ABI 150 Section 2 - Day 3: To Spine or Not to Spine: That Was the Question

 Today in the classroom, our class got a firsthand look at the realities of conducting field research — from the logistics to the limits imposed by time, budget, and ethics.

We started a little behind schedule thanks to some technical issues with the projector, but that didn’t slow us down. Jessica, our MC, introduced herself and set the tone for the day with the infamous name game, where we shared our names and something we enjoyed either on Friday’s hike or over the weekend. Jessica then shifted to discussing the research project framework. One of the key takeaways was how short a quarter really is for a full-scale research project. She outlined several constraints we need to consider: time, location, budget (we only have $1,000 to work with!), and, importantly, ethical approval for working with animals.

She emphasized IACUC approval (Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee) for vertebrates, noting that involving vertebrate animals in our projects is likely unrealistic because the approval process is complex and time-consuming. This was a useful reality check: while the idea of working with animals in the field is exciting, logistical and ethical considerations must guide our research design. 

From there, we jumped into a discussion of different taxa. Insects seemed to be the obvious choice at first: they’re everywhere, easy to study, don’t need IACUC, and have short life cycles. Sure, not everyone loves bugs, and that’s okay. Birds, on the other hand, offered interesting observation opportunities but came with complications: they can fly away before you can record much, weather could keep them away, and yes, IACUC is required. Ethical restrictions, habitat limitations, and environmental unpredictability made them tricky to work with. 

The Brainstorm Journey Begins!

Then it was time to break into small groups. The discussion board Jessica shared guided our brainstorming, and ideas started flying. Some students were excited about water striders, noting how abundant they are and how they could even tell us about water quality. Others thought observing birds could be interesting — maybe looking at quill patterns or walking behavior. Some imagined plant competition experiments, planting different numbers of plants in plots and measuring growth. And a few were drawn to tadpoles and algae, or the interactions between dragonfly larvae and tadpoles, though IACUC restrictions and temporary ponds posed challenges. Mosquito larvae were also on the table for anyone interested in near-water studies.

When groups shared their ideas, the creativity was inspiring:

• Group 1 (Mario, Kendall, Jennifer) wanted to study western fence lizards — how they expend energy depending on the angle of their perch, how predators affect them, how mates interact, and even how fast they “run” or how many push-ups they do. They also thought about water striders as indicators of water quality.

• Group 2 (Rosie, Marshall, Kaya) focused on invasive species, proposing to collect eggs from invertebrates, which avoids the IACUC issues entirely.

• Group 3 (Caelan, Alejandra, Aja, Arianna) explored water striders and tadpoles, thinking about behavioral studies like movement versus size and the effects of water pollution. They discussed using both temporary and permanent ponds, noting that the river at Devil’s Gate is temporary, but both types of water bodies could provide valuable data. They concluded that, with careful planning, these studies could be completed within the 10-week quarter.

• Group 4 (Cristal, Kayla, Alan, Eric) focused on tadpoles, investigating how algae affects their populations, possible exclusion experiments, and the role of dragonfly larvae as predators. They even noted that some frogs in the wetlands may be endangered, which would make such studies both meaningful and challenging — not to mention exciting for those willing to navigate IACUC approval.

From Brainstorm to Word Cloud: Clearer skies ahead!

After sharing these unique ideas to the whole class, Jessica set up a Word Cloud, in which we entered the words and/or phrases bouncing around in our heads. The cloud, as pictured below, yielded some very interesting results, including the words “push” and “:)”. 

From there, we organized everything into six general categories: aquatic insects, tadpoles, animal behavior, habitat quality, predation, and species composition. Jessica then led us through a “Hunger Games” style discussion, in which we listed pros and cons of each of the six topics. By the end of the debate, we all agreed that…

…We were not entirely sure whether we wanted to work with invertebrates or vertebrates! Jessica and Marshall reminded us that not knowing at this point was okay–we had a few more class sessions to narrow a research question down. We did agree to conduct our research near/in the water, as most of the class seemed interested in the organisms populating Putah Creek and the creek in Stebbins Cold Canyon.

By the end of the morning, it was clear how much thought and planning field research requires. Each idea had trade-offs — abundance vs. ethical restrictions, accessibility vs. excitement, practicality vs. curiosity. But that’s part of the fun. 

Between sessions:

• Please read through/peruse the maps/species lists/information sheets I have compiled in the Google Doc located in the “miscellaneous” folder on Google Drive. I will also post a link in the Discord. Identify a species you are looking forward to potentially spotting in either the wetlands or the bypass, and be prepared to share it on Friday during our name game.

• Additionally, since there isn’t enough time to view the entire Yolo bypass, we will be taking a vote as to which parking lot to stop at for our site number 2 (refer to schedule below). Please take a look at the map and choose a parking lot that piques your interest.

• Read How to Do Ecology chapters 3 and 4.

• Make sure your R studio assignment is complete.

• Pack plenty of water, a lunch/snack, etc. for our second trip to the water. It WILL rain, so make sure you are adequately geared up. Additionally, if you are able to, please bring: 

• A camera or something that takes photos

• A container for collection

• Notebook/pen/writing surface for recording scavenger hunt finds

Did I Say Clearer Skies Ahead? I Take that Back…

Our next trip will be to the Davis wetlands and the Yolo Bypass with a focus on vertebrates, since we still need to decide between vertebrates and invertebrates. Here is some important information regarding our field locations:

• Weather

• There is an 80% chance of rain, with precipitation likely occurring around 12pm, when we will be outdoors. Bring a rain jacket, umbrella, or both. Also be prepared to have muddy shoes. We will be by the water the entire day.

• Bathroom Access

• There will be access to bathrooms along the driving path in yolo bypass, and there is potentially a small porta potty outside the wetlands. Prepare accordingly. 

• Potential hazards 

• There are no steep slopes on either site we are visiting, but due to the rain and the moisture level, the trails will likely be muddy/slippery. Please use caution when navigating the wetlands. Other than that, the wetlands and the bypass are generally safe areas for wildlife viewing.

Tentative schedule for Friday (subject to change)

• 10:00 AM: Meet in parking lot 26

• 10:30 AM: Arrive at Davis Wetlands/briefing/name game

• 10:45 AM: Scavenger hunt/collection time!

• 12:00 PM: Regroup, show and tell

• 12:10 PM: Arrive at Yolo Bypass, eat lunch, vote on site 2 location, explore bypass site 1 (Lot A)

• 1:40 PM: Regroup, move to site 2 

• 3:00 PM: Results of scavenger hunt

• 3:20 PM: Head back to campus

See you in lot 26 for a soggy critter catching day!