Saturday, September 10, 2011

More on Mary Anning...The Fossil Hunter

Photo Courtesy: Palgrave Macmillan
Our latest Book of the Month features another tale of Mary Anning and her friend Elizabeth Philpot, two Victorian women who helped change the world's view on evolution, dinosaurs, and even a woman's role in science.  We previously talked about them in the fictional book "Remarkable Creatures", but now we get the true story in "The Fossil Hunter: Dinosaurs, Evolution, and the Woman Whose Discoveries Changed the World" by author Shelley Emling.

Many of the themes from Remarkable Creatures carry through to the Fossil Hunter as well, such as the second-class role of women in both social as well as scientific circles .  Despite Mary's singular ability to discover fossils other could not, and despite her providing the very data being used by male researchers to build their own fame, she was not allowed into their meetings and did not receive public credit for most of her work.

What we see more in this book, however, are many of the class issues that also came to influence her life.  She was a poor girl raised for many years by a single mother who collected fossils for money and sustenance, not pride or curiosity.    As we can see early in the book's Prologue:
By birthright, Mary should never have grown up to be a famous fossil hunter and geologist.  In addition to being dirt poor, Mary Anning was also marginalized by odds clearly not stacked in her favor: her sex, regional dialect, lack of formal eduction, and adherence to the Dissenter faith, a religious strain that didn't conform to the teachings of the established Church of England. But she enjoyed one powerhouse advantage: the very good fortune of having been born in exactly the right place at the right time, in 1799 in an unassuming town called Lyme Regis alongside some of the most geologically unstable coastline in the world.  Unbeknownst to anyone at the time, its wobbly cliffs held the remains of a baffling array of ancient reptiles, reptiles that used to roam the land and inhabit the seas hundreds of millions of years in the past.
We also learn more about her father and how he provided her all the tools she'd need for fossil-hunting, both literally and figuratively.  It began when was she only five or six years old when he'd take her for long walks on the nearby beach looking for "curios" -- the former name for fossils.  An avid fossil-hunter and and shopkeeper himself, he taught Mary how to identify interesting specimens, clean away the stone surrounding the fossil, display them in attractive cases, and smooth talk  souvenir hunters into paying a proper price for the piece.  He even crafted special tools for her child-size hands.  So even if she could not be apprenticed into a trade like her brother, she would always be able to support herself and her mother.

Sadly, her father would pass away when she was only eleven years old.  After her father's death life was not easy for the Anning family.  Constantly in debt it was all Mary could do to help with her mother's laundry business, collect fossils, and sell them in her small shop just to make ends meet.  It was up to Mary to keep the family going, although it often wasn't enough.
It is likely that living on parish relief for five years had caused Mary to focus her efforts even when she might have preferred to do otherwise.  Often the family faced the real threat of starvation, and fossil hunting was the concrete means by which they knew how to earn a living.  In addition, Mary likely continued her pursuits in an effort to honor her father's memory.  His dream had been to open a proper fossil shop, one with a glass-fronted window through which he could show off his wares.
Fortunately her discovery of complete Pleisosaur and Icthyosaur skeletons, along with countless other high quality fossils, allowed her to eventually collect enough money to purchase a quaint little house of their own complete with an attractive storefront for the "Anning Fossil Depot".  But this was small payment for all she was providing to the world of science.  As contemporary Anna Maria Pinney once wrote, "...these men of learning have sucked her brains, and made a great deal by publishing works of which she furnished the contents, while she derived none of the advantages."

