Understanding the perspectives of knowledge users and the demands of their decision-making environment would benefit researchers looking to enhance the utility of the knowledge they generate. Using ...the Fraser River Pacific salmon fishery as a case study, we investigate the views of 49 government employees and stakeholders regarding the barriers to incorporating new knowledge into fisheries management. Our study uses analysis of qualitative data structured by a knowledge-action framework, which revealed that 90% of respondents perceived the contextual dimension (e.g., institutional structures and norms) as a barrier for incorporating new knowledge, followed by barriers related to the characteristics of knowledge actors (52% of respondents), characteristics of the knowledge (27%), time and timing (27%), knowledge transfer strategies (17%), and relational dimension (8%). The identified barriers have indirect-direct relationship with knowledge producers and appear hierarchical in nature. We note that informal relationships can enable conditions whereby knowledge users can access new knowledge, and knowledge producers can gain insights on users' needs. We discuss lessons learned from the case, which we believe can be applied more beyond fisheries.
Telemetry studies have produced fundamental knowledge on animal biology and ecology that has the potential to improve management of aquatic resources such as fisheries. However, the use and ...integration of telemetry-derived knowledge into practice remain tenuous, so we surveyed 212 fish telemetry experts to understand existing barriers for incorporating telemetry-derived knowledge into fisheries management practices. We apply a sociological knowledge-action framework to structure the findings, which revealed four primary challenges to integrating telemetry findings into management: (1) the perceived uncertainties and unclear relevance of telemetry findings; (2) the underlying motivations and constrained rationalities of actors that can lead to inaction or suboptimal decisions; (3) the constraints of institutions, governance structures, and lack of organizational support, and (4) time and mismatches in scale, culture, and world views. On a more positive note, the relational dimension (collaboration, trust, and relationship building) appears to be important for overcoming and avoiding barriers. We further provide recommendations to navigate these perceived barriers and argue that these lessons also apply to other fields of applied ecology, conservation, and resource management.
The knowledge‐action gap in conservation science and practice occurs when research outputs do not result in actions to protect or restore biodiversity. Among the diverse and complex reasons for this ...gap, three barriers are fundamental: knowledge is often unavailable to practitioners and challenging to interpret or difficult to use or both. Problems of availability, interpretability, and useability are solvable with open science practices. We considered the benefits and challenges of three open science practices for use by conservation scientists and practitioners. First, open access publishing makes the scientific literature available to all. Second, open materials (detailed methods, data, code, and software) increase the transparency and use of research findings. Third, open education resources allow conservation scientists and practitioners to acquire the skills needed to use research outputs. The long‐term adoption of open science practices would help researchers and practitioners achieve conservation goals more quickly and efficiently and reduce inequities in information sharing. However, short‐term costs for individual researchers (insufficient institutional incentives to engage in open science and knowledge mobilization) remain a challenge. We caution against a passive approach to sharing that simply involves making information available. We advocate a proactive stance toward transparency, communication, collaboration, and capacity building that involves seeking out and engaging with potential users to maximize the environmental and societal impact of conservation science.
Cierre de la Brecha entre el Conocimiento y la Acción en la Conservación con Ciencia Abierta 21–311
Resumen
La brecha entre el conocimiento y la acción en las ciencias de la conservación y en su práctica ocurre cuando los resultados de las investigaciones no derivan en acciones para proteger o restaurar la biodiversidad. Entre las razones complejas y diversas de esta brecha, existen tres barreras que son fundamentales: con frecuencia el conocimiento no está disponible para los practicantes, es difícil de interpretar o difícil de usar, o ambas. Los problemas con la disponibilidad, interpretabilidad y utilidad son solucionables mediante las prácticas de ciencia abierta. Consideramos los beneficios y los obstáculos de tres prácticas de ciencia abierta para su uso por parte de los científicos y practicantes de la conservación. Primero, las publicaciones de acceso abierto hacen que la literatura científica esté disponible para todos. Segundo, los materiales abiertos (métodos detallados, datos, códigos y software) incrementan la transparencia y el uso de los hallazgos de las investigaciones. Tercero, los recursos educativos abiertos permiten que los científicos y practicantes de la conservación adquieran las habilidades necesarias para utilizar los productos de las investigaciones. La adopción a largo plazo de las prácticas de ciencia abierta ayudaría a los investigadores y a los practicantes a lograr los objetivos de conservación mucho más rápido y de manera eficiente y a reducir las desigualdades que existen en la divulgación de información. Sin embargo, los costos a corto plazo para los investigadores individuales (incentivos institucionales insuficientes para participar en la ciencia abierta y en la movilización del conocimiento) todavía son un reto. Advertimos sobre las estrategias pasivas de divulgación que simplemente hacen que la información esté disponible. Abogamos por una postura proactiva hacia la transparencia, la comunicación, la colaboración y la construcción de las capacidades que incluyen la búsqueda de y la interacción con los usuarios potenciales para maximizar el impacto ambiental y social de las ciencias de la conservación.
