STRI'S TROPICAL BIOLOGY FIELD COURSE

By Daniela Mera & Dirley Cortés

           Full House: the spread of excellence from Plato to Darwin (Gould, 1996). The world, organized through a progression in perfection. The scala naturae (Valdes, 1579): earth’s organisms organized according to an increasing scale of perfection from the least ‘perfect [simple]’ ones at the bottom to the most ‘perfect [complex]’ ones at the top. From Plato: nature being organized hierarchically, where things progress from simple to perfect (primitive to most advanced). The least perfect organisms share a degree of ‘complexity’ completely lesser compared to the most perfect ones, which share in turn a similar degree of ‘complexity’. No intermediary stages between these two. A direction in evolution is now conceived. To Darwin: gradual transformations and diversification. Misunderstanding represented in a number of books as a linear tendency. Origin of Species (Darwin, 1856), showing indeed a branching tree to explain how species originate. All organisms in the tree are equally evolved being influenced by natural selection. There is no a direction in evolution according to Darwin. Gradualism and linearity, a misconception during Darwin’s time: ape-to-human progression. All life is in turn related. ‘Species are not immutable’ (Darwin, 1844). There are changes over time in response to natural selection (even though no fossils were recognized at that time!).

           All over the media, we see images like the ape-to-human straight line. Evolution follows a straight line based on those diagrams upon naked-eye observations. We see then the linear progression in complexity. Is it true that evolution embodies a trend? A tendency for earth’s organisms to ‘increase in anatomical complexity, or neurological elaboration, or size and flexibility or behavioral repertoire, or any criterion obviously concocted (if we would only be honest and introspective enough about our motives) to place Homo sapiens a top a supposed heap”?(Gould, 1996, p. 19). Another way of drawing this ‘progression in perfection’ path is by a pyramid, ‘with man, the most complex but least numerous organism, at the apex, and viruses, the most numerous but least complex organisms, at the base’ (Gould, 1996, p. 25). So, how is that ‘a few creatures have evolved greater complexity in the only direction open to variation [?]. The mode has remained rock-solid on bacteria throughout the history of life -and bacteria, by any reasonable criterion, were in the beginning, are now, and ever shall be the most successful organisms on earth’ (Gould, 1996 p. 38). Now think about this for a moment, and realize that the claim about an increase in complexity of life reflecting a drive to progress in evolution is a tremendous fallacy. Nobody more assertive than S.J. Gould to describe it with such prose:

           ‘Natural evolution includes no principle of predictable progress or movement to greater complexity. But cultural change is potentially progressive or self-complexifying because Lamarckian inheritance accumulates favorable innovations by direct transmission, and amalgamation of traditions allows any culture to choose and join the most useful inventions of several separate societies’ (Gould, 1996 p. 222).

            That is why we must examine the ‘full house’ of the total system of a biological system, and not only a narrow aspect of it (Gould, 1996; Weijer, 1997).

           Here is how our reflection of the Complexity of Life started and what we did learn from it.

           “Complexity” is defined by the Cambridge dictionary as the ‘quality or condition of being difficult to understand’, while other general definitions state that complexity means lacking simplicity. Specific definitions based on the theory of systems incorporate more details to the general definition of complexity in order to quantify somehow such convoluted characteristics (Baeta and Montero 2006). Do these definitions integrate complexity in natural evolution?

           Over dinner in the Gamboa schoolhouse, some people came up with some exciting questions in-depth related to how we define ‘complexity’. What is a complex organism? What is complex in a complex world? Are some organisms more complex than others? Are we biased when we talk about complexity?

           In the discussion we had, we realized that scientists use the word ‘complexity’ indiscriminately and without paying much attention, and we talk about complex patterns, complex systems, complex communication signals, complex physiological mechanisms, etc. However, what do we mean accurately by ‘complexity’?

           Despite the fact that some people think that complexity is measurable, complexity is still very ambiguous and subjective. This was reflected in our conversation in which some of us were arguing that humans are the most complex organism in the tree of life due to the communication capabilities of humans (speaking multiple languages and having a ‘unique’ brain), for being aware of their owns existence along with doing research about surrounding species, for making world impact decisions, and being able to live in societies, among others. These morphological and behavioral capacities place humans -based on our discussion classmates- on top of the complexity pyramid. 

           If we mention remarkable features of the human species, we can also highlight a few other species’ impressive capabilities. For instance, some type of bacteria are able to survive 100°C temperatures (e.g. Wharton, 2004), some fish species lice in the dark depth of the ocean (e.g. Hornung et al. 2003), and a few locusts are able to fly 4,500 km in 10 days (e.g. Hunter 2004). All of these characteristics are unique to those groups, and compared to human species, advantages and disadvantages can be recognized with ease. As differences came up, we cannot acknowledge that humans are less complex because of the fact they lack these characteristics. How would you argue here against this thesis when most of we see on media or vaguely read in books and blogs or even hear from colleagues shows the opposite?

