Personal Webpage of Sara Neves
Project Mission Statement:
Develop a way to categorize and monitor the well being
of one of the last true frontiers on Earth--the Amazon Basin Rainforest--and
devise a set of practical strategies to ensure its preservation.
Fauna Group Mission Statement (Grade Definition):
As part of Mission 2006's general goal to develop ways
to characterize and monitor the well-being of the Amazon Basin Rainforest
and devise methods of preservation, the Fauna Group will first categorize
fauna and develop exemplary case studies. Within each of these studies
we will define basic requirements for healthy fauna populations by identifying
appropriate indicators of population health. We will then proceed
to identify threats to the fauna of the rainforest and attempt to develop
strategies that will lessen these threats while also developing strategies
to monitor fauna population. As part
of Mission 2006's general goal to develop ways to characterize and monitor
the well-being of the Amazon Basin Rainforest and devise methods of preservation,
the Fauna Group will first categorize fauna and develop exemplary case
studies. Within each of these studies we will define basic requirements
for healthy fauna populations by identifying appropriate indicators of
population health. We will then proceed to identify threats to
the fauna of the rainforest and attempt to develop strategies that will
lessen these threats while also developing strategies to monitor fauna
population health.
Plans and Areas of Research:
Plan 1: Choose exemplary case studies
Our original plan was to choose
case studies of a few species populations. Though the plan was rather
vague, we were going to separate the rainforest sort of into different
habitats--water, ground, tree, canopy, underground, etc.--and choose an
exemplary species from that habitat and apparently just "learn about it".
As is probably easy to see, we abandoned this plan simply because
of the difficulty in choosing one representative species, and of course the
lack of significance of simply learning and studying one random species.
Plan 2: Choose
species based on food webs
This plan was based on the principle that
if one species population was healthy, then those species that ate it or
were consumed by it were also healthy. Although somewhat flawed because
of the abundance of species and the complexity of food webs, this idea was
the first that led us on our way to the idea of "indicator species". We
each tried studying a species in a different part of the food chain, but
when we came together and shared the information, the research was interesting
but the individual research did not relate to each other, so this plan was
also left by the wayside, to some degree.
Plan 3: Separate
project into two parts--Characterizing and Monitoring
We decided to separate the project
into Characterizing (developing an information template to describe species
which would prove useful in setting up a database, and adapting monitoring
strategies) and Monitoring (researching and developing modern and common
monitoring practices to not only keep track of animal species, but also
to "keep an eye" on the rainforest and be alerted of new threats). This
plan seemed to fulfill all of our goals, as mentioned in the grade definition.
The only problem with this plan was that it was based too widely
on general research. Our project needed to be more focused.
And so, on to...
Plan 4 (current plan): Key Indicator Species
The current plan is to focus on the health
of the ecosystem, and basically use animal species to do so. Of course,
this also involves developing ways to preserve the health of animal species,
as animals are part of the ecosystem. Our plan is to research and choose
a few indicator species (i.e.-- bats, amphibians) that are not only relatively
easy to monitor, but that also show some important information about rainforest
ecosystem health. Current areas of research include researching possible
indicator species and the threats to the rainforest (so that we can choose
appropriate species that would illustrate the effects of such a threat on
the ecosystem). There are more areas of research to come.
This is by far the most promising plan,
and seems to be the one that will "stick". After the preliminary research,
more details and information will be available as to the exact status of
the project and the associated research.
Current Status of Project/ Group Research:
September 23-- At the group meeting last Friday, the Fauna group decided on seven preliminary areas of research: River, Delta, Emergent, Canopy, Above Ground, Underground, andUnderstory. These areas will each be researched by one member of the group. The research should give basic information about the particular habitat of the rainforest, such as the biodiversity present along with characteristic features of the habitat, as well as possible species that could serve as case studies. My area of research for now is Canopy.
We have also received the names of our mentors for the project,
and will begin contact with them shortly.
September 30-- The studies of the preliminary areas of research
proved unfruitful. Some members of the group could find very little
information on their area of the rainforest, whereas others found too
much information and were overwhelmed. Also, it was very difficult
for the team to find even possible species to act as a case study
representing the area/habitat.
It was
then decided that we should try researching a species or a species group,
somewhat based on a food chain (that is, a high order land animal,
a low order land animal, a high and low order water animal, etc.). On
Friday, each team member came in with the requested information and explained
it to the group. While it can be said that at the end of this information
session everyone learned something about rainforest animals, it became
evident that this method had not worked either. The group seemed
to be going in circles as to which direction we should take to carry out
our mission statement, and how to go about it. It seems to be mainly
the "monitoring" portion that is giving us trouble, as we can neither determine
what the monitoring is for, nor what way to actually do it efficiently.
Each member had a slightly different idea, and so the plan became
for each member to develop that idea, and present it on Wednesday (October
2) to convince the rest of the team to use it.
That
is the project as it stands this moment. We are going to have a
meeting today with our mentor after the 4pm class on the Perspectives
readings.
October 8-- Our meeting with the mentor last Monday (September
30) was very helpful and informative. Our perspectives meeting
was also interesting; by playing the roles of different parties with interests
in the rainforest, we could see a little bit better exactly what was
involved, and what each party was looking to get from the rainforest.
On Wednesday each team member
presented his or her ideas on the project, on monitoring and what we
thought should be looked into. It was very interesting to hear
each person's ideas, and we discovered that we all had similar views,
but I am not sure if we really went anywhere from there in terms of choosing
a viable, effective plan for our part of the Mission 2006 project. My
notes on my plan can be found here (October 1 notes).
