Today:

1

• Today
• Ecosystem Ecology
• Overview
• Brief history
• Unique CSU role

2
L. Slobodkin once said that ecology without
species is the ultimate abomination.

3
The CSU story(from Golley 1993)
International Biological Program Original
theme Biological basis of human
welfare. Original action areas conservation,
human genetics and improvements in the use of
natural resources
Morphed into Understanding biological
productivity as a basis for human
well-being Ultimately, a largely ecosystems
program studying productivity at the biome level.
US efforts led originally by E. Odum Grassland
biome studies led by CSUs George Van Dyne
4
George Van Dyne
Described as a workaholic and very
enthusiastic 35 when he was appointed Director
of the Grassland Biome program in 1967
He taught himself computer programming at nights
and on weekends in grad school and had been on
the faculty (Animal husbandry) at CSU, and
Montana State before moving to Oak Ridge Natl.
lab and Univ. of Tennessee (before returning to
CSU)
5
Very Quantitative in all aspects of his
life Success grant and publications (things
you could measure) Management style memos and
tables of organization, not personal
relations Expertise by 1967 was clearly modeling
6
The grassland biome group at CSU
Asked for 2 million (in 1967 12 million
today!) to study producers, consumers,
decomposers, abiotic drivers at one intensive and
many extensive grassland sites modeling would
integrate the work 80 investigators involved and
over 60 identified projects
Not funded! Revised version of 700,000 was
funded a year later. Later requested 2.2 million
(for a 1 year period 36 million today for a
standard 3-yr grant!) to study various states of
the grassland ecosystems to determine
interrelationships of structure and function, to
determine the variability and magnitude of rates
of energy flow and nutrient cycling, and to
encompass these parameters and variables in an
overall systems framework and mathematical model.
7
Or give us enough , we will measure everything
important, build a model and understand all
important components of grasslands related to
productivity!
About ½ the funding requested was ultimately
receiveda huge investment for one biome, and
unprecedented in ecology even for today
8
Ultimately, lots of fundingbut problems quickly
arose
- Management of large numbers of scientists and
technicians was impossible - Inherent conflict
between goals of individual projects of the
investigators and the overall project goals arose
- Top-down dictates bothered ecologists who were
used to being in charge
- Ecologists tired of being technicians and
left - Students were hired but not well-trained,
and data quality suffered Thus, research was
increasingly criticized
- Bickering between those in IBP and those
outside increased and funding from NSF was
decreased
9
- Gaps between specialists who studied key
systems components and modelers widened there
were no people between them to interpret the data
- Integrators (senior scientists) were hired,
but it didnt help (Many of these folks became
highly successful ecologists at CSU and
elsewhere)
Van Dyne went on sabbatical (1972) after several
years of working 7 days a week While on
sabbatical, one of the senior scientists wrote a
renewal proposal with de-centralized leadership
and more independent projects
10
When he returned, Van Dyne was furious and went
to NSF demanding that he be restored to full
authorityhe was denied and came back and told
the staff that, despite just being awarded 2
million, the program was shutting down and they
should look for jobs! CSU asked him to resign as
IBP director and he lost the program completely
in 1974 Other senior scientists continued with
parts of the program and Van Dyne remained
involved till 1976
Eventually, Van Dyne, who wife left him during
the turmoil, died of a heart attack at 49 in the
CSU Range Science Dept in 1981.
11
IBP Program in general and the grassland project
in particular couldnt live up to its promises
and was viewed from the outside as a failure
Not fair -- much good science resulted at the
ecosystem component and process level, but the
promised whole-system model and complete
understanding was never achieved (despite 16.3
million from 1968-1976 - 80 million in todays
dollars).
Other biome programs (tundra, desert, coniferous
and deciduous forest) were organized differently
and independently so integration among biome
programs was difficult (1800 scientists were
involved!). Other biome programs failed in their
own ways as well
12
Positives - Good science, tremendous model
development - Ecosystems Studies Program at NSF
resulted from IBP - NREL at CSU was established
and benefited greatly, and today continues the
modeling and systems approach
13
What can we learn from the careers of really
successful Ecologists?

• Some caveats
• Success is defined by being on the Most Highly
  Cited List
• Many other ways to define success
• Success in ones career may or may not equal
  success in other aspects of ones life

14
Jane LubchencoEcosystem Ecologist

• Nathan Batesel
• Peter Bruss
• Megan Lowery
• Zoe Miller

15
Childhood

• Grew up in Denver, CO
• Both parents were physicians
• Growing up in Colorado, her family was active in
  the outdoors

16
Education

• BA Biology Colorado College 1969
• MS Zoology University of Washington
  1971
• - Advisor Bob Payne
• PhD Ecology Harvard University 1975
• - Advisor Thomas Schoener

17
Past Positions

• 1975-1977 Assistant Professor, Harvard
  University
• 1976 Visiting Professor, University of West
  Indies, Jamaica
• 1977-1982 Assistant Professor, Oregon State
  University
• 1982-1988 Associate Professor, Oregon State
  University
• 1978-1984 Research Associate, Smithsonian
  Institute
• 1989-1992 Chair, Oregon State University, Dept.
  of Zoology
• 1993-2000 Director, World Resources Institute
• 1996-2000 2000-2006 member, National Science
  Board (nominated by President Clinton)

18
Current Positions

• 1988-Present Professor, Oregon State University
• 1993-Present Distinguished Professor of Zoology,
  Oregon State University
• 1995-Present Wayne and Gladys Valley Professor
  of Marine Biology, Oregon State University
• 1995-Present Trustee, Monterey Bay Aquarium
• 1995-Present Trustee, Environmental Defense
• 1999-Present Director, Royal Swedish Academy of
  Sciences, Beijer Institute for Ecological
  Economics
• 2000-Present Director, SeaWeb
• 2001-Present Trustee, David and Lucile Packard
  Foundation

19
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
(NOAA)

• Nominated by President Obama to be top
  administrator and confirmed in March 2009
• First woman marine biologist to hold this
  position
• Scientific knowledge should inform
  decision-making. Scientists have an obligation to
  communicate their knowledge in a clear, credible,
  relevant and useable fashion, and that management
  and policy decisions should focus on the common
  good and the long-term. 