           Something to be considered that afternoon and which we need to take with caution here is the human egocentrism (should we then call it as self-complexity?). Probably, because a social/cultural reasons, we consider (and we wish) ourselves to be on top of anything being then more important than everything. This anthropocentric behavior probably also drives our actions and decisions regarding how we inhabit, share and behave towards other earth’s organisms, their environment, and even other humans!

           After a chaotic initial discussion, we could not get to a consensus! Some of us disagreed with this previous idea mostly because we find really mistaken to consider a ‘progression-in-perfection hierarchy’ within earth’s organisms displaying in the tree of life. As previous brilliant minds pointed out before (e.g. C. Darwin and S.J. Gould), we think that evolution is not linear, that there is not such complexity in that path, and that conceiving a trend in life forms is inaccurate and lacked ‘full house’ attributes. Instead, we see diversification (and innovations) of life forms, exhibiting protuberant and protruding branches following several paths. So, finding a more complex clade on top of it is highly dubious.

           A final aspect to reflect from is that some people consider humans to be on top of the complexity scale, probably because they are the best known and studied species worldwide (e.g. 3’575.260 documents for humans vs. 2’445.892 for category-plants vs. 1’975.535 for mice, Feb 2020). Humans have been always concerned about their own survival as well as questioning their own existence. However, we cannot underestimate other organisms’ complexity because of our lacking of knowledge about the indisputable other 99.99% of extant and extinct species natural history!

           In conclusion, we consider that complexity is by itself a characteristic of every organism in the tree of life. From the very small inconspicuous bacteria to the marine mammal megafauna, including all different kind of ecological interconnections within them, taking different paths along the tree branches, placed over a micro to macro spatiotemporal scales and being permeated by atoms and linked to the galaxies, it is alarming, inconceivable, nonsense, and even funny to this point, to grant a single species with the attribute of being either complex or simple without considering a holistic vision of evolution, the ‘full house’ of the total system of a biological system. If we rather prefer to opt for a <human self-complexity to camouflage complexity in natural evolution> perspective, then we see a predictable (and needless to say) trend here, at least for us.

References

Baeta C., Monteiro F. 2006. O que há de complexo no mundo complexo? Niklas Luhmann e a Teoria dos Sistemas Sociais. Sociologias. http://dx.doi.org/10.1590/S1517-45222006000100007 

Darwin, C. 1856. On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection, or the preservation of favoured races in the struggle for life. (1809-1882). London: John Murray.

Darwin, C. 1844. In letters. The foundations of the Origin of Species. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. https://www.darwinproject.ac.uk/letters/darwins-life-letters/darwin-letters-1844-1846-building-scientific-network

Gould, S. Jay. 1996. Full House : The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin, 1st ed. Harmony Books, New York, pp.

Hornung H., Sukenik A., Gabrielides G. 2003. Distribution and composition of fatty acids in muscle lipids of inshore fish and deep water sharks from the eastern Mediterranean. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 28(7): 448-450

Hunter D. 2004. Advances in the control of locusts (Orthoptera: Acrididae) in eastern Australia: from crop protection to preventive control. Australian Journal of entomology. 43 (3): 293-303 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1326-6756.2004.00433.x

Hornung H., Sukenik A., Gabrielides G. 2003. Distribution and composition of fatty acids in muscle lipids of inshore fish and deep water sharks from the eastern Mediterranean. Marine Pollution Bulletin. 28(7): 448-450

Valdes, D. 1579. Scala naturae. Rhetorica Christiana. From the original held by the Dep. Sp. Col. Herburgh Libraries of the University of Notre Dame.

Wharton D. Life at the limits. Organisms in extreme environments. Department of zoology. University of Otago. New Zealand. Cambridge University press. pp. 87

Weijer, C. 1997. Full House: The Spread of Excellence from Plato to Darwin. BMJ, 314 (7082), p.761.

By Dirley Cortés

“In its belly, you will find a new definition of pain and suffering as you are slowly digested over a… thousand years.” – C-3PO Jabba the Hutt.

The Star Wars’ carnivorous creature Sarlacc from the epic Great Pit of Carkoon battle (Planet Tatooine) in “Return of the Jedi: Ep 6” is not that far from the truth. Sarlacc has a trap in which skywalker is placed into. An antlion larva (Neuroptera: Myrmeleontidae) has perhaps the most exciting pit digging behavior provided by a hole engineering from which that scene was probably inspired.

Thus, bearing ambush tactics, the antlion larva lays pit-fall traps in sand/soil of 1-2 inches deep/width for small-sized arthropods to fall into it while patiently nestling underground. When feeling a disturbance, this hidden and tiny insect gets alert and carefully emerge their long and powerful mandibles slightly over the center of the pit.

There are three scenarios in which insects such as small ants may be involved in that scene:

First (conditioned freedom), an ant walks on the surface and passes really close around risking its life, but ending up entirely free for it did not fall into. Just like in Starwars, Jabba the Hutt attempts to drop Skywalker, Han Solo, and Chewbacca into the multi-tentacled beast. This time, Skywalker frees himself and the rest of them.

