1.20.25

Microbes facing tough times

Jennifer sampling soil before the shelters were set up. Here you can see the control (left) and carbon addition (right) plots.

The activities are as follows:

As the climate changes, Michigan is expected to experience more drought. Droughts are periods of low rainfall when water becomes limiting to organisms. This is a challenge for our agricultural food system. Farmers in Michigan will be planting crops into conditions that make it harder for corn, soybean, and wheat to grow and survive.

Scientists are looking into how crop interactions with other organisms may help. Microbes are microscopic organisms that live in soils everywhere. Some microbes can help crops get through time times. These beneficial microbes are called mutualists. They give plants nutrients and water in exchange for carbon from the plant. Microbes use the carbon they get from plants as food. If plants are stressed and don’t have any carbon to give, microbes get carbon from dead plant material in the soil.

Jennifer is a biologist studying the role of microbes in agriculture. She has always been interested in a career that would help people. As a student, Jennifer thought she would have a career in politics. Along the way, she learned that a career in science is a great way to study questions that may lead to solutions for the challenges we are facing today. Jennifer was drawn to the Kellogg Biological Station, where she joined a team of scientists studying the impacts of climate change and drought on agriculture.

Jennifer and other scientists set out to test ways that we can give mutualists in the soil a boost. She thought, perhaps if we were to give microbes more food, they would be less stressed during a drought and would be able to help out crops growing in these stressful conditions.

To test this idea, Jennifer needed to test how well microbes were doing under different carbon and drought conditions. First, she set up treatments in soybean fields to manipulate the amount of carbon in the soil. She set up control plots where she left the soil alone. She also set up carbon treatment plots where dead plant litter was added to the soil to increase the carbon available to microbes.

Next, Jennifer manipulated the availability of water in her plots to test the microbes under stress. To do this, she set up her plots under shelters that kept out rain. The shelters had sprinklers, which were automated to add specific amounts of water to the plots. This design allowed Jennifer to control the watering schedule for each plot. One shelter treatment was a control, where water was added to the plots every week. This is similar to the schedules of local farmers who add water through irrigation. The other shelter treatment was drought, where plots received no water for six weeks. This experiment was replicated 4 times, meaning there were 4 shelters on the control watering schedule and 4 shelters that were under drought conditions.

A view of one of the shelters used in Jennifer’s experiment.

Finally, Jennifer had to measure how the microbes were doing in each treatment. She did this by measuring their enzyme activity. Enzyme activity is a measure of how active the microbes are. The higher the enzyme activity, the happier the microbes are. To measure this, Jennifer collected soil samples from each plot throughout the growing season and took them to the lab to measure enzyme levels in the soil samples. These enzymes are made by microbes when they are active. She then calculated the mean of all her samples for each treatment combination.

Jennifer predicted two things. First, if drought is harmful to microbes, then she would expect to see lower enzyme activity in the drought treatment compared to the irrigated treatment. Second, if adding carbon to the soil is a way to help microbes overcome the challenge of drought, she expected higher enzyme activity in the plots with plant litter added compared to the control treatment. Both of these taken together would indicate that drought is stressful for microbes, but we can help them out by adding resources like plant litter to soils.

Featured scientist: Jennifer Jones (she/her) from the Kellogg Biological Station Long Term Ecological Research Site. Written with Melissa Frost and Liz Schultheis.

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.2

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget:

To introduce this Data Nuggets activity, students can watch a talk by Jennifer when she made a classroom visit to share her background and research interests. This video is a great way to introduce students to scientist role models and learn more about what a career in science looks like, as well as get an introduction to the themes in the research.

There is also a video of Jennifer and her scientist colleague, Grant Falvo, out in the field talking about their research under the rainout shelters.

For more information about the rainout shelter experiment, students can watch this short video featuring Jennifer Jones and another scientist on the team, Grant Falvo:

  • https://youtu.be/1lDUQIxwRaM

These data are part of the Kellogg Biological Station Long Term Ecological Research Program (KBS LTER). To learn more about the KBS LTER, visit their website:

  • https://lter.kbs.msu.edu
12.11.24

Little butterflies on the prairie

Butterfly on prairie flower.
A Tiger Swallowtail butterfly visiting a prairie flower to drink nectar.

