Real and imagined boundaries, magical people, and the science/policy interface

Small introductory note:

Let’s be honest, people: my blog is kind of pathetic. Anemic. Atrophied. Wandering hopelessly through the desert without food or water, incapable of muttering a coherent thought. Today I vow to more than double my entries by the end of June (that kind of sounds like a campaign promise, eh?). Let’s get going!

The post:

Johnny Cash was on to something: walking the line. Yes, that sounds good. But the line I want to walk is the line between science and policy. That imaginary bureaucratic, academic, and largely psychological line that we draw between the science we do and the world that can use it.

For some people, the line is more a brick wall. It is an impervious boundary that divides two disciplines. This is embraced by some academics because it makes them feel safe. On the other hand, many scientists lament the brick wall. They do this not because they want to see what’s on the other side, but, perhaps, because they sincerely long for a day when the powerful folks living on the policy side of the wall will climb over to see what’s on the science side. This may very well be a vain hope. Let’s be frank: the folks on the policy side of the wall would much prefer—for good reason—that scientists build some kind of ramp, or whatever complex machinery they need to build to feel smart, and have a go at effectively presenting their work to the “big boys.”

And yet, some scientists have turned this brick wall into more of a semi-permeable membrane. They appear to know how to package their material and present it effectively so that it floats through small, imaginary pores in the membrane, disseminating on both side. My guess is that there are people on either side of the line who would like to make these pores bigger, easier to find, and more frequently used. Or maybe we need someone to navigate the membrane for groups on both sides.

On Fridays when we’re both free, I meet with my supervisor at NIWA to discuss progress on the project, any problems I may have, and whatever tangential topics we discover in the heat of the moment.

Yesterday we chatted about this line and how I would like to be working right at the line, or even—gasp—crossing it frequently during my career. He mentioned that what is really needed is someone whose sole purpose is to patrol the line. No, patrol is the wrong word. Negotiate the line. A liaison, if you will.

This excites me. “Yes,” I said, “I want to be that person!” The problem, he says, is that no one really wants to employ that person (at least it doesn’t seem they want to in NZ) because they aren’t really “billable.” What do they produce? What to they make? I think they make all the science more meaningful by, you know, getting it to be useful to policy-makers. Therefore that person actually makes everything better and makes the research institution an asset to the country. That doesn’t seem to be something that translates into making money, however. Also, it’s not an easy job!

He launched into the job description for someone who might want to liaise between ocean scientists and policy-makers:

--Understands ocean science…broadly…. (does anyone?)

--Knows how to get scientists to explain their work

--Understands policy

--Personable

--Is perceptive and can compromise

--Good at communicating

--Knows what the policy world needs

--Knows how the science world can help

--Basically, possesses magical powers

Whoa there!! I have to be MAGICAL?!

A moment of thought followed by: “Yes…. that’s still the kind of thing I want to do.” Now I just need to work on those magical powers.

Scientific Waste

I have a friend who recently embarked on a voyage from NZ to Hawaii on board a traditional sailing Waka, or canoe (visit the voyage website, it’s really cool!). The trip is not only a way for the participants to engage with their heritage as sea-faring peoples but also a chance to raise awareness about ocean-related environmental issues like acidification, ocean trash, overfishing, etc. Part of their pre-voyage training focused on the impact that they will have on the ocean and ways they can minimize this impact while at sea.

One of the Wakas in the marina in Auckland:

Great effort went in to planning how they might go about reducing waste but in the end, the solutions are not that complicated. They bought bulk shampoo and soap for the crew that comes in biodegradable containers. They minimized the waste that will come from the kitchen by making sure that products are in metal cans or cardboard that won’t float around the ocean for thousands of years to come. This got me thinking about oceanographic research cruises because ocean trash is a real issue and humans have to stop dumping plastic into the oceans.

As a marine scientist I’ve often wondered at the many things we do in the field and in the lab that create waste and have an overall negative impact on the marine environment.