In a second scenario (conditioned break), an ant hangs out nearby and suddenly fall into one of those traps. If lucky, it escapes from a terrifying predator just climbing the steep side of that trap while it is being chased by the antlion with no success. In this case, the antlion would do its best effort to throw sand up toward the ant to pull down the ant once again into the pit. For that tiny ant, that is a huge avalanche. One more time, the ant does not give up, it climbs even more, even stronger and determinedly fighting face-to-face against the larva. Successfully for the already scared and tired ant, but unfortunately for the hungry and excited larva, this odyssey ends here, at least until a next and not far away from the trap.

In a more fascinating and tough scenario (becoming dinner), an ant unnoticeably falls into the trap being captured by the clever predator. Although it is not an easy task, that ant loses the fight giving the antlion the most desired banquet. By having a long tube, it secrets a paralytic venom full of enzymes that will slowly liquefy the ant. Once dinner is taken, a dried exoskeleton is now left.

Although cruel to many and dazzling to others, this is simply fascinating and fun to catch up!

*I have prepared a video including the above described three scenarios. Watch it here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y3O-iVSZWuo

**I noticed these traps for the first time during our expedition to BCI thanks to D. Gálvez who stopped by to explain it to me. There are many of those traps all over the BCI station, so J. Scott encouraged me to take some videos!

Dear colleague,

You have been doing very well. Your astonishing work in science and by providing outstanding and efficient service since you became a natural and curious scientist, you make the world a better place to live in. Naturally, we all are directly or indirectly grateful for such lifelong labor. However, I regret to say that it isn’t entirely meaningful to do science when we forget our inner naturalist and skip our appreciation of the natural world by rushing to collect data and speedy get published?

From my last personal experience in the field, I see this as being alarming, very alarming. Everyone rushing to collect and analyze data, to then spend hours playing with the results to be finally presented. But how can it be avoided? Perhaps by recovering a sense of carefully observing the amazing exposed rocks (or fossils if that is the case), touching the leaves and feeling the breeze, smelling the forest, listening to the creeks, drawing with no moderation, and even tasting (when possible) a pack of seeds … in other words, through a selfless and profound contemplative appreciation for Nature. Embracing modern science but remembering contemplative connection with nature will enable us to be that enthusiastic, humble, attuned and genuine about the natural world first, but also pooling our thoughts and observations after. Of course, we cannot claim to keep living in the preceding naturalists times (such as A.v. Humboldt**, G. Cuvier, J.F. Blumenbach, G.H. Karsten, S. Merian, J. Colden, E. Michael, C. Darwin, among others), but we can be still, mindful, watchful, and present as the contemporary naturalists we are (if there is room to house that word), balancing pure observation and today’s academic system challenges. 

Please do not take this as a complaint, and please do not feel I am assuming to tell you how to run your behavior and work while doing fieldwork. This letter is prompted solely by a desire to react following my personal experience and points of view about ways of doing science in today’s world, that misses someway the foundation of our spectacular predecessors. They made an effort to understand biodiversity, climate, evolution, geography, organisms, etc. through an in-depth thoughtful and pure observations, why on earth we are losing that particular and wholesome taste?

We all are privileged for having the chance to view the natural world from a holistic viewpoint and for doing what we love to do, satisfying our curiosity and understanding the natural world along the way starting from a single but significant question.

You are busy. Please do not trouble to answer this note.

Yours truly,

Dirley

*Along with to this letter, I have inserted some videos showing what astonished me the most during the TropicalBio expedition.  

Land: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6FKNNWOh6EA

Ocean: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=taVn3kLy6eU

**If you want to read a really inspiring book about one of the most innovative and crucial naturalists ever lived, Alexander von Humboldt, I highly recommend this one: “The Invention of Nature” by Andrea Wulf.

By Dirley Cortés

3 IDEAS FROM MY OWN EXPERIENCE DURING THE COURSE              

I.

The most effective form of getting your ideas across within colleagues is not speaking out loud, but seeking first to listen, and then kindly speaking about how their points integrate somehow with yours, even if they are completely opposite. As people often say, being kind is sometimes most important than trying to be right while proving others wrong. Here I also quote Henry ford: let’s ‘get the other person’s point of view and see things from his angle as well as from our own’.

II.

No matter how many times you have visited a place before, there’s always lots of first times in places, ecosystems, ideas, people, and experiences when you’re back again. And this is particularly true when coming back to Panama and STRI.

III.

How did life become so diverse? What does drive such diversity? How is that that diversity has maintained across millions of years? And why is there such high biodiversity in the Neotropics? 

Those are some of the most intriguing questions that scientists have been trying to address since the first naturalists undertook the most incredible explorations around the world back in the mid-18^th century. Yet, no single answer has come up after almost three centuries of explorations and research, and perhaps we never will fully know since the processes driving global-scale changes are too complex. Processes that have driven diversification of life across the Neotropics over millions of years may not be modeled or understood as a simple reductionist phenomenon. Nevertheless, articulating interdisciplinary perspectives to tackle those questions might provide important insights to improve our knowledge on this respect. That’s why STRI is that outstanding, and I’m happy to be part of it! 