20
Major Elected Offices Held

• International Council for Science (ICSU)
  President 2002-2005
• National Academy of Sciences, Council 1999-2002,
  Executive Committee 2000-2002
• American Association for the Advancement of
  Science President, Chair of Board of Directors
  1995-98
• Ecological Society of America Vice-President
  President, 1988-94
• ICSU's Scientific Committee on Problems of the
  Environment, SCOPE, Executive Committee, 1992-95

21
Founded Organizations

• The Leopold Leadership Program (1977)
• COMPASS (the Communication Partnership for
  Science and the Sea, communicates marine
  sciences) (1999)
• Climate Central (2008)
• http//www.climatecentral.org/

22
Research Interests

• Science and the environment
• Public understanding of science
• Sustainability science
• Ecosystem services
• Ecological causes and consequences of global
  change
• Biodiversity
• Sustainable ecological systems
• Chemical ecology
• Biogeography
• Evolutionary community ecology

23
Partnership for Interdisciplinary Studies of
Coastal Oceans -PISCO

• Long Term Ecological Consortium
• Established in 1999
• Purpose To answer key questions about coastal
  marine ecosystems that were previously
  unapproachable due to limitation in traditional
  marine ecological or oceanographic research.
• Goal Investigate the nearshore marine ecosystems
  in an innovative, coordinated, and
  interdisciplinary fashion to advance scientific
  frontiers and to provide better understanding for
  conservation and management decisions.

24
Research Changes Through Time
25
Publications per year
26
Citations per year

27
Citations of Most Cited Articles by Year
28
Changes in Journal Publications by Year
Ambio
Bioscience
Ecological Applications
Ecological Monograph
29
Changes in Journal Publications by Year (cont)

• Science Journal

30
Successful Students

• Matt Bracken- Assistant Professor of Biology,
  Oregon State University
• Jennifer Burnaford Visiting Professor at
  University of Puget Sound
• Tess Freidenburg - Lecturer at California State
  University East Bay
• Elise Granek Assistant Professor, Environmental
  Science and Management, Portland State University
• Anne Guerry NOAA Researcher
• John Howieson previously a radiologist MD,
  Professor at Oregon State University
• Received a MS from Jane at age 74
• Chris Krenz North Pacific Project Manager at
  Oceana
• Heather Leslie Assistant Professor of
  Environmental Studies and Biology, Brown
  University
• Karina Nielsen Assistant Professor at Sonoma
  State University
• Laura Petes Affliated Scientist, Coastal Marine
  Biology Laboratory, Florida State University,
  NOAA Climate Program
• Roly Russell Naeem Lab, Dept of Ecology,
  Evolution, and Environmental Biology, Columbia
  University (Ecology with no apology)
• Eric Sanford Assistant Professor at UC Davis in
  the Dept of Evolution and Ecology and Bodega
  Marine Laboratory

31
Questions ??

• Dr. Jane Lubchenco
• NOAA Administrator
• Wayne and Gladys Valley Professor of Marine
  Biology and Distinguished Professor of Zoology
• Department of Zoology, Oregon State University
• Corvallis, Oregon

32
Lindeman 1942 Cook 1977 --------------------------
- Odum 1969 Chaffin 1998 -------------------------
-- General Comments?
Also, may I include 'ooze' to describe a
fundamental part of the ecosystem I write about
in my thesis? Nascent ooze is my new favorite
science term I love the fact that ooze is used
as a technical scientific classification in
figure 1.
33
Lindeman 1942 Cook 1977 What is the motivation
for this paper? How successful is it?
34
The Lindeman story I found it very interesting
to see a real-life example of the peer-review
process and see the criticism Lindeman got for
not having real data to back up his
hypotheses. The persistence of Lindeman and Odum
in the face of peer rejection demonstrates to me
that stick-to-it-tiveness is a characteristic
that is valuable not just during the process of
acquiring a PhD., but rather throughout ones
career. Furthermore, having faith in ones own
beliefs and being humble enough to be open to
criticism are also life skills we can all benefit
from valuing. I was shocked to read that
Lindeman's trophic paper was rejected by Ecology
given its later influence. The rejection was
based solely on the bias of two scientists who
failed to see the importance of Lindeman's
writing. How does the modern journal system work
compared to the early 40's? Are papers still
being rejected for publication based exclusively
on the opinion of two individuals or is it more
of a larger consensus?
35
Journal Review system Depends on impact factor
and prestige of journal (acceptance rate can
vary from 10 to 75 - ultimately) Most
journals - 2 anonymous reviews and an associate
editor to mediate/decide Reviews take from 1
week (bad news if Science/Nature) to 6
months! High profile initial, very harsh
pre-screening prior to full review If the 2
reviews are split, often a revision goes to a 3rd
reviewer Few (no) double blind reviews in
Ecological Journals Very few papers are accepted
without revision and re-review