A STATISTICIAN COLLABORATING WITH
ECOLOGISTS:
from
EXAMPLES
to
LESSONS LEARNED
N. Scott Urquhart
Senior Research Scientist
Department of Statistics
Colorado State University
(June, 2004)
FUNDING ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
This talk was developed under the STAR Research Assistance Agreement CR-829095
awarded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to Colorado State University.
This presentation has not been formally reviewed by EPA. The views expressed here are
solely those of presenter and STARMAP, the Program he represents. EPA does not endorse
any products or commercial services mentioned in this presentation.
This research is funded by
U.S.EPA – Science To Achieve
Results (STAR) Program
Cooperative
# CR - 829095
Agreement
PATH FOR TODAY
 Autobiographical Sketch
 Some lessons learned
 Listed first, then
 Illustrated from experience
 Questions are welcome at any time
BIOGRAPHY of NSU
 Grew up in agriculture in Western Colorado
 Very familiar with the business end of
dairy cows
 Manual labor of 1950’s vintage agriculture
 Motivation for higher education = HIGH
 Came to CSU in 1958
 Started in math, but considered civil engineering through
first year
BIOGRAPHY - continued
 Statistical calculation of 1950’s was done on rotary
calculators
 IBM electronic accounting equipment
 Two computers in Colorado then!
 Went to work in the CSU “Computing
Center” Spring, 1959
 Predecessor of both Computing Center and
 Stat Lab
 Took the graduate statistical methods course the
summer after my freshman year
 Been at stat ever since
LESSON LEARNED
 Your professional world will change in major ways
during your career!
 Implication: Plan for it by learning how to think and
learn. You will have to engage in learning throughout
your career.
COMPUTING TOOLS OF 1960
STATISTICAL
STATISTICAL COMPUTATION
COMPUTATION
HAS CHANGED!
--- SO WHAT?
HAS CHANGED!
 The more powerful of the two computers in Colorado
at that point was an IBM 704
 About 1985 I realized that the IBM XT on my desk
 10M (not gig) hard disk
 8088 + 8087 = processors
 More power than the 704 0f 25 years earlier!
 Implication = ?
 Be prepared for CHANGE
 Learn how to learn about all of ecology, statistics, and
mathematics
LESSONS LEARNED
 Your professional world will change in major ways during your
career!
 Implication: Plan for it by learning how to think and learn.
You will have to engage in learning throughout your career.
 Most easy problems have been solved.
  Relevant problems will require teamwork.
 Corollary: Ecologists, Statisticians and Mathematicians need to
understand each others’ perspectives
 Ecologists – take collaborating statisticians and
mathematicians to the field with you. Statisticians and
mathematicians – GO! Invite yourself, if necessary.
 Statistics can make a difference
 Mathematics can, too, but my examples deal with statistics
ILLUSTRATIONS
 Collaboration with plant ecophysiologists in Arctic
Alaska
 = “North Slope”
 Collaboration with the Grand Canyon Monitoring and
Research Center (GCMRC), Flagstaff, AZ
 Monitoring of the terrestrial plant ecology near the
Colorado River in the Grand Canyon
 EPA’s Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP)
 My major collaboration for the past 14 years