The activities are as follows:

Butterflies are insects with colorful wings. You will often see them in a field, flying from flower to flower. Butterflies eat a sugary food made by flowers, called nectar. In return, the butterflies help the plants make seeds by moving pollen. As they travel from flower to flower, pollen is dropped off. This helps plants reproduce and make seeds. This is called pollination, and butterflies are pollinators. We need pollinators to grow many of the fruits and vegetables that we eat!

Prairies are habitats filled with many types of flowers. The Midwestern United States used to be covered in prairies. Today, most have been replaced by farm fields. Crops like corn and soybeans are commonly planted in the Midwest. Farm fields are important because we need land to grow our food. But this also means there is less food and habitat for butterflies.

Many farmers are concerned with growing our food while still protecting habitat for butterflies and other species. They want to know – how can we grow food for ourselves while still growing flowers for butterflies? A group of scientists in Michigan is working with farmers to think of solutions. The team is made of people from many different backgrounds and work experiences. The members of the team change over time, but typically 8 scientists are working together at a time. They all come together to brainstorm and do their research at the Kellogg Biological Station in Michigan.

Group of researchers ready to go out into field to butterfly survey.
Members of the Haddad Lab, ready to go out for a day of butterfly sampling in the prairie strips!

Prairie strips are a new idea that might help both farmers and the environment. These strips are small areas of prairie that can be added to farm fields. They look like rows of flowers and grasses within a field. They create habitat for many species, like butterflies, birds, ants, and even microscopic fungi and bacteria! Prairie strips may also help our food grow better by providing habitat for pollinators.

To figure out if prairie strips are able to draw in butterflies, the research team needed to collect data. They visited a large experiment that had many different kinds of farm fields. Some of the fields had prairie strips, while others did not. They thought prairie strips would help butterflies by adding habitat for them in farm fields that usually don’t have many flowers. They predicted they would see more butterflies in fields that have prairie strips and fewer in fields without these strips.

To count the butterflies in each type of field, the team went out on sunny spring and summer mornings when butterflies were flying around and eating nectar. They walked along the same paths in the same fields at the same time every week. Each time, they counted all the butterflies they saw within 5 meters. Each walk was 12 minutes long and followed a 150-meter path. They did these counts in 6 farm fields without prairie strips and 6 farm fields with prairie strips. The team counted butterflies like this 20 times over the summer. At the end of the summer, they added up all of the butterflies observed in each field. This number is called butterfly abundance.

Featured scientists: The Haddad Lab from Kellogg Biological Station Long Term Ecological Research Program – KBS LTER

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 7.3

10.24.24

A burning question

Fire crew in a woodland prescribed fire.

The activities are as follows:

Forests in the midwestern U.S. provide many important ecological services. They store carbon dioxide, which helps fight climate change. They also host a variety of plant and animal life. Forests provide spaces for recreation and support local economies through tourism.

Unfortunately, forests face threats. Climate change is causing more severe weather events, such as flooding and droughts. The spread of some parasites and diseases is also increasing as temperatures change. Forest managers are motivated to protect forest health. They can help combat these threats with their knowledge of different management practices.

Ellen and John have studied forest health in Wisconsin for decades. Ellen first became interested in nature while camping and hiking in Minnesota with her family when she was young. John became passionate about nature as a child while walking through the oak-hickory forests on his family farm. They teamed up with foresters from the Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources to examine the impact of prescribed fire as a management tool to increase forest health. A prescribed fire differs from a wildfire in that it is a planned fire that is set on purpose. When the conditions are right, forest managers will assign prescribed fires to specific areas to meet land management objectives. A lot of organization goes into prescribed fires to make sure the fire doesn’t spread or burn too hot.

Fire is part of the natural history of oak forests. They are adapted to recover quickly and they actually can benefit from fire. This is important for land managers who want to encourage the health of oak forests.

Ellen recording plant species diversity in a plot.

Oaks are considered a keystone species. This means they play a major role in maintaining ecosystem functions and the success of other species. There are two main reasons. First, they produce large amounts of acorns, which are food for many types of wildlife. Second, their canopies have more open spaces that allow light to reach the forest floor. Light is an important resource for plants, and smaller plants are limited by the shade of large trees. More light passing through the canopy allows more plants to grow below the oak trees. This increases the variety of species found in oak forests.

