Basic Biology, Good Field Notes, and Synthesizing across Your Career

Abstract

Ichthyology and herpetology remain in need of well-done studies in basic biology and ecology, life history, or natural history for many species. Even for well-studied areas in the United States, the percentage of species for which basic information is lacking or for which better information is needed, based on state or regional faunal books, ranged from about 10 to 35% for fish species, and about 5 to 31% for herps. For Mexico the need was even greater, with the basic biology of approximately 45% of the fish fauna poorly known. Part of the need for better information stems from perceptions by some that basic studies are less desirable than works grounded in theory or modeling. But basic biological information is the foundation for and critical to virtually all syntheses or meta-analyses. Thus, publication of good basic biology in appropriate journals is extremely valuable to one's discipline, and many peer-reviewed journals like Copeia remain amenable to publishing such information. In recent years, graduate students and faculty have been encouraged to publish in high-profile journals, often as judged by ''impact factors.'' But impact factors are a poor way to evaluate across disciplines, and the degree to which papers are cited should be given more consideration than the impact factor of any particular journal. Papers in Copeia or similar journals can be and are highly cited, with several in Copeia having been cited 300 to more than 500 times. To the end of high-quality publication of basic information, or its eventual synthesis, suggestions are offered relative to field notes and similar practices. For herpetologists and ichthyologists in mid-to late career, the challenge is to synthesize across one's career, passing to the next generation all that you have learned, by publishing professional books, books for laypersons, or outreach through other media. Contribution to knowledge by publication of basic biological information, and ultimately by synthesizing across one's career, all help meet our obligations to the disciplines that have so shaped our professional lives.

Natural Habitat Conditions in a Captive Environment Lead to Spawning of Spotted Gar

“…Further research into the use of artificial substrates to promote spawning of Spotted Gar both in captivity and in the wild is warranted. Observational reports of life history characteristics and habitat associations are important contributions to our understanding of the basic biology of species (Matthews 2015). For gars, which have historically been considered a nuisance fish, information concerning many aspects of their biology and ecology remains unknown (Scarnecchia 1992).…”

Positive biotic interactions in freshwaters: A review and research directive

“…However, while we advocate a cross‐scale approach, we caution strongly against the wholesale replacement of small‐scale natural history studies (Frimpong, ; Ricklefs, ). The call for the resurrection of natural history studies (Able, ) coincides with a realisation that modelling, species inference, and big data are only as good as the foundational ecology behind them (Matthews, ). Many of the examples of positive interactions discussed here have stemmed from the observations of earlier naturalists seeking to simply describe and understand the phenomena they witnessed; this type of science is irreplaceable.…”

“…However, some crayfish species actively groom themselves, removing worms and keeping worm densities at levels that confer benefits (Farrell, Creed, & Brown, 2014). This grooming behaviour is also affected by host ontogeny, with host age and size influencing worm removal (Skelton, Creed, & Brown, 2014, 2015. Because young crayfish frequently moult, which relieves their gills of fouled cuticles, they do not benefit from hosting worms and thus remove them (Thomas, Creed, Skelton, & Brown, 2016).…”

Feeding Ecology of Early Life Stage Razorback Sucker Relative to Other Sucker Species in the San Juan River, Utah

“…; Courchamp et al. ; Matthews ). Our objective was to compare trophic resource use among co‐occurring ELS Bluehead Sucker, Flannelmouth Sucker, and Razorback Sucker by using museum‐vouchered specimens collected from the San Juan River, Utah.…”