An official website of the United States government
The BoF will address four questions: Q1: What are novel modes of computing implied by AI? Which will have the greatest impact on CI for gateways and national compute resources? Facilitated by Joe Stubbs Q2: What are or should be the goals of broadening access to compute resources for AI purposes? Who can be brought into the community that previously was not? Facilitated by Sandra Gesing Q3: What are the interesting aspects related to data sharing? How do the various compute loads and modes impact how data are shared, moved, and accessed? Facilitated by Rob Quick Q4: How can AI be used in a science gateway to make it more effective, efficient, secure, or otherwise better? Facilitated by Claire Stirm
more »
« less
Designing eco‐evolutionary experiments for restoration projects: Opportunities and constraints revealed during stickleback introductions
Abstract Eco‐evolutionary experiments are typically conducted in semi‐unnatural controlled settings, such as mesocosms; yet inferences about how evolution and ecology interact in the real world would surely benefit from experiments in natural uncontrolled settings. Opportunities for such experiments are rare but do arise in the context of restoration ecology—where different “types” of a given species can be introduced into different “replicate” locations. Designing such experiments requires wrestling with consequential questions. (Q1) Which specific “types” of a focal species should be introduced to the restoration location? (Q2) How many sources of each type should be used—and should they be mixed together? (Q3) Whichspecificsource populations should be used? (Q4) Which type(s) or population(s) should be introduced into which restoration sites? We recently grappled with these questions when designing an eco‐evolutionary experiment with threespine stickleback (Gasterosteus aculeatus) introduced into nine small lakes and ponds on the Kenai Peninsula in Alaska that required restoration. After considering the options at length, we decided to use benthic versus limnetic ecotypes (Q1) to create a mixed group of colonists from four source populations of each ecotype (Q2), where ecotypes were identified based on trophic morphology (Q3), and were then introduced into nine restoration lakes scaled by lake size (Q4). We hope that outlining the alternatives and resulting choices will make the rationales clear for future studies leveraging our experiment, while also proving useful for investigators considering similar experiments in the future.
more »
« less
- Award ID(s):
- 2133740
- PAR ID:
- 10517845
- Publisher / Repository:
- Wiley Blackwell (John Wiley & Sons)
- Date Published:
- Journal Name:
- Ecology and Evolution
- Volume:
- 14
- Issue:
- 6
- ISSN:
- 2045-7758
- Format(s):
- Medium: X
- Sponsoring Org:
- National Science Foundation
More Like this
-
-
Abstract Local adaptation is a fundamental phenomenon in evolutionary biology, with relevance to formation of ecotypes, and ultimately new species, and application to restoration and species’ response to climate change. Reciprocal transplant gardens, a common garden in which ecotypes are planted among home and away habitats, are the gold standard to detect local adaptation in populations.This review focuses on reciprocal transplant gardens to detect local adaptation, especially in grassland species beginning with early seminal studies of grass ecotypes. Fast forward more than half a century, reciprocal gardens have moved into the genomic era, in which the genetic underpinnings of ecotypic variation can now be uncovered. Opportunities to combine genomic and reciprocal garden approaches offer great potential to shed light on genetic and environmental control of phenotypic variation. Our decadal study of adaptation in a dominant grass across the precipitation gradient of the US Great Plains combined genomic approaches and realistic community settings to shed light on controls over phenotype.Common gardens are not without limitations and challenges. A survey of recent studies indicated the modal study uses a tree species, three source sites and one growing site, focuses on one species growing in a monoculture, lasts 3 years, and does not use other experimental manipulations and rarely employs population genetic tools. Reciprocal transplant gardens are even more uncommon, accounting for only 39% of the studies in the literature survey with the rest occurring at a single common site. Reciprocal transplant gardens offer powerful windows into local adaptation when (a) placed across wide environmental gradients to encompass the species’ range; (b) conducted across timespans adequate for detecting responses; (c) employing selection studies among competing ecotypes in community settings and (d) combined with measurements of form and function which ultimately determine success in home and away environments.Synthesis. Reciprocal transplant gardens have been one of the foundations in evolutionary biology for the study of adaptation for the last century, and even longer in Europe. Moving forward, reciprocal gardens of foundational non‐model species, combined with genomic analyses and incorporation of biotic factors, have the potential to further revolutionize evolutionary biology. These field experiments will help to predict and model response to climate change and inform restoration practices.more » « less