2 IDEAS FROM OTHERS

I .

“Start with the question, then think of the study system” (Owen McMillan)

II.

“Macroevolutionary patterns arise from microevolutionary processes” (Ummat Somjee)

1 QUESTION FOR YOU

If a country’s economy depends upon the science, how would you influence a government person to set aside some of the national funding to invest in your project?

*The 3-2-1 format is inspired in the J.C. newsletter that I personally find really helpful and practical.

During the Tropical Biology Field course (2020) for three weeks we attended great lectures of various topics of tropical evolutionary ecology in terrestrial and marine ecosystems. The lectures preceded a brainstorm session to state a research questions in order to develop a short project for a 2-3 days. During these three days we worked 16-19 hours a day collecting data in the field, doing laboratory work, analyzing data and finally presenting our results using R markdown. On the third week and final project of the course, after a long workday, collectively all us students created the new habit of looking at the beautiful sunset and the stars in Coibita.

Even though field work take researchers to harsh environment with limited commodities during long working days, is satisfactory to have the opportunities to experience invaluable natural spectacles such the Coibita beautiful night sky. We luckily have good weather with clear sky during almost all nights of our stay in Coibita. One night all of us lay on the wet grass to admire the sky while listening the mosquitos flying by. I hope this post described the quiet nights of quiet stars experienced in Coibita.

We will live eternally in this mood of reverie away
from all the earthly cares around us

(Lyrics from Diana Krall – Quiet Nights)

Roberto Forte, Adriel Sierra & Helio Quintero

The appearances of bats tend to make us feel very unrelated to them. It is hard to think of a social or economic beneficial of bats to humans, since for century they have been associated to blood sucking vampires and more recently as potential reservoir hosts and vectors of diseases or parasites (Klimpel & Mehlhorn, 2014). Bats are highly diverse worldwide, showing astonishing morphology, lifestyles feature and feeding behaviors that are related to their importance in ecological functions such as pest control, seed dispersal and soil fertilization. During the Tropical ecology course during a lecture and field night observation, we were introduced to the bat’s high diversity in Panama and its importance. Based on our interest and curiosity we decided to explore and discuss the functional importance of bats to human economy and health, in order to break current negative view to these organisms.

Bats as effective pest management

Recent studies (Kolkert et al., 2020; Whitaker Jr & Odegard, 2019) in insectivorous bats sustain their potential as crop’s pest controls. This service of control of plagues can be valued in trillions of dollars globally through the decrease of crops damage, reduction of the use of chemicals, and increasing the yield. It is estimated that a bat can eat 30%-100% of its body weight in prey every night. Bats like to feed on places where there is an abundance of prey, such as areas in crops where there is an outbreak of plague (Kolkert et al., 2020). Advances in molecular methods have facilitated the precise identification of the diet of these bats, thus allowing them to establish predator-prey interactions. Kolkert et al., (2020) applied the Metabarcoding methodology to identify how diverse the insectivorous community was in transgenic cotton crops and what type of insects (benefits or pests) are consumed by bats. The study evaluated the effectiveness of insectivorous bats as plague controllers through the investigation of their diets. Bats were captured at the limits of cotton plants by using mist nets and harp traps. They were placed in bags and kept until the next nightfall. Fecal pellets (2-8) were removed from each of the trapped bats. A total of 58 individuals from 7 different species of insectivorous bats were captured. Of the total of individuals captured, only in 24 the sex was identified, 50% male and 50% female.

Figure 1. View of Phyllostomidae (Artibeus jamaicencis) bat captured in Gamboa on the STRI Laboratory.

Kolkert et al., (2020) stated that the most prefer insects by bats included: Lepidoptera (moths), Coleoptera (Bettles), Homoptera/Hemiptera (true bugs), Orthoptera (grasshoppers amongst others), Diptera (flies), Araneae (spiders) and Ixodidaes (ticks). Moreover, they concluded that moths are in important component of bat’s diets; however, bats determine what to eat based on the availability of food.  For instances, Cicadellids where an important component of bat’s diet when they were most available. Cicadellids contribution to bats diet in September was very limited (up to 1.5%), this behavior corresponded with the low availability of Cicadellids during this month. Similarly, insects such as beetles and true bugs were consumed in less quantity during September. Another conclusion reached by Kolkert et al., (2020) was that small insects (such as flies) with less energy in relation to the energy expended by them during the predation process were captured in lower amounts even when vastly available. Species of flies of greater size were the most preferred.

Bats guano as a source of fertilizers

Bats feeds on various sources from fruits, insects, fish, mammals and blood. One interesting fact is that most bats often have a special place where they eat and consequently defecate, accumulating massive amount of fecal matter (guano) in a single place. Due to this behavior people have taken advantage to collect large amount of guano to fertilize poor soils for agriculture. Guano is rich in nitrogen, phosphorous and potassium which are principal components for plant growth making them an inexpensive natural resource for local agriculture. Guano was used extensively around the globe before the production of artificial fertilizers in 1915. In the 1800s century mining for Guano cause the destruction of bat caves and consequently reduction in guano production in Peru after the monopolization of the resource. Extensive mining of guano in caves can negatively impact bats caves in various ways and the ecosystems it beholds. This critical situation made the International Union for Conservation of Natures (IUCN) in 2014 to create sustainable mining policies. Sustainable extraction of guano in developing countries could be a solution to boost local agriculture where buying artificial fertilizers represent a relatively big expense causing negative incomes in their local productivity.    