Ellen and John wanted to know if there were more plant species in oak forests that had prescribed fires. To answer their question, Ellen and John decided to study a part of the Madison School Forest in southwestern Wisconsin. This oak forest is special because research has been done on the impact of fire for over 75 years. In 1996, the forest was split into 15 units that have been under different management plans. One of the experimental treatments included prescribed fire at different frequencies. For example, the units in the prescribed fire treatment could have been burned every 1 to 4 years. Other units served as a control and were not burned. Comparing the control to plots that had been burned allows managers to see how often oak forests should be burned to increase forest health.

All of the management units were sampled in 1996 when the experiment first began and again in 2002 and 2007. In each sampling year, the number of plant species, or species richness, in the management units was counted. In 2023, Ellen, John, and their team resampled the plots to pick up this experiment where it was left off. This research will guide the best ways to support the health of oak forests and determine how important fire is to maintaining forest biodiversity. If fire is necessary to maintain oak forests, and oaks are a keystone species that support biodiversity, the research team expects to find higher biodiversity in plots where prescribed fire has been used.

Featured scientists: Ellen Damschen (she/her) and John Orrock (he/him) from
University of Wisconsin-Madison. Written by: Amy Workman (she/her)

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.8

8.28.24

Guppies on the move

Guppies in the lab. Photo Credit: Eva Fischer.

The activities are as follows:

Animal parents often choose where to have their offspring in the place that will give them the best chance at success. They look for places that have plentiful food, low risk of predation, and good climate.

Even though parents pick out these spots, individuals often move away from their birthplace at some point in their lives. Why do animals move away? There are risks that come with moving from one place to another. It can be dangerous to go through unknown places – potentially stumbling into predators or being exposed to diseases. But there can also be benefits to moving, such as discovering a better spot to live as an adult, finding mates, and spreading out to reduce competition.

As someone who loves to travel and has lived in four different countries, Isabela can relate! Isabela likes to see new places, try new foods, and learn new languages. But there can be drawbacks, and occasionally she finds it hard to be in a completely new place. Sometimes people don’t understand her accent, or she can’t understand them. She also misses her family when she is away. Knowing that traveling and moving can have such highs and lows for herself, Isabela wanted to know more about what motivates animals to seek out new places.

To follow her curiosity, Isabela found a graduate advisor who was also interested in animal movement. She joined Sarah’s lab because she had already collected data on the movement of small tropical fish called guppies. Sarah is part of a large collaborative project, where researchers from all over the world come together in Trinidad to study these fish populations.

When Sarah first started collecting data in this system, she wanted to track how far guppies move from one place to the next. She used established protocols from previous work in this system to set up a study. With the help of a team, she captured every fish in two similar streams for replication. Every fish that was caught was marked with a small tattoo so the research team could recognize it if it was found again in the future. She did this same procedure every month for 14 months. Each time she sampled the fish, she recorded the individuals that she found and where they were found.

Isabela used this dataset to ask whether guppies benefit from moving from one place to another. In this study, she focused on one type of benefit: having a higher number of offspring. It is through reproduction that animals are able to pass on their genes, so the more offspring an individual fish has, the more successful it is.

First, Isabela used the existing dataset to find out how far each fish moved: if Fish 1 was captured in Portion A of a stream in February and then in Portion B of the same stream in March, Isabela knew it had to move from A to B. She could use the timepoints to estimate how far each individual had traveled that month.

Second, Isabela used genetics to find out how many offspring each fish had. She looked at genetic markers to determine familial relationships between individuals in each stream. For example, two fish that shared 50% of their genes were probably a parent and an offspring. In this case, the older individual would be marked as the parent. Isabela used the genetic information to build a pedigree, or a chart that documents each generation of a population. That way she could track how many offspring each parent had produced.

She used these data to answer her question on whether there are benefits to traveling more. Isabela also wanted to compare whether the potential benefits of dispersal differed across the sexes. Males have to compete for females in order to mate. Isabela wanted to know if males that moved more were able to mate with more females and have more offspring.

Featured scientists: Isabela Borges (she/her) and Sarah Fitzpatrick (she/her) from the Kellogg Biological Station at Michigan State University.

