Search for: All records

As the scientific community, like society more broadly, reckons with long-standing challenges around accessibility, justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion, we would be wise to pay attention to issues and lessons emerging in debates around citizen science. When practitioners first placed the modifier “citizen” on science, they intended to signify an inclusive variant within the scientific enterprise that enables those without formal scientific credentials to engage in authoritative knowledge production (1). Given that participants are overwhelmingly white adults, above median income, with a college degree (2, 3), it is clear that citizen science is typically not truly an egalitarian variant of science, open and available to all members of society, particularly those underrepresented in the scientific enterprise. Some question whether the term “citizen” itself is a barrier to inclusion, with many organizations rebranding their programs as “community science.” But this co-opts a term that has long referred to distinct, grassroots practices of those underserved by science and is thus not synonymous with citizen science. Swapping the terms is not a benign action. Our goal is not to defend the term citizen science, nor provide a singular name for the field. Rather, we aim to explore what the field, and the multiple publics it serves, might gain or lose by replacing the term citizen science and the potential repercussions of adopting alternative terminology (including whether a simple name change alone would do much to improve inclusion). 

Abstract Many animals learn to produce acoustic signals that are used to attract mates and defend territories. The structure of these signals can be influenced by external features of the environment, including the anthropogenic soundscape. In many sedentary species, habitat features and soundscape appears to influence the cultural evolution of songs, often with tradeoffs for better transmission over sexually selected song structure. However, none have investigated whether noise on the wintering grounds affects song structure, which for long-distance migrants may result in an acoustic ‘mismatch’ when returning to a breeding ground. This study investigates urban noise effects on song structure in a long-distance migrant, Zonotrichia leucophrys gambelii, on the wintering grounds in the Fresno Clovis Metropolitan Area and in outlying non-urban areas. Songs and background noise levels were recorded concurrently, and song measurements of frequency and duration were examined differences across noise levels and habitats . We found that the buzz and trill decrease in bandwidth in the presence of noise. The length of the whistle and buzz portion of the song also tends to decreases with noise in urban habitats. This trend toward short, pure tones in noisy areas may transmit better in noisy urban winter habitats, but may not be adaptive on quieter breeding grounds. We suggest that future studies should consider whether winter auditory feedback and song learning environments have consequences for song crystallization and breeding success for long-distance migrants.