Bats pollination to improve tequila production

The mention that bats are great pollinators is often accompanied by images of them visiting flowers in the forest or somewhere distant without establishing a direct connection with the applicability of their role to our daily lives. An example that shows us how these winged companions, in exercising their natural function, are capable of affecting our economy is the relationship of some species of Mexican bats with agave plants (Agave sp.), responsible for generating tequila. These bats are one of the main pollinators of agave (Trejo Salazar et al., 2016), however, due to the techniques that some producers use for their cultivation, agave populations have low genetic diversity (since they do not allow them to flourish and the production of more agave is carried out asexually) (Eguiarte et al. 2013), this makes the crops a vulnerable target for the attack of pathogens and as a side effect can reduce the availability of food for these nectarivores bats. A fairly novel method proposed to solve both problems lies in allowing at least 5% of the agaves in one hectare to flourish, thus giving, on average, nectar to 89 bats per night. Taking into account the amount of agave hectares in Mexico, it was estimated that this could represent food for more than two million bats per month and at the same time increase the genetic diversity of both agave crops and wild populations of the genus that are also threatened by their low levels of genetic diversity (Trejo Salazar et al. 2016). The producers who have adopted these measures are benefited with a label that certifies that their tequila is “Bat-friendly” (figure 2), which gives them an added value to their product while supporting the conservation of two wonders of this world, bats and tequila.

Figure 2. Logo of bat-friendly tequila Project.

References

Eguiarte, L. E., Aguirre-Planter, E., Aguirre, X., Colín, R., González, A., Rocha, M., & Souza, V. (2013). From isozymes to genomics: population genetics and conservation of Agave in México. The Botanical Review, 79(4), 483-506.

Klimpel, S., & Mehlhorn, H. (2014). Bats (Chiroptera) as Vectors of Diseases and Parasites. Facts and Myths. Springer, 1-187.

Kolkert, H., Andrew, R., Smith, R., Rader, R., & Reid, N. (2020). Insectivorous bats selectively source moths and eat mostly pest insects on dryland and irrigated cotton farms. Ecology and Evolution, 10(1), 371-388.

Trejo-Salazar, R. E., Eguiarte, L. E., Suro-Piñera, D., & Medellin, R. A. (2016). Save our bats, save our tequila: industry and science join forces to help bats and agaves. Natural Areas Journal, 36(4), 523-530.

Whitaker Jr, J. O., & Odegard, D. (2019). Food of the Free-Tailed bat, Tadarida Brasiliensis, from congress avenue Bridge, Austin, Texas. The Southwestern Naturalist, 64(1), 20-22.

For a long time naturalists have described species using a detailed written descriptions and illustrations to fully present their observations. Before the availability of photographic technologies, naturalist depend on detailed drawings to described microscopic organisms that otherwise will have been impossible to illustrate. In the current modern world high quality photography of organism macroscopic and microscopic features have added a new way for scientific illustrations. Despite of modern photographic devices available, natural history artworks are far from disappearing due to the beauty they enclosed in the details.

An example of beautiful scientific artwork are in the work of the German Biologist, naturalist, philosopher and physician, Ernst Heinrich Haeckel. He illustrated how various microscopic organisms’ forms appear through brilliant colorful and detailed drawings and watercolors. These cryptic organisms would not have been regarded if it was not for Haeckel illustrations. His work not only contributed to the description of many unknown species at the time, but also by capturing science in fantastic artwork outreach the world about these microscopic organisms.

In humid tropical forest nearly, all surface get cover by cryptic organisms such as mosses (Bryophytes). Some bryophytes tend to colonize leaf surface in tropical forest where high number of species co-exist. Most of these species tend to have a small size ranging from 0.1-2.0 mm, that might go unnoticed even for well-trained botanist. They represent less conspicuous organisms but albeit equally important component of tropical forest. In the context of describing the cryptic diversity of epiphyllic organisms in tropical forest I made line drawings, acrilyc and oil paintings of several liverwort species that are presented below.

Line drawing of the liverwort genus Ceratolejeunea habit.

Habit of the common epiphyllous liverwort Cololejeunea surinamensis. A. Macro photography. B. Microscopic photography. C. Acrylic painting.

Representation of an epiphyllous liverwort habit in oil painting

A day in the life of a field biologist is not centered around the typical 9-5 work day of an office professional. Indeed, our workflow typically involves long days in the field starting, in some cases, before the sun rises and ends after it has set in the evening. As student biologists, many of us have experienced the atypical work day in the field where time spent working is strongly linked to your organism of interest. Therefore, one important aspects of research is choosing a topic that brings enough motivation to get you out of bed at 5:00 AM consecutively. For me, this topic has always been birds.