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.3

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget include:

If you or your students are interested in accessing more of the data behind this Data Nugget, you can download the full dataset from Isabella’s research and have students create graphs in Excel, Google Sheets, or using other data visualization software.

If students would like to learn more about Isabela, check out this Exploring with Scientists video from her time at the Kellogg Biological Station.

For more on this system and the research Sarah did in this study system, check out this unit and video on Galactic Polymath:

8.1.24

Poop, poop, goose!

Cackling Goose next to a pile of goose poop, or feces
Cackling Goose next to a pile of goose poop, or feces. Photo by Andrea Pokrzywinski.

The activities are as follows:

Each spring, millions of birds return to the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. This delta is where two of the largest rivers in Alaska empty into the Bering Sea. It is also one of the world’s most significant habitats for geese to breed and raise their young. 

With all these geese coming together in one area, they create quite a mess – they drop tons of poop onto the soil. So much poop in fact, that scientists wonder whether poop from this area in Alaska could have a global impact! Climate change is a worldwide environmental issue that is caused by too many greenhouse gasses being released into our atmosphere. Typically, we think of humans as the cause of this greenhouse gas release, but other animals can contribute as well. 

When poop falls onto the soil it is decomposed by bacteria. Bacteria release methane (CH4), a potent greenhouse gas. The more geese there are, the more poop they will produce and the more food there will be for soil bacteria. By increasing the amount of greenhouse gasses that are released by soil bacteria, geese might actually indirectly contribute to global climate change.

Trisha is an ecosystem ecologist who scoops goose poop for research projects. Her research is looking into whether animals, other than humans, can change the carbon cycle. Trisha teamed up with Bonnie, a fellow ecosystem ecologist. Bonnie studies how matter moves between the living parts of the environment, such as plants and animals, and the nonliving parts. She is especially interested in how bacteria in the soil play a role in the carbon cycle.

Together, the team designed a three-year project to figure out the effects of goose poop on the carbon cycle. Each summer, a large team of researchers spend 90 days camping on remote sites near the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta. The team scooped up poop from nearby goose habitats to use in their experiments. They set up six control plots where they added no poop and six treatment plots where they added poop. From these twelve plots, the team measured methane emissions from the soil. Methane was measured as methane flux in micromoles, or µM. These data helped them determine how ecosystems respond to geese by measuring whether goose poop affects methane production by soil bacteria.  

Featured scientists: Trisha Atwood of Utah State University and Bonnie Waring of Imperial College. Written by Andrea Pokrzywinski.

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.7

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget include:

7.17.24

Sink or source? How grazing geese impact the carbon cycle

Tricia (left) installing carbon dioxide plots in the field.

The activities are as follows:

“If it wasn’t for the geese, you and I would not be here today because our ancestors would not have made it. When long, hard winters emptied people’s food caches early, starvation loomed. Return of geese in April saved us.” – Chuck Hunt, born and raised on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta

Spring geese are an essential food source for subsistence communities like Chevak, Alaska. Elders in western Alaska Native communities have observed a decrease in geese returning to their villages over time. These changes affect the local communities and could also affect the local ecosystem.

One way geese change their environment is by eating grass. In the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta in western Alaska, birds from every continent on Earth migrate to this sub-Arctic habitat to lay their eggs and raise their young. Once they arrive, geese eat a ton of grass. They graze only in specific areas, called grazing lawns, leaving the rest of the vegetation alone.

When geese graze on wetland plants, they remove plant matter, potentially decreasing the amount of carbon dioxide, or CO2, that is released during photosynthesis. As plants photosynthesize, they absorb CO2 from the atmosphere and turn it into glucose (a sugar) and oxygen. Gross primary production is the total amount of energy that plants capture from sunlight to grow and live before they use up some of that energy for themselves. Plants can slow climate change by removing CO2 from the atmosphere and turning it into plant matter, like leaves and roots.

A scientist mimics geese grazing by clipping the grass.

