Data, data, everywhere, and not a trend to believe!

Am I talking about my data? No, thank Darwin.

Today I'd like to talk about a problem that we're continually facing as a society; the overload of information that reaches our ears and eyes - especially in the form of numbers! It seems like I can't turn on the TV these days without seeing some new statistic about what will kill me or what kind of food I should eat. Seriously people, do I eat the egg yolks or not?? Make up your minds!

I'm currently taking a statistics course taught by a brilliant biological statistician at Texas Tech. He's one of those teachers that you just sit and absorb; I imagine if I was a scholar at the School of Athens, I would feel the same way about Plato or Socrates, but I digress. Statistics is what I want to talk about today. Numbers. It's hard to know what numbers to believe; how do we tell the fact from the fiction?

Unfortunately, the only way to find out what's real is to fact-check every piece of information you see. The best way to do this is get on Google Scholar and find the primary resource. Thankfully in science, the peer-review process of publication almost always weeds out those claims that are based in fiction or "noisy" data. But sometimes, those papers still slip through the cracks. We only know as much as those who've done science before us, and we can only do as much as the current technology allows us to. Sometimes it's hard to believe that at one time it was commonly thought that the Earth was flat - and that notion was probably based on something science-like!

So why am I taking the time to talk about this? Well, I think it's important that I (and you and everyone else) don't just absorb all of the information we hear, no matter what the source - with popular media, you never really know the source of the information. The only way to find the true meaning behind all the numbers is to look at the numbers yourself!

And on that note, an interesting email came through my inbox this morning; a post about using climate change and other "hot" environmental topics' data sets to boost inquiry learning in the classroom. Don't worry, I have a link: Macroecology Environmental Education. This website, funded through the ESA (Ecological Society of America), has valuable information about how to use data sets in the classroom, and some resources and links to example data sets. This sort of resource exemplifies one of the hardest parts of science to translate for students; we know what we know because of numbers. Mind effectively blown.

How do you feel about data sets? Do large batches of numbers make you want to scream and run away? Don't worry, you're not alone! :)

Working overtime - good stuff :)

This week's post is going to be short and sweet - I've been hard to put some finishing touches on my personal portfolio website. Without further ado - here it is! :)

Website Link: www.myweb.ttu.edu/aarner


Please leave me comments on things you'd like to see, or ways I can make the information easier to access. Enjoy!

♬ You can't always get what you want ♬

So we just finished round 1 of trials back here is Lubbock, and unfortunately, things aren't going quite as planned. If you remember, my hypothesis about the lab toads (from the invasive range) is that:

Cane toads from the invasive range (S. Florida) are, on average, more exploratory and better learners than toads from the native range (Panama).


Why did I think this? Well, when an animal is invasive, it is more likely to encounter novel (new) environments and items. High exploration and mobility would allow toads to gather more information. If the toads use this information to locate food resources, then they are learning.

However as I said, things aren't going quite as planned. Why not, you ask? Well, I'm honestly not sure. You see, we have a confounding factor. A confounding factor is something that may alter the response variable (in this case, the behavior of the toads in the arena) without prior knowledge. In the first round of trials, the confounding factor seems to be... moonlight.

Yes, the moonlight. The bulb that I went out of my way to purchase and install in the arena room. I didn't think about it beforehand, but the bulb is purple/blue tinged to "mimic" moonlight. We discovered over the summer that blue colored plastic has an interesting effect on the toads; they seem to calm down and stop struggling. We termed this blue plastic "the blue cone of silence", and thought nothing of it other than being a funny anecdote. Well, fast forward to the beginning of the first round of trials. Arena set up, lighting in place, toads are ready - and they hardly move at all. And of course, it just so happened that the first day of trials I tested all 3 experimental group individuals in this round - so I have no idea if they were just unmotivated, if the light affected them adversely, or if there's something else going on altogether. I immediately switched back to using the low-intensity LED lights I had used in the pilot study, but the damage had already been done. Oh well, such is science sometimes!

The good news is that we're starting round 2 on Monday of next week, with 5 more toads. Hopefully I'll be able to discern what's really going on, and make further predictions about the behavior of the lab toads. Until then, I'm working hard on about 6 other writing projects, and trying to finish gathering my data from this summer. The life of a graduate student is busy, busy, busy!

When it comes to science, is it better to be a face or a name?

Hi folks,

Sorry I skipped out on Tuesday - I only have myself to blame, no excuse. :( Actually, I do have an excuse - I started toad trials on Monday, and this week has proven to be a little hectic. Oh, well, cest la vie right?

I'll share some info about the project next time, but for now I wanted to talk about an interesting topic; the 'faces' of science. There are a great many scientists who contribute to their respective fields, yet most of them are unknown by the public. I mean, think about it - how many Nobel prize winners can you name? Fortunately, because no one really becomes a scientist in order to be famous (although everyone hopes for that 'breakthrough' that gets their name out there)!

Some scientists are so well known that anyone can recognize them by name, but can you name these well-known thinkers by their faces?

From top to bottom, we have Galileo Galilee, Sir Isaac Newton, Benjamin Franklin, Gregor Mendel, Thomas Edison, Watson and Crick, and Albert Einstein. How many of these did you guess right? Do you know what each scientist is responsible for contributing to the field?

Don't feel too bad if you didn't recognize many of these scientists - most lived long before the use of video cameras or photography. Today's technological advancements make it much easier to identify people as "famous".