ILLUSTRATIONS
 Collaboration with plant ecophysiologists in Arctic
Alaska
 = “North Slope”
HELPING DESIGNING VEGETATION STUDIES
IN ARCTIC ALASKA
MAP OF ALASKA
VIEW FROM OUTSIDE - REFRIGERATED
ENTRANCE
IN THE TUNNEL
AN OLD ICE WEDGE
A SEGMENT OF
THE
TRANS-ALASKA
PIPELINE
RESEARCH SITE AFTER JUNE SNOW
TYPICAL “VALLEY” BOTTOM
(NOTE MOOSE IN CENTER)
R4D PROJECT ON ALASKA’S
“NORTH SLOPE”
 FUNDED BY DEPARTMENT OF ENERGY
 INCLUDED A STUDY ECOLOGICAL PROCESSES
 OF PLANTS
 WITH THE VIEW OF PREDICTING LIKELY RESPONSE
TO DISTURBANCES,
 LIKE THE DEVELOPMENT OF AN OIL FIELD
 MAJOR STUDY SITE = IMNAVIAT CREEK
GENERAL GOALS OF R4D
 DEVELOP ECOPHYSIOLOGY MODELS FOR PLANTS
ON THE NORTH SLOPE
 TO SUPPORT MORE GENERAL MODELS TO ALLOW
EVALUATION OF LIKELY IMPACT OF ENERGYRELATED DEVELOPMENT
 NSU: ON-SITE EXPERIMENTAL AND SAMPLING
DESIGN
 FOR MANY STUDIES
R4D PROJECT ON ALASKA’S
“NORTH SLOPE”
- continued
 A SMALL QUESTION IN THE LARGER QUESTION:
 “WHAT MAKES STONE STRIPES”
 WATER SEEMS AVAILABLE IN VEGETATION BETWEEN
STONE STRIPES
 ELEVATION DOESN’T SEEM TO EXPLAIN
 STUDY: COMPARE PHYSIOLOGICAL PROCESSES OF
PLANTS IN STONE STRIPE TO THOSE OF PLANTS
IN IMMEDIATELY ADJACENT PLANTS IN HEAVILY
VEGETATED AREA
 ?? HOW TO SELECT STUDY PLOTS ??
HILLTOP AND NEARBY “STONE STRIPE”
STONE STRIPES AND EQUIPMENT FOR
MEASURING PHOTOSYNTHESIS RATE
POWER FOR MEASURING
PHOTOSYNTHESIS RATE
EQUIPMENT FOR MEASURING
PHOTOSYNTHESIS RATE
R4D PROJECT ON ALASKA’S
“NORTH SLOPE”
- continued - 2
 PREVIOUS YEAR STAKES HAD BEEN SET ON 100m
CENTERS (Orange stakes in an earlier image.)
 NSU HAD ARRANGED FOR THREE 100m TAPE
MEASURES TO BE AVAILABLE
 AND TOOK ALONG A LONG LIST OF PAIRS OF
RANDOM DIGITS (00 - 99)
 DEFINE THE POPULATION - AWAY FROM THE
SITE
 “WHAT DO YOU WANT TO SAY IN THE
INTRODUCTORY PARAGRAPH OF THE PAPER YOU
PLAN TO WRITE ABOUT THIS?”
 ===> CRITERIA FOR WHETHER A SPECIFIC m2 PLOT
WAS OR WAS NOT IN THE POPULATION
FIELD RESULT OF RANDOMLY SELECTED
PLOTS
“I WOULD NEVER HAVE
PICKED THAT PLOT!!!!
BUT I SHOULD HAVE!!!”
THE ENTIRE CONTEXT OF INTEREST
HOMOGENEOUS
CONTEXT
SAMPLED
THE ENTIRE CONTEXT OF INTEREST
HOMOGENEOUS CONTEXT SAMPLED
THE ENTIRE CONTEXT OF INTEREST
LESSON LEARNED - I
 OPINION: FOR MOST ECOLOGISTS, A “TYPICAL
SITE” IS VARIABLE FOR THE FEATURE OF
INTEREST, BUT AS HOMOGENEOUS AS POSSIBLE
IN ALL OTHER WAYS
 ===> MANY “ECOLOGICAL FACTS” ARE BASED ON
VERY BIASED SUBPARTS OF THE SITUATION OF
INTEREST
ILLUSTRATIONS
 Collaboration with plant ecophysiologists in Arctic
Alaska
 = “North Slope”
 Collaboration with the Grand Canyon Monitoring and
Research Center (GCMRC), Flagstaff, AZ
 Monitoring of the terrestrial plant ecology near the
Colorado River in the Grand Canyon
PROGRAM EVALUATION FOR THE
GRAND CANYON MONITORING AND
RESEARCH CENTER (GCMRC)
 OBJECTIVE
 REVIEW THE TERRESTRIAL RESEARCH PROGRAM
 EXTERNAL PANEL
 BIOLOGISTS & QUANTITATIVE SCIENTISTS
 ACADEMIC & FEDERAL EMPLOYEES
 FROM GLEN CANYON DAM THROUGH GRAND
CANYON TO LAKE MEADE
 EVALUATION PANEL OF 8
 11-DAY RAFT TRIP THROUGH GRAND CANYON
 ACCOMPANIED BY 9 PEOPLE WHO HAD CONDUCTED
RESEARCH ALONG THE RIVER
MAP OF THE GRAND CANYON AREA
THE PANEL + SUPPORT CREW
THE “BEGINNING”
THE “REAL” START @ LEES FERRY
CAMPED LIKE ANY OTHER TRIP
WE SAW MAJESTIC SCENERY
WENT THROUGH RAPIDS!!!!!!!!