Trisha is a scientist who became interested in ways that animals can affect the carbon cycle through their interactions with the environment. She wondered whether fewer geese returning to western Alaska could have global consequences that extend beyond remote communities. She thought that if geese ate enough grass, they may limit photosynthesis. This is important because it could change whether this ecosystem is a carbon sink or a carbon source. An ecosystem is called a carbon sink if it absorbs more CO2 through photosynthesis than it releases through respiration. Alternatively, an ecosystem can be a carbon source if more CO2 is released than absorbed. We want ecosystems to be carbon sinks because then they keep CO2 out of the atmosphere, where it contributes to global warming.

To test her idea, Trisha teamed up with fellow scientists Bonnie, Karen, and Jaron to take a closer look at how grazing grass influences whether the Y-K Delta ecosystem is releasing or absorbing CO2. To do their experiment they had to get creative. They considered getting a lot of geese, bringing them to an ungrazed area, and letting them chow down. However, it’s hard to capture geese and get them to graze exactly where you want. So instead, the research team simulated the effects of geese by cutting the grass to mimic nibbling and then gently vacuuming the pieces of grass to remove them.

The “Carbon and Geese” scientist team.

The team set up six different experimental areas. Inside each area were two plots: one that was left ungrazed, and the other which was artificially grazed. The research team then used a piece of equipment called a LI-COR to measure the quantity of CO2 in the air above each plot. They recorded the CO2 levels during the day and night. The comparison from day to night is one way to look at gross primary production and respiration in a system. At night, when there is no light, plants can’t photosynthesize, so the detected CO2 will be from respiration. The levels during the day represent a combination of CO2 absorption by plants and release from respiration.

To assess whether the ecosystem is a carbon sink or source, we need to determine the difference between respiration and gross primary production, or net ecosystem exchange (NEE). A negative NEE means the ecosystem absorbs more CO2 than it emits. A positive NEE means the ecosystem is releasing more CO2 than it is absorbing. In this way, scientists classify an ecosystem as either a carbon sink that is storing carbon or a carbon source that is releasing carbon into the atmosphere.

Featured scientists: Trisha Atwood, Karen Beard, and Jaron Adkins from Utah State University and Bonnie Waring from Imperial College. Written by Andrea Pokrzywinski.

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level: 8.9

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget:

Check out this website created by teacher Andrea who participated in the research and wrote this Data Nugget. You will find additional lesson plans, videos, slides, and articles to use in the classroom!

6.7.24

Seagrass survival in a super salty lagoon

A researcher in the Dunton Lab measures seagrasses underwater using a mask, snorkel, and a white PVC quadrat.

The activities are as follows:

Seagrasses are a group of plants that can live completely submerged underwater. They grow in the salty waters along coastal areas. Seagrasses are important because they provide a lot of benefits for other species. Like land plants, seagrasses use sunlight and carbon dioxide to grow and produce oxygen in a process called photosynthesis. The oxygen is then used by other organisms, such as animals, for respiration. Other organisms use seagrasses for food and habitat. Seagrass roots hold sediments in place, creating a more stable ocean bottom. In addition, the presence of seagrasses in coastal areas slows down waves and absorbs some of the energy, protecting shorelines.

Unfortunately, seagrasses are disappearing worldwide. Some reasons include damage from boats, disease, environmental changes, and storms. Seagrasses are sensitive to changes in their environment because they have particular conditions that they prefer. Temperature and light levels control how fast the plants can grow while salinity levels can limit their growth. Therefore, it is important to understand how these conditions are changing so that we can predict how seagrass communities might change as well.

Ken is a plant ecologist who has been monitoring seagrasses in southern Texas for over 30 years! Because of his long-term monitoring of the seagrasses in this area, Ken noticed that some seagrass species seemed to be in decline. Kyle started working with Ken during graduate school and wanted to understand more about what environmental conditions might have caused these changes. 

Manatee grass (Syringodium filiforme) located within the Upper Laguna Madre.

Texas has more seagrasses than almost any other state, and most of these plants are found in a place called Laguna Madre. During his yearly seagrass monitoring, Ken noticed that from 2012 – 2014 one of the common seagrasses, called manatee grass, died at many locations across Laguna Madre. Since then, the seagrass has grown back in some places, but not others. Kyle thought this would be an opportunity to look back at the long-term dataset that Ken has been collecting to see if there are any trends in environmental conditions in years with seagrass declines.