用开放科学填补保护中的知识‐行动缺口
【摘要】 在保护科学和实践中, 当研究成果不能转化为保护或恢复生物多样性的行动时, 就会出现知识‐行动缺口。在造成这种缺口的各种复杂原因中, 有三个基本的障碍:保护实践者往往无法获得知识, 或难以理解, 或难以应用, 又或者两者都有。然而, 可获得性、可解释性和可用性的问题可以通过开放科学实践来解决。我们考虑了三种开放科学实践对保护科学家和实践者的好处和挑战。第一, 开放获取出版使所有人都能获得科学文献。第二, 开放材料(详细的方法、数据、代码和软件)增加了研究结果的透明度和可用性。第三, 开放的教育资源使保护科学家和实践者能够获得使用研究成果所需的技能。长期采用开放科学实践将帮助研究者和实践者更快、更有效地实现保护目标, 并减少信息共享中的不公平现象。然而, 研究者个人的短期成本(参与开放科学和知识动员的制度激励不足)仍然是一项挑战。我们告诫大家不要采取仅提供信息的被动分享方式, 而应对透明度、沟通、合作和能力建设采取积极主动的态度, 包括寻找潜在使用者并与之接触, 从而充分发挥保护科学的环境和社会影响力。【翻译:胡怡思;审校:聂永刚】
Unique molecular vulnerabilities have been identified in the aggressive MCD/C5 genetic subclass of diffuse large B-cell lymphoma (DLBCL). However, the premalignant cell-of-origin exhibiting MCD-like ...dependencies remains elusive. In this study, we examined animals carrying up to 4 hallmark genetic lesions found in MCD consisting of gain-of-function mutations in Myd88 and Cd79b, loss of Prdm1, and overexpression of BCL2. We discovered that expression of combinations of these alleles in vivo promoted a cell-intrinsic accumulation of B cells in spontaneous splenic germinal centers (GCs). As with MCD, these premalignant B cells were enriched for B-cell receptors (BCRs) with evidence of self-reactivity, displayed a de novo dependence on Tlr9, and were more sensitive to inhibition of Bruton's tyrosine kinase. Mutant spontaneous splenic GC B cells (GCB) showed increased proliferation and IRF4 expression. Mice carrying all 4 genetic lesions showed a >50-fold expansion of spontaneous splenic GCs exhibiting aberrant histologic features with a dark zone immunophenotype and went on to develop DLBCL in the spleen with age. Thus, by combining multiple hallmark genetic alterations associated with MCD, our study identifies aberrant spontaneous splenic GCBs as a likely cell-of-origin for this aggressive genetic subtype of lymphoma.
•Government employees and stakeholders involved in co-managing a fishery were interviewed about their information-seeking behaviours.•Both groups self-report high levels of scientific ...awareness.•However, the groups access scientific information differently and have different perspectives on how to improve science communication.•Government employees focus on the immediate utility of scientific findings, while stakeholders focus on their political implications.•Recommendations are made to scientists to better align communication efforts with user group behaviours and expectations.
Environmental scientists have long been frustrated by the difficulties involved in transferring their research findings into policy-making, management, and public spheres. Despite increases in scientific knowledge about social-ecological systems, research has consistently shown that regulators and stakeholders draw on tacit, informal, and experiential knowledge far more than scientific knowledge in their decision-making. Social science research in the fields of knowledge exchange (KE) and knowledge mobilization (KMb) suggest that one of the major barriers to moving knowledge into practice is that scientists fail to align their communication strategies with the information-seeking behaviours and preferences of potential knowledge users. This article presents findings from in-depth qualitative research with government employees and stakeholders involved in co-managing Pacific salmon fisheries in Canada’s Fraser River. We investigate how members of these groups access, view, and use scientific information, finding both similarities and differences. Members of both groups express a strong interest in academic science, and self-report using scientific information regularly in their work and advocacy. However, the two groups engage in different information-seeking behaviours, and provide notably different advice to academic scientists about how to make research and communication more relevant to potential users. For example, government employees focus on the immediate applications of research to known problems, while stakeholders express greater concern for the political context and implications of scientific findings. We argue that scientists need to “go where the users are” in the behavioural and intellectual sense, and tailor their communications and engagement activities to match the habits, preferences, and expectations of multiple potential user groups. We conclude with recommendations on how this may be done.