THE END WAS IN SIGHT
@ THE END
DESIGNING AND IMPLEMENTING A
VEGETATION STUDY FOR GCMRC
 OBJECTIVE - LOCATE AND LAY OUT
VEGETATION TRANSECTS
 NSU SELECTED 100 POTENTIAL SITES
 RANDOMLY, SUBJECT TO SPATIAL RESTRICTIONS
 EACH POTENTIAL SITE WAS
 DETERMINED TO BE VERTICAL FACED, EFFECTIVELY
UNVEGETATED, = NO TRANSECT
 OR TRANSECT WAS LAID OUT AND DOCUMENTED
 RESULT:
 20 SITES TO BE REVISITED ANNUALLY
 40 SITES TO BE VISITED ONLY ONCE IN THREE
YEARS
NO VEGETATION HERE!!!
(MILE 135.2)
ROCKY, BUT VEGETATED SITE @ 12.3
A VERY
ROCKY SITE @
95.0
A SANDY
SITE
@ 171.5
THE “CREW” AFTER TWO WEEKS ON
THE RIVER
LESSON LEARNED – II
 NSU has continued a low level of collaboration with
GCMRC
 After a presentation to the Technical Advisory
Committee, he was asked, “Can this design be used to
estimate the amount of vegetation in the region of
interest?”
 Answer was YES.
 Response from a long-time researcher in GCMRC
 While developing the environmental impact statement for a
particular activity, we needed to estimate this quantity,
but realized our data (gathered using traditional
ecologists’ methods of selecting sites) didn’t support it.
I’m glad we can now do that.
ILLUSTRATIONS
 Collaboration with plant ecophysiologists in Arctic
Alaska
 = “North Slope”
 Collaboration with the Grand Canyon Monitoring and
Research Center (GCMRC), Flagstaff, AZ
 Monitoring of the terrestrial plant ecology near the
Colorado River in the Grand Canyon
 EPA’s Environmental Monitoring and Assessment
Program (EMAP)
 My major collaboration for the past 14 years
DESIGNING STUDIES FOR EPA’s
ENVIRONMENTAL MONITORING AND
ASSESSMENT PROGRAM (EMAP)
 DISTINCTIVE EMAP PERSPECTIVE
 DEFINE THE POPULATION OF INTEREST
 CONDUCT A PROBABILITY SURVEY OF IT
 CAREFULLY DEFINE THE SAMPLING FRAME
 VARIABLE PROBABILITY SELECTION OF SITES, BUT
WITH SPATIAL BALANCE
 CAREFULLY DEFINE RESPONSES TO BE EVALUATED
 TRAIN FIELD CREWS WELL
 MANAGE DATA WITH CARE AND AN “AUDIT TRAIL”
 LEARN FROM PAST MISTAKES, THROUGHOUT
 NSU HAS BEEN VERY INVOLVED WITH PROCESS
FOR EVALUATING “BUGS” IN STREAMS
Policy Questions Are Often Very Simple
“What do you mean you don’t know
how many acid lakes there are?”
William Ruckelshaus - EPA Administrator - early 1980s
EMAP Lesson #1 Not all “Experts” are expert in all things
“That’s a stupid question and one that you can’t
possibly answer.”