Each year, Ken, Kyle, and other scientists follow the same research protocols to collect data to monitor Laguna Madre meadows. Seagrass sampling takes place 2 – 4 times a year, even in winter! To find the manatee grass density, scientists dig out a 78.5 cm2 circular section (10 cm diameter) of the seagrass bed while snorkeling. They then bring samples back to the lab and count the number of seagrasses. While they are in the field, they also measure environmental conditions, like water temperature and salinity. A sensor is left in the meadow that continuously measures the amount of light that reaches the depth of the seagrass.

Kyle used data from this long-term monitoring to investigate his question about how environmental conditions may have impacted manatee grass. For each variable, he calculated the average across the sampling dates to obtain one value for that year. He wanted to compare manatee grass density with salinity, water temperature, and light levels that reach manatee grass. He thought there could be trends in environmental conditions in the years that manatee grass had low or high densities.

Featured scientists: Kyle Capistrant-Fossa (he/him) & Ken Dunton (he/him) from the U-Texas at Austin

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level 9.8

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget:

There is another Data Nugget that looks at these seagrass meadows! Follow Megan and Kevin as they look at how photosynthesis can be monitored through the sound of bubbles and the acoustic data they produce.

Follow this link for more information on the Texas Seagrass Monitoring Program, including additional datasets to examine with students.

There are articles in peer-reviewed scientific journals related to this research, including:

National Park Service information about the Gulf Coast Inventory and Monitoring.

Texas Parks and Wildlife information on seagrass:

11.17.23

The prairie burns with desire

Stuart showing an Echinacea flower setting seed.

The activities are as follows:

Fire plays a crucial role for prairie habitats across North America. Native Americans have long observed that lush and green pastures grow after a wildfire. In many areas, it is part of current and historical native culture to imitate this natural process by deliberately burning the prairie in a controlled way. This land management practice has many benefits, such as helping native grasses form seeds, thinning out plants, and enhancing habitat for prairie animals. By using controlled fires to cultivate these areas, Native Americans increase the availability of food and connect to the environment and their cultural traditions.

Some land management agencies plan prescribed burns to increase the health of prairie ecosystems. However, fire is still suppressed in many North American prairies due to the possible damage to human development. In these areas, scientists have observed that fire suppression contributes to local plant species extinctions, but we do not know why.

Stuart is a scientist interested in how fire can help prairie plants. In the late 1990s, Stuart was in central Minnesota searching for prairie plants in the Echinacea genus. The prairie was ablaze with flowers, so he had no difficulty finding plenty of plants. He tagged each plant so that he could study them again in the future. However, when he returned the following year, the field had almost no flowers! He kept returning to this same field. A few years later he found the site was again filled with flowers. That year there had been a prairie fire. Visually seeing the impacts of fire on the landscape is a memory he will not forget.

Stuart became interested in learning more about how fire affects the reproduction of native prairie plants. He knew that Echinacea plants grow in many places, but they have a hard time making seeds. This genus cannot self-pollinate, meaning they must be fertilized with pollen from a genetically different plant. Echinacea plants are also dependent on insects, such as bees, to pollinate them.

Echinacea flower

In 1996, a research team started collecting data on Echinacea plants in a large research site in Minnesota. This prairie site had a schedule for prescribed burns, or controlled fires that are started by experts to manage the land. These burns would happen every 4-6 years during the spring.

The team established a set of plot locations that they visited each summer. They searched for and mapped the location of all flowering Echinacea plants within these plots. They took measurements on each Echinacea plant – whether it was flowering, and the distance to its second closest Echinacea neighbor.

Stuart decided to take a new look at this long-term dataset. He had two ideas for how fire might be helping Echinacea plants. First, fire might help all the plants get on the same schedule and make flowers at the same time. This synchrony, or flowering at the same time, could help pollen get from one flower to another. Second, fire might remove competing plants from the area, opening up bare ground for new seeds to establish. This would allow Echinacea plants to be closer to one another, again making it easier for pollen to move between flowers.

With these data, Stuart could compare years with and without prescribed burns to see whether fire helped Echinacea flowering. To look at whether fire decreased the space between blooming Echinacea plants, he looked at the distance between a focal plant and its second-closest neighbor. To see whether fire increased the synchrony of flowering, Stuart used the data to calculate the proportion of Echinacea plants that were in bloom during the summer sampling period.