When we go to sea, it seems that no one is paying attention to the waste we create on board because everyone is too concerened about their own scientific mission. Everyone brings their own plastic bottles of shampoo, and myriad of other toiletry products. I’ve heard stories of deep-sea submersibles that have come across trash at hydrothermal vent sites that they eventually figure out was generated on the ship. I’m hoping to talk with people in charge of the WHOI fleet and other scientists that I go to sea with about ways the ship can minimize its impact on the sea. But, most importantly, I will make a commitment to doing better myself and only bringing ocean-friendly products with me to sea. Do you have stories of waste at sea or can you think of ways that we can be better?

This is WHOI's R/V Atlantis—how can we green this ship?!

After collecting animals at sea, most of my actual “sceince” happens when we get back on shore. Certain types of laboratory science create massive amounts of plastic, rubber, and chemical waste. Because I’m interested in population genetics I do most of my work in a molecular biology lab working with hundreds of tubes, pipette tips, latex and nitrile gloves, and 96 well plates, which means I go through lots of plastic and other synthetic materials that we throw away. Lab waste doesn’t get recycled beacause it’s often covered in nasty chemicals. I’ve often wondered why no one has found a way to get around this. Is there some way to wash or melt-down and purify the plastic pipette tips? Why do we have to throw away so much plastic?

Eppendorf glorifies their "consumable products" by publishing free monthly wallpaper art for your computer, like these rt PCR plates:

There are several differences between my lab here at NIWA and my home lab at WHOI, like the use different reagents, different protocols, or different brands of chemicals for certain reactions. I’m often a bit hesitant to use something new partly because when I go back to WHOI, it’s important that I be able to replicate the work I’m doing here. But in some cases, there are alternative methods to what I’m used to that could be more effective, cheaper, or even reduce waste.

For example, there are two contrasting ways to “clean up” a gene product that we get from PCR. Essentially, PCR makes a bunch of copies of one particular gene of interest. Once the reaction is run, there are some reagents—chemicals and pieces of DNA—that we want to get rid of because they might make it harder to sequence the gene that we’ve copied. To do this, I usually use a column clean-up method, produced by QIAGEN. Essentially, there is this magical tube (see below) with a membrane made out of silica that selectively binds the DNA we want and allows us to wash away everything we don’t want. In the final step, you rinse the DNA off the membrane into a new tube and you’ve got a “clean” product. Then you throw away the columns and the all old tubes.

At NIWA, someone has suggested that I use a different method called ExoSAP, which is an enzyme cocktail that digests the small bits of DNA that we don’t want. I was hesitant to accept this suggestion, but while looking at the website and reading that it advertised itseld as the “greener method” to clean up PCRs, I realized that I should really have a go because it could seriously reduce the waste that my project produces and will likely work just as well.

I’m sure that there are many ways that we can work on laboratoy trash, it’s just that someone needs to sit down and think a bit about it. I’m going to try to dedicate myself to being more aware of the ways that my science impacts the environment because there’s little sense in claiming that I’m out to conserve the oceans if I am, in fact, doing harm to the environment in the process.

Apology Haikus

Untitled #1:
Disappointing you;
Failure to communicate!
I will do better.

Untitled #2:
When lab work fails me,
motivation alludes me.
Hard to find topics.

Untitled #3:
PCR banding
that looks like lunar landing...
Contamination?

Titled #1:
I hope you get these:
Creativity attempts.
If not, more to come.

BiomimiWHAT?

Since arriving in New Zealand I have somehow surrounded myself with excessively smart people. From the other Fulbright students, to the delegates at the Future Partnership Forum, to folks at work, the people I encounter have given me a constant stream of interesting ideas and new important issues to consider. There’s nothing like having a fascinating conversation or attending a stimulating lecture to put you in a good mood and I’ve been lucky to experience several over the last seven weeks (yes, I’ve been here seven weeks already!).

Science excites me for several reasons: first of all, it’s usually extremely cool; second of all, it can help us improve our understanding of ourselves and of our place in the world; third of all—and this is what I’m most passionate about—science presents us with a wonderfully rational and elegant way to approach management of resources and regulation of our own actions, as well as a way to progress as a civilization that will hopefully someday incorporate the earth’s fine-tuned balance.

