Conclusion

I hope you’ve enjoyed learning more about the world of online ecology transcriptions! If you have any questions about the work described here, please don’t hesitate to reach out.

While I have concerns about the long-term utility of this project, it is nonetheless a well-designed and easily accessible citizen science project. Most importantly, it is a great opportunity for conservationists on the go. If you have even five minutes, you can make a difference through this project. How many other programs can claim this same?

 

Thanks for reading!

Sincerely,
Caitlin Verdu

Conservation Threats Addressed

This post is long overdue. I wanted to fully understand the research project before tackling the conservation threats that this citizen science project addresses. This question is particularly complicated for these online transcriptions because there are so many potential uses for this data.

Instead of trying to address them all, I will focus on the issue addressed by the Virginia Master Naturalists: Pollinator Plants. So why should we care about pollinator plants?

First, let’s establish why pollinators are important.

According to Ollerton, Winfree and Tarrant, approximately 87.5% of flowering plants rely on pollinators (2011). The US Fish and Wildlife Service estimates that roughly 75% of crops also depend on these animals. Without these organisms, humans can say goodbye to foods like apples, almonds, chocolate, coffee, and many others (US Fish and Wildlife Service).

Beyond the apocalyptic potential of a world without coffee, pollinators also support ecosystem health. The Pollinator Partnership explains that by ensuring flowering plants are able to prosper, pollinators play a role in combating soil erosion and increasing carbon sequestration (Pollinator Partnership). This means healthier soils for all kinds of plants and less carbon in the atmosphere. We’ve spent a lot of time this semester discussing the effects of climate change, so I won’t elaborate here on why reducing carbon is so critical.

So now that we’ve established why we need pollinators, let’s talk about pollinator plants.

The Committee on Status of Pollinators in North America cites habitat loss and degradation as a core threat facing pollinators. Their report states that insect pollinators need suitable nectar and pollen to survive (2007). This is where pollinator plants come in. These species of flowering plants provide much-needed food sources for our valuable pollinators.

The Committee on Status of Pollinators in North America continues, explaining that humans can support pollinators by ensuring that there are a variety of flowering plants which will provide sufficient pollen and nectar through the growing season (2007). For example, if a county only has plants that provide food for 2 weeks out of the year, pollinators won’t be able to survive there. And since different insects prefer to visit different flowers, having a variety of pollinator plant available matters.

This is where the citizen science project comes in.

The SERNEC data reveals where particular pollinator friendly plants (among many other kinds of species) are located. I can think of a number of potential uses for this data.

First, scientists might want to know which plants are in their region. For example, let’s say someone is only interested in plants located in a particular county. If they can learn which plants have been recorded there with a quick online search, they won’t have to go out into the field to inspect the area in person. This would be especially useful (and cost-saving) for scientists who live far away from their study sites.

This tool would also help scientists who are trying to locate a specific plant. I worked on a milkweed population dynamics study in college, and we were only interested in finding common milkweed. We spent a great deal of time searching for this plant out in the field. If we had already known where we could expect to find it, we could have saved time searching in vain (saving time, money, and unpaid intern energy).

Along those lines, this tool could also help scientists set the scope of their investigation before it even begins. To use my milkweed example again, what if we had discovered that there was no common milkweed within 50 miles of campus? Our travel expenses would have been much higher. Our Principal Investigator would likely need to request additional travel funds to support our research, or we would have had to sacrifice other areas of our budget.

These are just a few of this database’s potential uses. However, as I mentioned previously, it’s still unclear if scientists utilize this transcription data to inform their research. My investigation did not reveal any evidence that they do. However, this may still change. If scientists eventually key in to this database, it may improve their research. This may mean more effective pollinator plant studies, leading to stronger conservation responses, and hopefully, a secure future for our prized fruits, chocolate, and coffee crops.

Sources

Committee on Status of Pollinators in North America. (2007). Status of Pollinators in North America. The National Academies Press. Retrieved from https://www.nap.edu/read/11761/chapter/5#93

Ollerton, J., Winfree, R., Tarrant, S. (21 February 2011). How many flowering plants are pollinated by animals? Oikos 120:321-326. Retrieved from https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/j.1600-0706.2010.18644.x

Pollinator Partnership. (n.d.). Pollinators need you. You need pollinators. Retrieved from http://pollinator.org/pollinators

US Fish and Wildlife Service. (n.d.). Pollinators. Retrieved from https://www.fws.gov/pollinators/

Do Scientists Actually Use this Data?