Featured scientist: Stuart Wagenius from the Chicago Botanic Gardens Written by: Harrison Aakre

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 8.6

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget:

More information about the Echinacea project, based in Minnesota. There are additional datasets to explore, blog posts from the field, identification guides, and pictures of the experiments.

Article to learn about cultural perspectives that are traditionally not represented in textbooks. Native Americans have, and continue to incorporate ecology, observations, and making sense of patterns for millennia.

For more information about indigenous knowledges, or traditional ecological knowledge, check out the following websites:

Published journal article about this research. Wagenius, S. et al. 2020. Fire synchronizes flowering and boosts reproduction in a widespread but declining prairie species. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.

6.6.23

Trees and the city

A neighborhood with many tree species and a lot of tree cover.

The activities are as follows:

We often imagine nature as being a place outside of cities. But within our cities, we are surrounded by nature – in fact, most human interactions with nature happen within urban areas. Picturing a tree, we might imagine it in a remote forest, yet many trees are planted by residents and local governments within cities. Trees provide important benefits, such as beauty and shade. The number and types of tree species that are planted in a neighborhood can increase the benefits received from trees in urban areas.

When Adrienne first moved to the Twin Cities in Minnesota, she started exploring Minneapolis and St. Paul by bike. Biking is done at a slow enough pace that she can travel long distances but still make observations about neighborhoods in these cities. As an ecologist, she naturally found herself looking for patterns in trees. For example, she noticed some older neighborhoods in St. Paul have a lot of large trees that provide plenty of shade and tree cover. In other neighborhoods, Adrienne saw fewer types of trees and noticed that she spent less time shaded by branches and leaves.

Adrienne biking around Minneapolis-St. Paul.

Adrienne started conversations with her colleagues about their observations of differences in urban landscapes. They discussed the ways in which laws, policies, and practices (“the way things are done”) give advantages to certain groups of people over others. These advantages are woven into our cultural systems.

Adrienne and her fellow researchers expected that neighborhoods with wealthier and more white residents would have benefited from a long history of greater investment.

Therefore, these neighborhoods were expected to have greater tree cover from the large old trees that have been growing there for many years. They also expected these neighborhoods would have more types of trees. In contrast, the researchers expected that less wealthy neighborhoods and those with a greater percentage of Black, Indigenous, and other People of Color (BIPOC) would have less tree cover and fewer types of trees because of chronic lower investment in these neighborhoods.

To research these ideas, Adrienne and her colleagues combined three different sources of publicly available data:

  • U.S. Census data, used to estimate % BIPOC and average median household income per ‘Block Group’ (similar to a neighborhood).
  • Satellite images, which are often used to estimate % tree cover, measure the percent of land area covered by the tree canopy. Adrienne looked at tree cover in the Block Group areas used in the Census.
  • City data that include the location and species for each tree planted along public streets to calculate tree species richness in each Block Group. Tree species richness is the number of different tree species in an area and is a measure of tree biodiversity used by many ecologists.

Featured scientists: Adrienne Keller (she/her) from the University of Minnesota

The data in this activity are from the MSP Long-term Ecological Research Site. The focus of the research at this site is centered on ecological interactions in urban environments. You can learn more here.

Flesch–Kincaid Reading Grade Level = 9.4

Additional teacher resources related to this Data Nugget include:

  • You can have students read more about environmental justice research from the MSP LTER in this peer-reviewed article (email us at datanuggetsk16@gmail.com if you need a downloadable version):
    • Rebecca H. Walker, Hannah Ramer, Kate D. Derickson & Bonnie L. Keeler (2023) Making the City of Lakes: Whiteness, Nature, and Urban Development in Minneapolis. Annals of the American Association of Geographers, DOI: 10.1080/24694452.2022.2155606
  • This short video features Adrienne as she describes the motivation and process behind her research study.
3.19.23

Mowing for Monarchs – Extension Activities

Gabe Knowles has developed and piloted several data activities to accompany these Data Nuggets activities. For the first activity, Gabe developed an extension to bring his data into elementary classrooms. Using beautiful art created by Corinn Rutkoski, the following are materials to print and use the activity in your classroom:

This activity was first piloted at Michigan Science Teachers Association Annual Meeting in 2023.
Next Page »