Since going to the Future Partnership Forum in Christchurch (part of the larger US-NZ council’s Partnership Forum) last month, I’ve found myself thinking a lot about the ways in which not only science and policy, but also science and industry, interact. (Mind you, these are not exclusive pairings.) I’ve been thinking about what it means to innovate. Creativity is the only path that will lead us to solutions for our toughest problems like dwindling resources, food and water crises, and climate change.

On my drive up to Auckland last weekend, my friend and I started discussing innovation and creativity in design, focusing on sustainability and our current environmental challenges. The conversation turned to a field called biomimicry. The concept is simple but inspired: look at how the earth and its creatures work, and try to use the designs of Mother Nature in our own products. My friend mentioned a company called Whale Power, which I have since looked up online.

The Whale Power website tells the story of the initial conception of the project: Dr. Frank Fish (amazing name) inspected a figurine of a humpback whale and wanted to understand why the whale’s flippers where bumpy on the front edge. After some serious research, he designed new blades for windmills that are more efficient than the smooth ones that human engineers first built. This is similar to the “invention” of Velcro by George de Mestral who noticed the efficacy of burrs at attaching to clothing and hair.

(Humpback whale from the web)

Coincidentally, this week at NIWA, the Thursday lecture focused on biomimicry. The speaker, a recent graduate of a masters program at Harvard University where he studies in the Lauder Laboratory, shared with us work he’d done on the fluid dynamics surrounding seal whiskers and sharkskin. Sharkskin has long been suspected to greatly reduce drag and facilitate fast and easy movement in the water, but until Johannes Oeffner decided to pursue the question for his master's thesis, no one had ever proved the existence of or quantified the phenomenon. (Spoiler alert: the sharkskin does reduce drag but a quantifiable amount!)

Data like those presented by Johannes can have an enormous impact on engineering and industry. Now that we know how good sharkskin is at reducing drag, we can design boat hulls, submarines, and cars that reduce drag with similar mechanisms, in turn reducing the energy input required to run those machines. To be sure, you readers can probably think of many more applications than I can!

(close up of sharkskin from a "glog" ?)

The Whale Power website highlights how using biological models as a template for design is, in a way, creating a product that has been field-tested for millions of years. I love the concept that the evolutionary iterations of an organism—from the constant evolution of unseen proteins to the alteration of physical characteristics we can see—represent an inimitable series of field tests. What an awesome way to look at evolution!

If we are going to achieve a better way of living, whom else should we look to but Mother Nature?

R/V Tangaroa

This past weekend I went on a trip up north to Rotorua and then on to Auckland. While I flew through Auckland on my way into the country, I had never seen any of the countryside north of Wellington and I jumped at the chance to join my friend on a little road trip up the island. The drive was absolutely gorgeous and I had a great time.

It just so happened that my advisor from the states was coming into port in Auckland after a three week research cruise to the Kermadec Ridge, home to a submarine volcano range and some really cool deep-sea ecosystems. The ship docked at about 9 am and he was flying back to the states that night, so I snuck in a quick meeting that afternoon to discuss my Fulbright project.

He joined a number of colleagues from NIWA, the Institute of Geological and Nuclear Science, or GNS, the University of Washington, and others, on board NIWA’s R/V Tangaro. In Maori culture, Tangaroa is the God responsible for the sea.

Upon arrival in Auckland, I found my way straight to the dock and met with my advisor on the ship. When the meeting was over, my friend James, an engineer at WHOI gave me a tour of the ship, highlighting some of the quirkier aspects of the R/V Tangaroa.

Like the tile bathtub…

…and the factory-like rooms down below that I imagine were used for fish processing. I have no proper sources for this assumption, but I think it used to be a trawler before it was converted to a research ship.

I even snapped a shot of the city skyline from inside the ship's bridge.


I stayed in Auckland until Tuesday afternoon and really enjoyed catching up with friends and checking out the city. A special highlight was the Maritime Museum, which had a huge range of exhibits from traditional islander and Maori canoes to the winning 1995 America's cup Yacht. The museum is a must do in Auckland.

What can I say? I'm a total ocean nerd!