Much of my prior research has involved getting up at early pre-dawn hours in order to catch the hub of bird activity just as the sun begins to rise. This field course was no exception. At times I awoke early to start data collection for our projects and other times, it was completely voluntarily in the hopes of spotting some amazing neotropical birds just for fun. Panama presents an excellent opportunity for ornithologists and bird enthusiasts alike, and being stationed in Gamboa for a few weeks truly presented us with numerous excellent opportunities to spot some birds. On our first full morning before class started, Isle and I decided to get up at 5:00 AM to hike as far into Pipeline trail as possible before breakfast started at 7. We met in the darkened hallway with binoculars ready and set off for a long walk to the trail entrance. It was still dark for most of the hike, but we were able to hear tinamous, toucans, and some motmots concealed from sight within the dense foliage. Unfortunately, we had to turn around to get back in time for breakfast, but this was far from our last chance at spotting some amazing avifauna in Panama. In fact, later that afternoon we heard the chirping call of a yellow-throated toucan which was perched directly outside the window of our classroom at Gamboa! Ilse made a few jokes about not having to wake up at the crack of dawn to see such cool wildlife anymore.

BCI was another amazing birding opportunity. Our group for the forestry project decided to focus on callback and response of three species of antbirds and antshrikes present on the island, led by the expertise of Janene. Again, our days started early in order to catch the birds at their peak activity. Throughout the project and data collection we were able to see some amazing birds that have always been on my bucket list including a red-capped manakin and a spectacled owl! Throughout our weeks in the canal zone we saw collared aracaris, more toucans, hundreds of tanagers, and pauraques (a personal favorite). On Coiba Ilse and I spotted the endemic Coiba spinetail (a type of ovenbird) during our trip to the mangroves! Later that night we fell asleep to the harsh chuuuuurip calls of the nightjars in the fields surrounding our tents.

Julia Briand & MK Hickox

            Historically, the general public have had restricted access to scientific findings. Science has largely been communicated in Western journals, which are generally exclusive to academic institutions and require subscriptions. Publications are often riddled with jargon, requiring advanced technical knowledge and a higher education to comprehend. These barriers act to limit access to scientific knowledge, so that only privileged audiences can engage with the literature and the wider scientific community. However, digital media and globalization may provide an opportunity to break past these barriers, dramatically increasing the accessibility of scientific knowledge.

            More and more often, science is being communicated to the lay man in a comprehensible format. Documentaries such as Blue, Chasing Coral, Planet Earth, and Oceans act to disseminate scientific knowledge through cinema, while many non-governmental organizations and nature photographers, such as Paul Nicklen, utilize social media to spread awareness and cultivate a love for nature within their audiences. Social media and film often reach a younger demographic and can thus be used as outreach tools for science. For example, Science Sketches (https://www.sciencesketches.org/) are short videos produced by scientists on a wide range of research topics, as well as fundamental scientific concepts. ScienceBlogs (https://www.scienceblogs.com/) is another great example of scientific information written for the public eye. Some journals have also made an effort to generate more accessible content, often developing summaries and articles to unpack the dense and highly technical language used in the actual research article or letter. Additionally, in 2014, Nature announced that subscribers and selected media could release “read-only” versions of its content to the general public. However, the publication processes of true open-access journals, such as PLOS One, have been subject to much criticism, limiting their legitimization within the scientific community. For example, PLOS One’s impact factor (2.776) remains much lower than that of Science (41.063). Thus, jargon-heavy, inaccessible journals continue to be the dominant means by which scientific findings are dispersed.

            To demonstrate the stark contrast between traditional and more current, reachable means of communication, we will present our Coibita research project in two summarized formats.

Traditional journal/presentation structure:

Acanthaster planci induced coral mortality

Acanthaster planci is a unique starfish and corallivore (Fig 1). One of the largest sea stars in the world, A. planci has five arms lined with poisonous spines (Moran 1997). Such features gave rise to its common name: Crown of Thorns (COT). Acanthaster predates upon coral by ejecting its stomach to engulf and dissolve the flesh of the organism. The remaining white skeleton is typically colonized by non-reef building organisms, such as algae (Chesher 1969). Nutrient-loading and release from predation have led to outbreaks of these coral predators in several regions, including the Indo-Pacific (Kayal et al. 2012). To better anticipate COT outbreaks, a better understanding of their distribution and feeding habits is necessary. Thus, this study aims to determine how A. planci predation varies with habitat type. It is hypothesized that coral communities will have a greater abundance of COT compared to coral reefs, as interstitial space within the rockier substrate of coral communities may effectively provide refuge.

• 

The island of Coibita, located off of the Pacific coast of Panama, was selected as the study site. Within this region, A. planci generally feeds on two species: Pocillopora sp, a branching coral, and Porites sp, a non-branching coral. To detect COT predation upon these two species, 20-minute timed surveys were conducted on the North, East and South sides of Grenada de Oro and the North and South sides of Machete. Research pairs were assigned to shallow, intermediate or deep depths for each survey. The size of every COT detected was determined using a PVC pipe. Each COT was also flipped to estimate the percent mortality of the coral it was ingesting. Additionally, the condition of surrounding coral was recorded.