The potential for telemetry data to answer complex questions about aquatic animals and their interactions with the environment is limited by the capacity to store, manage, and access data across the ...research community. Large telemetry networks and databases exist, but are limited by the actions of researchers to share their telemetry data. Promoting data sharing and understanding researchers’ views on open practices is a major step toward enhancing the role of big data in ecology and resources management. We surveyed 307 fish telemetry researchers to understand their perspectives and experiences on data sharing. A logistic regression revealed that data sharing was positively related to researchers with collaborative tendencies, who belong to a telemetry network, who are prolific publishers, and who express altruistic motives for their research. Researchers were less likely to have shared telemetry data if they engage in radio and (or) acoustic telemetry, work for regional government, and value the time it takes to complete a research project. We identify and provide examples of both benefits and concerns that respondents have about sharing telemetry data.
Co-management is widely seen as a way of improving environmental governance and empowering communities. When successful, co-management enhances the validity and legitimacy of decision-making, while ...providing stakeholders with influence over processes and outcomes that directly impact them. However, our research with participants in co-management across several cases leads us to argue that many of the individuals who contribute to co-management are subject to significant personal stress arising from both the logistical and social/emotional demands of participation in these processes. We argue that the literature on co-management has touched on this only indirectly, and that personal stress is a major challenge for participants that ought to be integrated into research agendas and addressed by policy-makers. In this article, we review the contours of the personal stress issue as it has appeared in our observations of co-management events and interviews with participants. While these findings are partial and preliminary, we argue that personal stress has theoretical and practical significance to the broader literature and process design. We conclude the article with recommendations for participants, researchers and policy-makers about how to consider and respond to problems of personal stress.
•Co-management can cause personal stress among community-level participants.•Stress is caused by costs, lack of support, conflict, and uncertainty.•Scholars should incorporate individual-level variables into research agendas.•Stress can be mitigated by providing resources and reforming processes.
Mechanical forces and tissue mechanics influence the morphology of the developing brain, but the underlying molecular mechanisms have been elusive. Here, we examine the role of mechanotransduction in ...brain development by focusing on Piezo1, a mechanically activated ion channel. We find that Piezo1 deletion results in a thinner neuroepithelial layer, disrupts pseudostratification, and reduces neurogenesis in E10.5 mouse embryos. Proliferation and differentiation of Piezo1 knockout (KO) mouse neural stem cells (NSCs) isolated from E10.5 embryos are reduced in vitro compared to littermate WT NSCs. Transcriptome analysis of E10.5 Piezo1 KO brains reveals downregulation of the cholesterol biosynthesis superpathway, in which 16 genes, including Hmgcr, the gene encoding the rate-limiting enzyme of the cholesterol biosynthesis pathway, are downregulated by 1.5-fold or more. Consistent with this finding, membrane lipid composition is altered, and the cholesterol levels are reduced in Piezo1 KO NSCs. Cholesterol supplementation of Piezo1 KO NSCs partially rescues the phenotype in vitro. These findings demonstrate a role for Piezo1 in the neurodevelopmental process that modulates the quantity, quality, and organization of cells by influencing cellular cholesterol metabolism. Our study establishes a direct link in NSCs between PIEZO1, intracellular cholesterol levels, and neural development.
There is growing interest in co‐developing research projects that more fully address the priorities of Indigenous communities throughout the Canadian Arctic and beyond. However, details regarding ...collaborative methods are often not adequately described in the literature.
Here, we describe a process to remotely co‐create a questionnaire compiling Indigenous knowledge about local aquatic species and their habitats with the community of Kinngait, Nunavut. This project was undertaken in response to interest expressed by the Aiviq Hunters and Trappers Association in understanding and assessing the impacts of climate change on coastal ecosystems.
Researchers from Fisheries and Oceans Canada and academic partners drafted an initial questionnaire that was revised through a series of collaborative sessions with community‐based technicians.
We detail the stages of this process and discuss elements that enabled co‐creation including: adaptable and frequent communication, community technician roles, and a pre‐existing partnership.
This paper emphasizes that project co‐development and the co‐creation of research tools can be a mutually beneficial process that can broaden our collective understanding of the impacts of climate change on Arctic aquatic ecosystems.
ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂ ᓇᐃᓪᓕᒋᐊᕈᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᑦ
ᐱᒍᒪᓂᖃᖅᐸᓪᓕᐊᑐᐃᓐᓇᓕᖅᑐᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕐᓂᕐᒧᑦ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᑦᓴᕐᓂᑦ ᐃᓚᐅᑎᑦᓯᒋᐊᖅᑐᓂᑦ ᓯᕗᓪᓕᐅᑎᒍᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᖏᑦᑕ ᑲᓇᑕᐅᑉ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᖓᓂ ᓯᓚᑖᓂᓪᓗ. ᑭᓯᐊᓂᓕ, ᖃᓄᖅ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂ ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓗᐊᙱᒻᒪᑕ ᑎᑎᕋᐅᑕᐅᓯᒪᔪᓂ. ᐅᕗᓇ, ᓇᓗᓇᐃᖅᓯᔪᒍᑦ ᓇᔫᑎᙱᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕐᒥ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᑦᓴᓂᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᓲᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᒪᔭᑐᖃᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᓄᓇᖃᖅᑳᖅᓯᒪᔪᐃᑦ ᐱᔾᔪᑎᖃᖅᑐᓂ ᐃᒪᕐᒥᐅᑕᓕᕆᓂᕐᒥ ᓄᓇᓕᖓᓐᓂ ᑭᙵᐃᑦ, ᓄᓇᕗᑦ. ᑕᒪᓐᓇ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑕᐅᓚᐅᖅᑐᖅ ᑭᐅᔾᔪᑕᐅᓪᓗᓂ ᐊᑐᕈᒪᓯᒪᔭᖏᓐᓂᑦ ᐊᐃᕕᖅ ᐆᒪᔪᕐᓂᐊᖅᑏᑦ ᑲᑐᔾᔨᖃᑎᒌᖏᑦᑕ ᑐᑭᓯᒋᐊᕈᒪᓪᓗᑎᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᒋᓗᒋᓪᓗ ᐊᑦᑐᐃᓂᖃᖅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᓯᓚᐅᑉ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖓᑕ ᓯᔾᔭᐅᔪᓂᑦ. ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑏᑦ ᐱᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᑕᕆᐅᕐᒥᐅᑕᓕᕆᔨᒃᑯᓐᓂᑦ ᓯᓚᑦᑐᓴᕐᕕᕐᔪᐊᕐᒥᓪᓗ ᐱᓇᓱᐊᖃᑎᐅᔪᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᒋᐊᙵᓚᐅᖅᑐᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᑦᓴᓂᑦ ᐊᐱᖅᓲᑎᒃᑯᑦ ᐋᖅᑭᒋᐊᖅᑕᐅᓂᖃᓚᐅᖅᑐᑎᓪᓗ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᑲᑎᒪᑎᑦᓯᖃᑦᑕᓂᒃᑯᑦ ᑲᑎᑎᑦᓯᖃᑦᑕᑎᓪᓗᒋᑦ ᓄᓇᓕᓐᓂ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᒋᔭᐅᔪᑦ. ᓇᓗᓇᐃᔭᖅᓯᒪᕙᕗᑦ ᐊᑐᖅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖏᑦ ᑕᒪᑐᒥᖓ, ᐅᖃᖃᑎᒍᑕᐅᓯᒪᓪᓗᑎᓪᓗ ᐃᓗᓕᖏᑦ ᐱᔪᓐᓇᑎᑦᓯᓯᒪᔪᑦ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᕐᒥ. ᑖᓐᓇ ᑎᑎᕋᐅᑕᐅᓯᒪᓂᖓ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᒋᐊᒃᑲᓐᓂᖅᑐᖅ ᐱᓕᕆᐊᑦᓴᓕᐅᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅ ᐊᒻᒪᓗ ᓴᖅᑭᑎᑦᓯᖃᑎᒌᓐᓂᖅ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᕈᑎᑦᓴᓂᑦ ᓴᓇᕐᕈᑎᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔪᖅᓯᒍᓐᓇᕆᐊᖓ ᑕᒪᒃᑮᓐᓂᑦ ᖃᐅᔨᓴᖅᑎᐅᔪᓂᑦ ᐃᑲᔫᑎᖏᓪᓗ ᑎᑭᐅᑎᓂᖃᖅᑐᑦ ᓯᓚᑖᒍᑦ ᑐᑭᓯᖃᑎᒌᒋᐊᕐᓂᐅᑉ ᓯᓚᐅᑉ ᐊᓯᔾᔨᐸᓪᓕᐊᓂᖓᓂᒃ ᐅᑭᐅᖅᑕᖅᑐᒥ ᐃᒪᐅᔪᓂ.
There is growing interest in co‐developing research projects to more fully address the priorities of Indigenous communities. The process of remotely co‐creating a questionnaire to compile Indigenous knowledge with a community in the Canadian Arctic is described here. This paper emphasizes that project co‐development and the co‐creation of research tools can be a mutually beneficial process with benefits that extend further than broadening our collective understanding of the impacts of climate change on Arctic aquatic ecosystems.
PDF