Here are a few of the more contemporary "faces of science" that you may recognize:

You may have been able to name these right off the bat! Top to bottom: Jack Hannah, Jeff Corwin, Steve Irwin, Jane Goodall, and Steven Hawking (OK, so he's not a conservationist, but he's a cool scientist!) Of these "modern scientists", do you know what they contributed to each of their respective fields?

Now here's some food for thought: Is it better to be well-known for who you are, or for what you did?

Toads and Animal Behavior - go together like PB & J!

Not that toads are tasty, or I would eat them, but more along the lines that toads are used to study all different kinds of animal behavior.

Today is a pretty crazy one for me, so I'm going to take the cop out method and show you something cool online (but I did remember to post!!).

I give you... the cutest toad to ever roam New Mexico (ok, I might be a tiny bit biased)

New Mexico Spadefoot Toad (Spea multiplicata)

This site contains a fantastic learning module on research done with this species at UNC. It's a little involved (maybe 8th-12th graders only), but the information and the pictures are great!

Before I go, I bet you're all wondering how those cinder blocks turned out, hmm? Well, check it out:

 They're not exactly the same size, but they'll do just fine for what I need! :) I should have the arena setup completed tomorrow, in order to start trials on Monday. I'll have lots of pictures and updates for you on Tuesday. Have a great weekend!

When Designing an Experiment, Creativity is the Key!

In the next few days I'm going to try and start 'mobile blogging' - that is, start blogging from my smart phone. I'm hoping this will keep me on track with remembering to do updates on the right days. Unfortunately, I've got schedules in 3 places right now (desktop calendar, google calendar and iPhone reminders) and none of the are quite synced up. I'm working on this, too - the first couple of weeks back at school are always crazy with commitments, and I clearly need a better way to keep track of it all. But enough about me, let's talk about science!


We're gearing up to start the first set of trials with the Lubbock toads next week, so this week has been mainly about getting the arena set back up. As you may know, the arena we used in Panama was considered 'semi-outdoors' (since it was under a concrete block house, with a concrete floor), however the arena we use in the lab is in a completely controlled environment. Our lab is actually in a basement, so we control everything; temperature, humidity, light, and noise. This can be good, but it can also be time consuming to set up. For example, I need to make sure that the lighting during arena trials is as close to natural moonlight levels as possible. Clearly, it is challenging to mimic the moon! Lucky for us, you can purchase light bulbs that 'mimic' moonlight - that is to say, they should have the same light intensity as the low levels of light that radiate off the moon.

I purchased two of these bulbs and two light fixtures, and I plan to get those set up in the next couple of days.

If you've got your 'scientist hat' on, I bet you're thinking, "but how do we really know if these bulbs are the the same as the moonlight in Panama??" Well, that is a great question. Unfortunately, we don't know..... but we can test it! We can use a spectrophotometer to measure the intensity of the light emitted bythe moonlight bulbs(usually measured in watts). We can then compare this to measurements of actual light intensity from the moon taken in Gamboa. Since moonlight is actually a range of intensities, from dark nights with no moon to nights that are very bright with a full moon, it is likely that the moonlight bulbs will fall somewhere within that range. I'll post pictures as soon as I get the bulbs set up, and show you how it's done!

Meanwhile, back at the lab, we have another slight logistical problem.You see, a long time ago, way back in April, I met with my committee to discuss my research proposal. When I talked about comparing data between the Panama and Florida toad populations and using the same arena in both places, one of my committee members asked me if cinder blocks in Panama are the same size as cinder blocks in the U.S. "Of course they are!" I said, and he chuckled and shook his head. Fast forward 2 months, to early June when I am setting up my arena in Panama, and low and behold, the blocks are differently sized! Luckily, they are the same in height and width, but Panamanian cinder blocks just so happen to be 1 1/2 inches (approx.) longer than American cinder blocks. Now I know, and you do too, in case that shows up on Jeopardy one day. So anyways, I knew this was going to be an issue I would need to deal with, but I put it out of my mind and told myself I would deal with it when I returned to Lubbock.


So, here I am, back in Lubbock and dealing with the issue. I checked out a few masonry companies around town, but it seems the standard is 16" long for cinder blocks (I need 17 1/2"). Then I had one of those rare moments of genius - extend the blocks I already have! But how? I looked into clay and plaster, but most of these materials are messy, expensive, and apparently don't hold up well in moist situations. What to do, what to do. Then, I had yet another moment of truth: 

Concrete! Of course! I used concrete in the past to make pretty sturdy stepping stones, so why not make little block-extensions? So with that, I ran my idea by my advisor, and was off to Home Depot for supplies. I found fast-drying concrete, some 1"x3" unfinished wood, wood screws and a circular saw (that I bought on my own - every lady needs power tools). Two days and a lot of measuring and cutting later, and here's what I got: 

Modifying some instructions I found online for making pavers, I made wooden frames and filled them 1" deep with sand. Then I marked off where I should fill the cement to, and coated the wood in vegetable oil (to keep the cement from sticking). Here's what the frame looks like full of concrete :

I made 5 total frames and filled them up. I need 13 total extenders, so I'll need to do this 2 more times. 

After about 24 hours of setting, we'll see what the concrete blocks look like, and if they're usable, then we're good to go! 

Sometimes, all you need is a little inspiration, and something that seems like a problem can turn into a craft project. :)

Life, through the eyes of scientists

While perusing the internet this afternoon, I found an amazing blog and some great posts about humanity and the self, and psychological research in general. While most of it would probably bore or confuse you, I think this whimsically beautiful video is definitely worth sharing.

A Record Of Life from Owen Gatley and Luke Jinks on Vimeo.