The resulting data was regressed using a Poisson distribution. A negative binomial distribution was excluded from the regression with coral type (y) and starfish count (y), as the mean was around 0 and the model incorporated a link function with a natural log, creating an infinitely high standard error. This revealed significant variation in COT abundance with substrate type (P = .008). Additionally, COT predation was higher in coral communities when compared to coral reefs (Fig 2), possibly due to the  presence of refugia and a wider variety of suitable niches. In fact, A. planci commonly takes shelter under stones within proximity of coral colonies (Sastry 1991). Other mutualistic organisms, such as crustacean symbionts Trapezia and Alpheus, also protect coral reefs from COT predation (Glynn 1976). These symbionts are more abundant in the reef flat, likely contributing to the observed distribution of Acanthaster. However, it should be noted that sample size was relatively small for this study. Thus, these results may not accurately represent true COT distribution and should be expanded upon in future work.

Documentary/film-style presentation:

References

Chesher, R.H. 1969. Destruction of Pacific corals by the sea star Acanthaster planci, Science 165: 280-283.

Glynn, P.W. 1976. Some physical and biological determinants of coral community structure in the Eastern Pacific, Ecological Monographs 46.

Kayal et al. 2012. Predator crown-of-thorns starfish (Acanthaster planci) outbreak, mass mortality of corals, and cascading effects on reef fish and benthic communities, PLoS One 7.

Moran, P. 1997. Crown-of-thorns starfish questions and answers. Australian Institute of Marine Science (AIMS). http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/reflib/cot-starfish/pages/cot-000.html

Sastry, D. R. K. 1991. Echinodermata: Asteroidea, Ophiuroidea and Echinoidea. In: Jairajpuri MS (Ed) Fauna of Lakshwadeep, State Fauna Series, 2, Calcutta, pp 363–397.

Feb 1, 2020

Coiba is one of those rare places on this earth where you can truly imagine you have stepped back into a time before humans existed. A seemingly unspoiled natural wonder where the silk-like surface of the tide conceals a vibrant underwater world teaming with life: Moray eels, reef sharks, corals, sea turtles, and, if you are super lucky, whale sharks. We just so happened to be one of the lucky few people to swim close enough to a whale shark that we could have reached out and touched it.

After spending 5 days in complete isolation from the rest of the world, it was easy to let our minds drift away from the constant emails, advisory meetings, and deadlines that we had left far behind on the mainland just a few days prior. It all came crashing back onto us once we got back on those wooden boats, sailed back to mainland Panama, and hit the first sign of cell reception after almost 6 full days on the island. Thus, this blog post will detail some of the many amazing experiences we got to share as a group on Coiba as well as some of the challenges we faced upon hitting reality again yesterday afternoon.

Unaware of what to fully expect as we piled on to the bus before the sunrise on Monday morning, we hoped what was packed in our backpacks would be enough. The main concern (at least for me) was keeping things waterproof. This is a main reason why over 3/4^ths of the group decided to ditch their laptops, leaving us with just 3 laptops to complete our projects. It also added to the feeling of complete and total isolation from the mainland and from technology during our time on the island! Although this seemed like a risky move, in hindsight I am happy I left my laptop behind, especially after a sudden and unexpected downpour flooded our tents and left everything slightly damp and smelly for days!

Without the burden of worrying about our water-sensitive devices, we boarded the motorized wooden boats and sailed across the Gulfo de Chiriqui for one very bumpy ride that lasted almost 2 hours. It began to rain once we were out at sea and concealed the epic scenery of forested hills and picturesque islands we were passing. However, the island welcomed us with sunshine breaking through the dense rain clouds and bathing everything in a soft golden light. We had finally reached our home for the next few days!

There are exactly 123 steps up from the beach to the field station at Coibita. The stairs themselves can become very slippery with moss and the dirt surrounding them creates the perfect home for tarantulas and maybe even the occasional curious crocodile. We quickly set up our tents and explored as much as possible before our first evening lecture and subsequent dinner on the island. One of the first challenges we faced was sharing one bathroom among 30+ people. One shower, one toilet. Things quickly got… messy… but there were so many interesting things to discover that no one truly cared. We were told to always have a buddy when venturing around the island at night and to never be on the beach past 6:00PM due to presence of crocs. One way to deal with this slightly uncomfortable situation was to watch cheesy and biologically-inaccurate crocodile movies we had previously downloaded on a laptop one of the more daring students had decided to bring.

The next day we had our first group snorkel around Granito de Oro as some group members had little to no prior snorkeling experience. The groups were able to see reef sharks, sea turtles, all sorts of colorful fish and sea stars, and of course a thriving coral community. We used this time to think of ideas for our group projects which we were told would not be as harshly graded as the previous projects and that the true goal was to experience marine field work. It was easy to let our minds flood with ideas for the projects being surrounded by all sorts of alien-like underwater reef dwellers. Our group in particular decided to look at starfish predation on different coral species. We quickly learned, however, that Coiba’s reefs are dominated by Pocillopora and our methodology evolved into something we would later come to affectionately call “starfish flinging”. The realization that we could no longer look at predation among different coral species forced us to shift our focus to estimating percent damage on Pocillopora caused by crown-of-thorns (Acanthaster planci).