I spent some serious time digging around on the website to find an answer. Here’s what I know:

Notes from Nature takes specific sets of field notes (Pollinator Plants of Virginia, for example), and facilitates volunteer transcription of those images. There doesn’t seem to be much publication at this level. Zooniverse, the parent organization of Notes from Nature, lists its publications here.

According to their site, Notes from Nature has only led to a single publication, entitled “Workforce-efficient consensus in crowdsourced transcription of biocollections information.” This work focuses on the process of volunteer transcriptions rather than the data itself.

After volunteers log the data, Notes from Nature sends that data to SERNEC (Southeast Regional Network of Expertise and Collections). Their goal is to “provide herbarium specimen images and metadata from one of the most botanically diverse regions of the earth with the goal of facilitating better research, better management planning and a more well-informed public” (SERNEC).

So what happens next?

I have not been able to find any publications listing SERNEC as a data source. Perhaps this information exists, but is just not publicly available. I imagine that the National Science Foundation would want to know that scientists are actually using the data, so perhaps this is something they track internally.

I stumbled across the SERNEC Bimonthly Report February 2018-1. In this document, SERNEC lists its education and outreach activities by state. Highlights from February include a tour and demonstration to Museum Studies students in Florida, a girl scout flower badge program in West Virginia, and a new Curation of Collections course in Arkansas.

If this truly the extent of SERNEC’s data usage, this presents a major issue with the transcription project. This whole effort hinges upon making data available for scientists to use, yet I cannot find any evidence that scientists are actually taking advantage of the resource. If they are, this information is certainly not easy to find. If they aren’t, then Notes from Nature and SERNEC need to refocus attention towards this outreach. If my research is any indication, then SERNEC has put the cart before the horse. They have a great collection of data with no-one to use it.

Perhaps this piece will come in time. Maybe scientists are waiting for more data to become available before looking towards SERNEC as a trusted resource. Or maybe not. If I was in charge, I would start directing time and energy towards attracting scientists towards these collections. If this information does not begin to enhance scientific research, then it seems like a waste of resources.

Breaking News (Update)

I mentioned earlier that the Master Naturalist database on Pollinator Plants of Virginia disappeared partway through the semester. I just discovered a section on the website for “completed expeditions,” that is, projects where all the specimens have been sufficiently transcribed. Lo and behold, Pollinator Plants of Virginia is finished!

Master Naturalists (and any other volunteers, if there in fact were any) transcribed 4673 specimens in just 70 days. Remember, that means that several people worked on the same specimens to ensure accuracy, so the number of transcriptions is in fact much higher.  You can see from the screenshots that we worked faster than some of the comparable projects. Way to go Master Naturalists!

Here are just some of the other completed plant projects. Looks like the volunteers have been hard at work.

Check out the stats for number of specimens and time to complete. Master Naturalists must work quickly!

Record of Work

As requested, here are the dates and times I worked on this project.

April 11: after work (30 minutes)

April 12: lunch break (20 minutes)

April 15: morning and afternoon (4 hours)

April 16: evening (15 minutes)

April 20: morning and afternoon (3 hours)

A Look into Public Outreach

While I think this project is very easy to use and is attractive to online citizen scientists, it’s not especially well-advertised. As far as I can tell, Master Naturalists conduct the bulk of the work.

I don’t necessarily see this as a problem though. For one, it seems like there is sufficient volunteer labor to create the desired outputs. Secondly, unlike other citizen science projects that I’ve seen (invasive surveys, deer studies, frog watch, bird counts, etc.), there is less emphasis on empowering the individual volunteers. I don’t think Notes from Nature expects to change anyone’s worldview by logging transcriptions. Nor is there a clearly defined path for volunteers to get more involved after participating in this activity.

I think instead, Notes from Nature is solely focused on creating a massive database from ecology field notes for further scientific use. Now, I have yet to decide if scientists are utilizing this resource. If not, then that would present an outreach problem for Notes from Nature. More on that soon.