At the end of Wednesday's class, we assigned each other something
to do for Friday. These included: researching existing rainforest
preservation projects, researching rainforest animals, and making up a generic
profile for what kind of information would be helpful to have concerning
a species.
On Friday we did not get
a chance to discuss our findings as the class was spent listening to presentations
from the other Mission 2006 teams concerning what progress they had made.
This was very helpful and gave us some idea as to how the other
groups were going about their projects.
Yesterday's meeting consisted
simply of a discussion on the Perspectives III readings.
October 14-- Last Wednesday's meeting (October 9) was mainly devoted
to preparation for Friday's presentation of our current work to the group.
This was quite a task because up to date, our plan on how to approach
our branch of the Mission 2006 problem had changed multiple times. Each
new idea we tried ended up proving unsuccessful and inefficient. Finally
we decided on a course of action which consisted of splitting the project
into two parts--characterizing and monitoring. The plan can be seen
more in detail in the "Plans and Areas of Research" section. We decided
that I would present the Monitoring portion of the project, and Jessie
would present the Characterizing portion of the project, and the rest of
the group would help answer questions.
On Friday, we presented our
project to the rest of the Mission 2006 group. It went relatively
well, some of the concerns of the other students being --how we
were going to find key (indicator) species
--if we were
studying the microorganisms of the rainforest
--how
fragmentation of the rainforest helped or otherwise affected our plan
of research or our project.
One of our mentors--Marcelo
Targino--was also present for the presentation. We decided to do
some "serious research" over the long weekend, and discuss the plan more
on Wednesday.
October 16-- Plan for the project changed again. See "Plans and
Areas of Research"
October 22-- Last Friday, the Flora group presented
their project, and basically took up all of the class time. After
they were finished, we were given 15 minutes to meet with our teams, and
then had 15 minutes at the end of class so that Kip could make some announcements.
The only work we managed to get accomplished was to obtain the top
five environmental toxins for each of land, water, and air (from the respective
groups, of course). Kip made some announcements warning us about the
size and urgency of the completion of the final project.
Yesterday, we basically
just had a team meeting to discuss the work of the members in our group.
We discussed information found about bats and bat detectors, as well
as amphibians and other possible indicator species, such as the caiman.
After the scheduled classtime, I was asked by my group to attend a
meeting whose attendees consisted of one member of each group. Details
about that meeting may be found here (October 22 notes)
October 30--Last Wednesday we discussed our project
more, and organized Tuesday/Thursday meetings for research in the library.
We discussed the possiblities of having our individual team meetings
in a better location, such as an Athena cluster, to make them more effective,
as there is no longer much to "talk about" without the actual research
in hand.
On Friday, we
had our meeting in the Teal Room, and talked about the research that we
had found. We also talked about this fantastic book that Stephanie
found which basically discusses all aspects of monitoring plant and animal
populations. It was decided that each team member read 2-3 chapters
out of the book and take notes. Mine (on chapters 9 and 10) can be
found here (research notes).
On Monday, we
again just discussed our research. There are not many new developments
at these meetings, and they are now basically used to bring the other team
members up to date on the research. We also planned to hold Wednesday's
(today's) meeting in the Athena cluster at the student center to update
our team webpage.
Today we updated
our team webpage, at least a bit, but mainly the web-savvy team members
taught the other members how to access the team site in order to update
it individually, as we find research. There was also another presentation
meeting, the notes from which you can find here (October
30 notes)
December 10--After the last update, it was decided that
the individual websites would not be graded again until after the end of
the project, and then they would be graded on an overall, accumulated basis.
As far as the team webpages go, they were graded cumulatively as well.
So to fill in what's happened since the last update,
the presentation meetings continued to some extent, with each meeting resulting
in decisions made which contradicted those made by people present at other
meetings. The controversy resulted in a vote during a class meeting
on what was probably the second Friday of November. Three people presented
their ideas for how the preparations for the final product should be carried
out. Sol Hsiang proposed that the class be recombined into groups of
two or three people to come up with specific solutions to the specific problems
that each original group came up with. Jonathan Rhodes' plan was virtually
the same, however his "solution groups" were different. And finally,
George Eng proposed to keep the project going as is, with more emphasis on
interaction between groups. A vote was taken, and Sol's plan accepted
and put into action.
I then became part of the "Logging Solutions"
group. The Fauna group met one more time to discuss what we would do
for our final characterization/solution document (this document can be seen
on the Research page). The different aspects
of our research were divided up to be formally written by different members
of the group, and then Helen and I synthesized the information together and
sent a final copy to the "Presentation Group". The work in the
logging group was a bit less productive. Our main plan fell through
at the last minute, and so there was a lot of scrambling to get another feasible
solution. But we pulled through with the help of other classmembers.
The speakers were chosen based on who
signed up, and also through an informal audition. We had fifteen speakers,
and then one person from each of the original 9 teams was chosen to answer
the questions addressed specifically to his or her group. I was chosen
to represent Fauna (but alas, no one had any questions about fauna!)
The final presentation went extremely
well, and all of the presenters did a fantastic job. See who our panelists
were on the Final Presentation page.
Special thanks goes to Kip and Maria for organizing everything so beautifully,
the UTFs for giving us guidance, the "Webpage" and "Presentation" Groups
for working so hard to pull everything together, and of course for our lovely
and fantastic TAs Kate and Jeremy who not only helped us by giving us advice
when we had a problem, and feedback on our solutions, but who also fill our
lives with sunshine (and grade our websites! : ) This was a great class--especially
the Fauna group!
NEW LINKS!!
Read what we discovered! Research
See where we got our information! Resources
Find out about the final presentation! Final Project