Crown-of-thorns (COT) starfish can exhibit dramatic ‘population explosions’ in many areas around the globe including the Red Sea, Great Barrier Reef, and South Pacific Asia (Babcock et al. 2016). Such population explosions are sentinels of an imbalance within the ecosystem and cause wide-spread coral damage, as the starfish feeds on the live parts of the coral and leaves behind a trail of dead, bleached coral pieces (De Bruin 1972).  Populations seemed to be stable in Coiba, possibly due to presence of plankton-feeding fish which generate a top-down control on the COT. In fact, we ended up having a little trouble finding a sufficient amount of these seemingly illusive starfish in our field sites to make any substantial statistical analysis. Anyway, here is how the ‘starfish flinging’ became a crucial step in our methodology. Accompanied by some STRI’s leading reef scientists and specialists, we divided our teams into 3 groups based on water column depth and swimming abilities and set off for our field stations. Armed with meter sticks, our task was to locate COT, measure its size in centimeters, fling it off of the coral from which it was feeding, and estimate percent damage. Sounds easy, huh? We were warned ahead of time that contact with the COT would cause “pain for years” and were, admittedly, a little intimidated at first to dive down so close to those spiny, coral-destroying invertebrates. The flinging part was fun though, and our group soon found its groove. We were able to find a grand total of 11 COT throughout 3 field sites and determined that the COT prefers coral communities rather than coral reefs possibly due to availability of dynamic niche space.

In between our data collection and analysis, the group experienced many amazing things during our stay in Coiba. Most notably, the aforementioned snorkeling with a whale shark. We were given the opportunity to deep-water snorkel one afternoon in a known whale shark area off the coast of a rocky island. I was slightly optimistic that we would see a whale shark, but a larger part of me knows how rare and illusive these massive creatures can be and I neglected to get my hopes up too high. We plunged into the current once the boats came to a halt and immediately swam with the strong current in search of the gentile giant. All though we saw sea turtles, a sea snake, and many amazing fish, the whale shark was the ultimate prize. Fast forward one hour and half the group had split up to go searching in another part of the current and others had fallen victim to the tiresome current and had long ago retired to the boats. I was actually next in line to flop myself back on a boat when I heard “LOOK UNDER YOU!!” (shout out to Lesty Boi). There, in the murky depths below my flippers was the unmistakable face of a whale shark swimming right towards me. It was one of the most surreal moments of my life! The shark circled our group like a showoff. It allowed us to get so close we could have touched it and it stuck around for a good 3 minutes, allowing for amazing photo and video opportunities from our group. It slipped back down into the depths, concealed by the murky waters, and the last glimpse I saw was of it’s tail. When I popped back into the surface of the water, everyone was uncontrollably smiling and asking if that experience had just actually happened In real life! I could not believe we saw a whale shark and it was certainly one of the highlights of my experience in Coiba.  

Additionally, our group had planned a night snorkel to see some of the bioluminescence. It just so happened to be planned on the one night where a sudden and completely unexpected torrential downpour dumped a biblical amount of rain on our little field site in the middle of the Pacific Ocean. Some of the scientists had gone down to the beach just moments prior to scan the inlet and make sure it was free of hungry corcs. It immediately turned from a light drizzle to a flood-like rain and slowly, our hopes of swimming among the bioluminescent organisms during the night snorkel were washed away too. The scientists came back around 20 minutes later using the rain as an excuse to cancel the snorkel event, but I overheard them talking about how they scanned the surface of the water only to have the flashlight beams reflected back in the eyes of a hungry crocodile family lurking just beyond the shallows where we would have been snorkeling. It did give the groups an excuse to start working on our data and presentations which were due the following day. Surely not as fun as a night snorkel, but quite necessary.

Being on Coiba with no connection to the outside world and having only a satellite phone (which “sometimes doesn’t work”) really brought everyone closer together as a group. We developed many inside jokes, stayed up late watching cheesy crocodile attack movies, stargazing, or working on our projects. We shared meals, bathrooms, tents, computers, and (in my case) flippers for snorkeling. We saw a whale shark! It was a week of complete disconnect from the trials of everyday life as a graduate student and a well-needed retreat. I know that visiting Coiba is a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity for us non-marine focused students and a memory I will always treasure.  

Literature Cited

Babcock, R.C., Dambacher, J.M., Morello, E.B., Plagenyi, E.E., et al. 2016. Assessing Different Causes of Crown-of-Thorns Starfish Outbreaks and Appropriate Responses for Management on the Great Barrier Reef. Plos One: 1-20.

De Bruin, G.H.P. 1972. The Crown-of-Thorns Starfish Acanthaster planci (Linne’) in Ceylon. Bull. Fish. Rest. Stn 23: 37-41.