-
Climate change increasingly drives local population dynamics, shifts geographic distributions, and threatens persistence. Gene flow and rapid adaptation could rescue declining populations yet are seldom integrated into forecasts. We modeled eco-evolutionary dynamics under preindustrial, contemporary, and projected climates using up to 9 years of fitness data from 102,272 transplants (115 source populations) ofBoechera strictain five common gardens. Climate change endangers locally adapted populations and reduces genotypic variation in long-term population growth rate, suggesting limited adaptive potential. Upslope migration could stabilize high-elevation populations and preserve low-elevation ecotypes, but unassisted gene flow modeled with genomic data is too spatially restricted. Species distribution models failed to capture current dynamics and likely overestimate persistence under intermediate emissions scenarios, highlighting the importance of modeling evolutionary processes.more » « less
-
Studies of eco‐evolutionary dynamics have integrated evolution with ecological processes at multiple scales (populations, communities and ecosystems) and with multiple interspecific interactions (antagonistic, mutualistic and competitive). However, evolution has often been conceptualised as a simple process: short‐term directional adaptation that increases population growth. Here we argue that diverse other evolutionary processes, well studied in population genetics and evolutionary ecology, should also be considered to explore the full spectrum of feedback between ecological and evolutionary processes. Relevant but underappreciated processes include (1) drift and mutation, (2) disruptive selection causing lineage diversification or speciation reversal and (3) evolution driven by relative fitness differences that may decrease population growth. Because eco‐evolutionary dynamics have often been studied by population and community ecologists, it will be important to incorporate a variety of concepts in population genetics and evolutionary ecology to better understand and predict eco‐evolutionary dynamics in nature.more » « less
-
null (Ed.)On August 2-3, 2021, the Thomas J. O’Keefe Institute for Sustainable Supply of Strategic Minerals at Missouri University of Science and Technology (Missouri S&T) hosted the NSF-funded virtual workshop ‘Resilient Supply of Critical Minerals’. The workshop was convened via Zoom and attracted 158 registrants, including 108 registrants from academia (61 students), 30 registrants from government agencies, and 20 registrants from the private sector. Four topical sessions were covered: A. Mineral Exploration and Source Diversification. B. Supply Chain and Policy Issues. C. Improving Mineral Recycling and Reprocessing Technologies. D. Technological Alternatives to Critical Minerals. Each topical session was composed of two keynote lectures and followed by a breakout session that was designed to identify promising pathways towards increasing critical supply chain resilience in the United States. During each breakout session, participants were asked to address five questions: Q1. What are the roadblocks that affect the resilient supply of critical minerals? Q2. What are the most pressing research needs? Q3. What opportunities can lead to the fastest and biggest impact? Q4. What skills training is required to meet future workforce demands? Q5. What other questions should be asked, but are commonly overlooked? Several issues that limit critical mineral supply chain resilience in the United States were identified and discussed in all breakout sessions, including: 1. Insufficient understanding of domestic critical minerals resources. To address this issue, workshop participants highlighted the need for (i) more geologic research to identify new and evaluate existing resources; and (ii) a qualitative and quantitative assessment of critical minerals that may be recovered as by/co-products from existing production streams. 2. Technical limitations of current mineral processing and recycling technologies. To address this issue, workshop participants highlighted the need for (i) innovative mineral processing technologies, including more environmentally friendly chemicals/solvents, and (ii) automated recycling technologies for appliances and e-waste. Participants also highlighted the need for a centralized and simplified way to collect recyclable materials, and incentives for the public to participate in recycling. 3. Long permitting processes for mining and mineral processing operations, with often unpredictable outcomes. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested the development of new critical mineral focused policies with faster processing times and more transparent / predictable decision-making processes. 4. The negative public image of mining and mineral processing operations. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested to design public outreach / education initiatives and to include local communities into decision-making processes. 5. Limited availability of a critical mineral workforce. To address this issue, workshop participants suggested an increased focus on critical mineral specific skill training in higher education institutions, and advanced training of the existing workforce.more » « less
