The Cataract Gorge in Launceston, Tasmania, where the 2019 Ecological Society of Australia Annual Meeting was held (Image Credit: Marina Schmoeller, CC BY 2.0)
I just got back from 10 days in Tasmania, Australia. As a temporary visitor in the country, I extended my trip to attend the Ecological Society of Australia’s annual conference (ESAus) as much as I could, so I could explore the surroundings and get to know a little of the place, its people and its unique biodiversity.
The conference was held in Launceston, the second largest city in Tasmania. With about ninety thousand inhabitants, a rich history with deep roots in its eye-catching landscapes, the Tamar River Valley and the Cataract Gorge, Launceston is a charming place with a lot to offer all visitors. But let’s talk about the conference.
It was easy to feel inspired about ecology with this view from the conference hotel.
It’s been two weeks since the 2019 Ecological Society of America conference and I’m still collecting all my thoughts about the meeting. My experience at ESA was, as they say, a little like drinking from a firehose: there was an enormous number of exciting talks, sessions, workshops, and networking opportunities, and I inevitably had time to experience only a fraction of them.
Image Credit: Chiltepinster, CC BY-SA 3.0, Image Cropped
I want to talk about a quandary I’ve encountered a few times recently, to which I still haven’t found any sort of resolution. It concerns people who have the right idea and intentions, and are helping to contribute a better world through lifestyle choices, yet have been grossly misled on a few key facts.
Species associations will change as the climate rises. So how can we attempt to predict these changes (Image Credit: Charles J Sharp, CC BY-SA 4.0, Image Cropped)
Using joint species distribution models for evaluating how species-to-species associations depend on the environmental context (2017) Tikhonov et al, Methods in Ecology and Evolution, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12723
Statistical modelling is a crucial part of ecology. Being able to provide an (admittedly simplified) mathematical description of the relationship between species abundance, range or density and the surrounding environment is a huge help in taking proactive steps to manage an ecosystem, or predicting species numbers in other areas.
Historically models have used environmental variables to explain population or evolutionary developments in species. When modelling a single species, many ecologists have taken into account that the presence of other species (for example competitors or predators) may influence the presence of this single species. This has led to the rise of joint species distribution models (JSDMs), which take into account environmental variables, as well as the interactions between certain species. These models have become increasingly useful, and with environmental change now being the norm in many ecosystems, this week’s authors produced one such model that accounts for changes in species interactions in the face of changing environmental factors.
The Northern Pike. Although it’s native to Norway, it has been moved around since and is now classified as ‘regionally invasive’. (Image Credit: Jik jik, CC BY-SA 2.0)
Two weeks ago, Norwegian Science Institute Artsdatabanken (ADB) announced that they would be changing the name of their invasive and alien species index. Formerly known as the Black List, the institute decided to use a name with less negative connotations, “Fremmedartslista“, loosely translated, the Alien Species list. Given this series’ focus on species from that list, it seems like an appropriate time to look at how we define the terms ‘alien’ or ‘invasive’ species.