)

In view of the above, and given that climate change has gained salience in the last decade, it is timely to examine potential relationships between the experiences of extreme weather events, environmental attitudes and belief in climate change. This is especially important for the Australian Wet Tropics region, where, in my view, there is a lack of both social survey data that spatially aligns with the local weather model outputs, and an understanding of how environmental attitudes affect people’s belief in climate change

In exploring this issue, the following questions would be addressed:-

• whether the views of the local people align with climate science (model outputs) at the local level • whether public concern about climate change is related to the personal experience with impacts • whether there exists a correlation between people’s attitudes towards the environment and their belief in climate change • whether there exists cultural relativity of perception within the same locality, including any differences in gender and ethnicity.

Overall, understanding the public perception of climate change is critical for developing effective strategies to mitigate the effects of human activities on the natural environment and reduce human vulnerability to the impacts of climate change.

Reading List:

Fischhoff B (1985) Managing risk perceptions. Issues Sci Technol 2:83–96

Kempton W, Boster JS, Hartley JA (1995) Environmental values in American culture. MIT Press, Cambridge

Lorenzoni I, Pidgeon NF (2006) Public views on climate change: European and USA perspectives. Clim Chang 77:73–95

Weber EU (2010) What shapes perceptions of climate change? Wiley Inter Rev: Clim Chang 1:332– 342

Ruddell, et al (2012) Scales of perception: public awareness of regional and neighbourhood climates. Climatic Change, 111:581–607

Spence et al, (2011) Perceptions of climate change and willingness to save energy related to flood experience. Nature climate change, DOI: 10.1038/NCLIMATE1059

Assessment

You will present your DR projects in the standard scientific formats of a peer-review style report and a conference style presentation. You will also be graded on your data management/proposal. Comprehensive details of all assignments will be provided separately, see below for the general descriptions and expectations.

Assessment Item Value (%) Final Report 70 Oral Presentation 15 Poster 5 Data Management/proposal (Socio-econ DR) 10

TOTAL 100

Final Report (70%): The final report is written in the style of a submission to a peer-reviewed journal in the appropriate field. You will have ample opportunity for guidance from your DR supervisor(s) throughout the DR period and especially during data collection, data analysis and draft writing. The analytical tools for research workshops in the DR course (and complementary classes in other courses) are designed to prepare you for producing the Results section and improve the quality of your work.

Oral Presentation (15%): You will present a subset of your DR work in a conference style presentation of 12 min length with additional time for questions. Unless the scope of your DR project is very small, you should not attempt to squeeze in everything from your final report into this presentation. Making sure that you are within the time limit is a very important skill and so thorough rehearsal is important.

Poster (5%): You will design and produce a poster from your research to display at our Community Presentation function. The format for the poster will be provided by faculty.

Data Management (10%): It is important to record and store research data in a manner that is useful. You will need to provide (as applicable) Excel sheets with your research data in a format that is intelligible to someone else. You may need to provide both raw and manipulated data you used to create figures, tables and to run statistical tests. You need to annotate your spreadsheets (use text boxes if appropriate) so that an outsider can understand what the data are. You may be required to provide field notes on your findings for review. OR

Proposal (Socio-econ DR): Students who will be involved in the EP and Socio-economic Value DR project will be required to come up with proposals consisting of an introduction and methods sections.

Collaborative and Individual Research Options Students will be expected to follow either an individual or collaborative research track. Collaborating students will undertake the assessment tasks collaboratively and will be awarded marks based on their supervisor and peer-assessed level of contribution to the group effort. Each group member will complete a confidential ‘’marks allocation form’’ indicating the percentage contribution of individual members to the assessment task. Students following the individual track will be graded based on their sole effort.

In awarding the final individual marks to collaborating students, the supervisor will not necessarily be bound by the peer-assessed distribution of the marks.

Grading Scheme

A 95.00 - 100% B+ 86.00 - 89.99% C+ 76.00 - 79.99% D 60.00 - 69.99% A- 90.00 - 94.99% B 83.00 - 85.99% C 73.00 - 75.99% F <60.00% B- 80.00 - 82.99% C- 70.00 - 72.99%

General Reminders Plagiarism: Using the ideas and material of others without giving due credit, is cheating and will not be tolerated. A grade of zero will be assigned if anyone is caught cheating or aiding another person to cheat actively or passively (e.g., allowing someone to look at your exam). All assignments unless specifically stated should be individual pieces of work.

Deadlines: Deadlines for written and oral assignments are instated for several reasons: they are a part of working life to which students need to become accustomed and promote equity among students. Deadlines allow faculty ample time to review and return assignments before others are due.

Late assignments will incur a 10% penalty for each day that they are late. No assignment will be accepted after three days. Assignments will be handed back to students after a one-week grading period.

Participation: Since we offer a program that is likely more intensive than you might be used to at your home institution, missing even one lecture can have a proportionally greater effect on your final grade simply because there is little room to make up for lost time. Participation in all components of the program is mandatory because your actions can significantly affect the experience you and your classmates have while at SFS. Therefore, it is important that you are prompt for all DR activities, bring the necessary equipment for field research, and simply get involved. Course Content DR Coursework Component: The coursework component of the DR is designed to prepare students to conduct scientific research. The lectures are delivered throughout the semester, in conjunction with the topical courses, so that students are well prepared to work with their faculty mentor on meaningful research. L: Lecture, FL: Field Lecture, FEX: Field Exercise, T: Test, D: Discussion or Breakout Session. Lecture Title and Description Type Time (hrs.) Lecturer DR01 DR Course Introduction L 1.5 All DR02 Introduction to Scientific Writing & Reading L 1.5 SH/CP Explore the difference between primary and secondary sources; expectations and standards of scientific writing; describe expectations for DR papers DR03 Research Ethics L 2 SH/JK Introduce students to the ethical considerations involved in research (e.g. human subject’s protection, data integrity and management). DR04 Risk & Time Management in Field Research L 1 SAM/Faculty DR05 Effective Scientific Communication Skills L 2 JK/SH Students will understand the importance of practicing scientific communication skills (oral and poster presentations) and start to think about how to address different audiences. DR06 Introduction to Statistical Analysis L 2 CP You will be given a brief introduction to basic statistical analyses during a series of workshops throughout the semester. These workshops will be combined with classes from the SFS 3700 course to allow you to apply statistical methods to ‘real-world’ questions.

DR07 Project Development & Proposal D 2 All Faculty and students will meet to refine their specific DR topics. Total 12

DR Research Component: The rest of the DR course is made up of research time, which includes: data collection; synthesis; and dissemination. Given the intense and mentored nature of the Directed Research project, students receive over 140 contact hours during this time period.

Research Component Activity Days Allocated Data Collection 11 Students work within their DR group to go into the field to collect data

Research Component Activity Days Allocated Data Synthesis 8 Students work closely with their faculty mentors to analyze their collected data and write up their findings in a structured scientific paper Research Dissemination 3 Students prepare, practice, and then deliver presentations for both internal SFS and community audiences. Total 22 days