Chair of NRC Indicator Panel
NAPAP
National Surface Water Surveys
Acid Sensitive Regions
NAPAP-NSWS Survey Results
Answering Ruckelshaus’ Question
Upper Midwest
Ridge/Blue Ridge
Northern Appalachians
Adirondacks
New England
0
5
10
Percent Acidic
15
Acid Sensitive Regions
NAPAP-NSWS Survey Results
Answering Ruckelshaus’ Question
Prior
Upper Midwest
Current
Ridge/Blue Ridge
Northern
Appalachians
Adirondacks
New England
0
5
10
Percent Acidic
15
“EcoSynthesis”
The Very Early Stages of EMAP
“There are plenty of data out there
to know what is going on in the
environment and what our major
problems are. Do the hard work and
synthesize it!”
Conventional Wisdom
EMAP Lesson # 2
Conventional wisdom is just that,
conventional, and seldom leads to
important breakthroughs.
The data were not there to provide unbiased estimates.
lack of appropriate indicators (e.g. forests) and
lack of an appropriate design (e.g. inland aquatics).
We discover we will have to collect the data ourselves!
WHAT EFFECT HAS EMAP HAD?
(A Statistically Defensible Approach)
 Drastically altered the sorts of data and reports
EPA’s Office of Water requires of States and Tribes.
 Prompted substantial changes in certain parts of the
Forest Inventory and Analysis (FIA) of the US Forest
Service
 Prompted substantial changes in outlook and
cooperation of




EPA’s Office of Water
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
United States Geological Service
Relative to – what follows
The Clean Water Action Plan (1999)
OW/NOAA/USGS
requirement to assess the
condition of aquatic
resources
Stalemated – 1999
Conference Call
Invention of the National
Coastal Condition Report
National Coastal Condition Report I
Based on 1990-1996 data
Virginian, Carolinian,
Louisianian, selected west
coast sites
National Coastal Assessment
 1999 – EMAP Western Pilot
Coastal
 2000 – All coastal states in
conterminous US and Puerto
Rico
 2001 – Includes Alaska and
Hawaii (one time)
 2002 – Includes Western
Inter-tidal
 2003 – Includes Western
Offshore with NOAA
 2004 – Includes SE Offshore
with NOAA
THE BOTTOM LINE
 For this Statistician, Collaborating with Ecologists
and Agricultural Scientists, the Experience Has Been:
 Interesting
 Fun
 Rewarding
 We all need clean water, clean air, and wholesome food
 End of this Planned Presentation
 Questions Welcome
CADDIS FLIES
MESA CREEK (ORC 20)
“SURBER” SAMPLER IN USE
COLLECTING IN A STREAM
FIELD CLEANING OF A COLLECTION
BAGGING & PRESERVING A
COLLECTION
BAGGED COLLECTION - LAB
EVALUATING THE
“EVALUATION ERROR”
 HERE, THERE IS NO WAY TO REPEAT
THE PROCESS OF PULLING CLUMPS APART
===> “REPEATED MEASURES” IMPOSSIBLE
 ALTERNATIVE: SPLIT COLLECTIONS
 50:50
 SEPARATELY EVALUATE EACH HALF
 EXAMINE SIMILARITY OF SPLITS TO
STUDY “EVALUATION ERROR”
COLLECTION
EMPTIED INTO A
BEAKER PRIOR
TO SPLITTING
PLACING A
COLLECTION IN
THE SPLITTER
SPLITTING A COLLECTION
COMPLETED
SPLIT
SPLIT COLLECTION READY FOR ENUMERATION
EPA’s ARCTIC CONTAMINANTS
RESEARCH PROGRAM
 REALITY: ARCTIC HAZE HAS INCREASED GREATLY
OVER THE PAST 30 YEARS.
 APPARENT ORIGIN


NORTHERN EUROPE
INCLUDING THE FORMER SOVIET UNION.
 IT CONTAINS LOTS OF “BAD STUFF.”
 QUESTION:
 HAS MUCH OF THIS “BAD STUFF” BEEN DEPOSITED
IN ARCTIC ALASKA?
 APPROACH
 USE LICHENS AS A NATURAL ACCUMULATOR
 COLLECT SPECIFIC LICHENS ACROSS A POSSIBLE
GRADIENT OF SITES
 NSU: SELECTED GENERAL SITE LOCATION &
DEVELOPED LOCAL SITE SELECTION CRITERIA