Otherwise, I think Notes from Nature is well-designed from the volunteer perspective. It’s quick to learn (no training needed), can be done 100% remotely at any time of day, and has systems in place to double check volunteer work. It may not be the most glamorous project out there, but it’s well constructed to meet its goals.

Internet Detective

Sometimes I feel like a bit of a detective working on these transcriptions. As I mentioned before, each specimen requires a country, state, and county location. Sometimes this data is totally missing and I just have to leave it blank. Other times, the field researcher will just leave a clue.

For instance, one of my recent transcriptions was for a specimen found in “Denver, PA.” A quick google search reveals that this spot is in Lancaster County. I’ve also seen specimens identified solely by state park. Thankfully, the internet makes these locations extraordinarily easy to pinpoint (as long as the researcher’s handwriting is legible!)

I was about to say that this would have been infinitely more difficult without the internet. But of course, that’s the whole point of this project. Without the internet, this effort would not be possible. Without it, scientists interested in this data would have to pour over thousands of hand-written notes. Now, with a couple of quick clicks they can find exactly what they’re looking for.

This weekend, I’m going to spend some time investigating exactly what research this data has supported. I’m hopeful it’s actually being utilized, but you’ll have to stay tuned to find out.

Breaking News!

Today when I logged in, I found that the Virginia Pollinator Plants database is gone! Perhaps volunteers already completed all the transcriptions? Or does Notes from Nature give each project a limited amount of time to complete its work?

In addition to this missing file, there’s a new “Bugs” category on the site. I’ll check that out shortly.

Even though the Virginia specific project is (apparently) complete, I’ll spend the rest of my volunteer time assisting with the remaining online initiatives. The butterfly and moth category in particular has been especially interesting.

 

A new Bug category emerges!

Goodbye, VA Pollinator Plants.

Attracting Volunteers

I think the “Digitizing Virginia’s Herbaria for Research and Education” project made a smart decision by partnering with Virginia Master Naturalists. In my experience, Master Naturalists make fabulous volunteers. Their initial class training is extensive and rigorous. Once trained, Master Naturalists need to complete 40 hours of service annually, along with 8 hours on continuing education, to keep their certifications current.

Beyond these requirements, Master Naturalists are often genuinely passionate and interested in conservation. Because of these factors, this volunteer group has a tremendous impact on Virginia’s environment. In 2017, 1841 volunteers completed more than 155,000 service hours (2017 Annual Report). This figure is also conservative—most Master Naturalists that I know fail to properly record their hours.

The online transcription program may have trouble keeping this group’s attention. Throughout the state, Master Naturalists participate in over 100 citizen science projects. That means as long as they’re not trying to schedule their activities in February and March, there’s likely some competition for volunteers among these projects. That said, the online format would be useful for volunteers trying to cram in those final hours in order to certify.

Beyond the Master Naturalists, it’s not clear who (if anyone) participates in this program. So if the project would like to expand its outputs, I suggest finding new sources of volunteers would be the first step.

For more information on the Master Naturalists, check out their website to find a chapter new you!

 

Looking into the Future

While I’m enjoying my time working on these online transcriptions, I don’t think I’m likely to continue after the semester.

Once I complete my Masters requirements, I’d like to get more involved with ARMN’s in-person citizen science projects. They have a frog watch program that I’m very interested in, and I’ve heard good things about our stream monitoring teams as well.

Most of all, I’d like to pursue the Chesapeake Bay Foundation’s Grasses for the Masses program. In this project, individuals grow wild celery grasses in big plastic tins. After helping the plants grow from seeds into maturity, CBF sponsors field trips where students and families can transplant their grasses into the Bay.

I think this would be a fabulous program for Arlington Public Schools. Not only does it promote classroom science skills, but it ties in beautifully with a local conservation issue. I am hopeful that through Arlington 4-H, I can entice some teachers to give this activity a shot. Personally, I think that would be much more rewarding and powerful than the online transcriptions.

However, I’d like to reiterate—this online platform was perfect for my needs this semester. If I had tried to keep high-maintenance underwater grasses alive, I don’t think I would have been nearly as successful!