We also learn a bit more about the scientific debate of the time over evolution, and even a story with an American twist. We are reminded that fossils weren't considered new in Mary's time; they had been discovered for years in many parts of the world. But the idea that these creatures didn't exist never entered peoples minds. If the creatures seemed strange, it's just because they no longer lived in a certain area but still lived elsewhere. The idea that God would create animals he didn't need was inconceivable to most. But in 1796, famed French naturalist Georges Cuvier first pronounced the theory of extinction, theorizing that mammoth fossils previously found were significantly different than African and Indian elephants, and that since nobody had ever seen these giant creatures in the wild (weighing up to six tons), they must be extinct.
One person closely watching Cuvier's work was U.S. president Thomas Jefferson. A longtime fossil enthusiast and also a devout churchgoer, Jefferson felt certain that the giants described by Cuvier were hiding somewhere in the vast wilderness of the American West. He even implored Lewis and Clark to seek out the creatures during their trek in 1803 and was certain they would return with tidings of mastodons, dead or alive. By this time debate over extinction was also stirring in America, where huge bones and teeth, weathered our of farmers's fields, were initially described as belonging to giant animals drowned in the biblical flood.
There are other, smaller discoveries that are no less important to our understanding of the ancient world.  She was the first to notice that when adding water to the tiny chambers in some marine fossils, she could create an ink that could be used for either painting or drawing.  These would turn out to be the very ink sacs ancient creatures used to avoid predators.  Just like a modern-day squid. 

Eventually the world slowly began to recognize the value of all Mary's works.  When the King of Saxony came to visit her home town, he visited her shop to look at the fossils they'd heard so much about. As she reportedly told his personal physician while purchasing some of her fossils, "I am well known throughout the whole of Europe."  She also had a few fossils named after herself, the Acrodus anningiae  and Belenostomus anningiae ifish.  But while the Royal Societies had paid small amounts for her discoveries and might even place her name on the skeleton when mounting them in the museum collections, this was tiny compared to the amount being made off of her work.  Only after much turmoil and many years of waiting, two prominent scientists did provide some repayment for her trouble.  One, fossil collector and retired British officer Thomas Birch, sold off nearly his entire fossil collection with the proceeds going straight to Mary.  Another, famed paleontologist William Buckland, arranged for Mary to receive an annual Civil List Pension of 25 pounds per year from the British Association for the Advancement of Science.  Not a princely sum but enough to keep the family comfortable in their later years.

As always her recognition would not come until later in life, and even then her fame did not last long.  Sadly she is more often remembered today as the purported inspiration for the tongue-twister "She sells sea shells by the sea shore." Given the very real contributions she made as a scientist when her age, rank, and gender would normally not let her, we hope these books keep her well known for her more illustrious achievements.   And we will always have her legacy.
There is no question that the fossil-hunting craze that started when Mary was alive is still going strong today. Every weekend, hordes of fossil hunters flock to the cliffs of Southern England, a 95-mile stretch of shoreline now called the Jurassic Coast that was declared a UNESCO World Heritage site in 2001. When a huge landslip occurred late in the evening of May 6, 2008 -- the worst in 100 years, destroying 1,300 feet of coast, crowds of fossil hunters gathered at the scene, just as Mary and William Buckland and so many others had nearly two centuries ago. And, like Mary, they were all looking for something special hidden amid fallen boulders, uprooted trees, and mounds of earth.

Sometimes fossil hunters risk their personal safety in their constant hope to make the discovery of a lifetime. Like Mary, they never give up.

Wednesday, September 7, 2011

More Distributed Computing Projects for You

It's been a while since we last talked about the many distributed computing projects looking for volunteers. But in just those few months many new projects have popped up while others have gone away after successfully completing their goals.  All good news, especially for us who are always looking for a new project to learn about.  So here are a few more to add to our ongoing list.  Won't you give them a look?  You'll see these on the dedicated OpenScientist Distributed Computing Web Page too.

  • Cure Tropical Diseases: The Drug Search for Leishmaniasis (http://www.worldcommunitygrid.org/research/dsfl/overview.do) project is looking for a cure to a tropical disease that infects over two million people in 97 countries each year.  Although there are treatments to this often-neglected disease, they aren't completely effective and can cause many negative side effects.  This project will use participant computers to comb through a vast library of potential drug compounds to find just the perfect one to treat the disease.  Click on our World Community Grid blog post for easy directions on getting started.
  • Spot Incoming Asteroids: Orbit@Home (http://orbit.psi.edu/) is developing statistical models to identify the best places to identify near-Earth asteroids and most accurately determine their likelihood of hitting our planet. The program does not look at individual asteroids but finds the best way to use valuable telescope time. Click on our BOINC blog post for easy directions on getting started.
  • Predict Weather 100 Years from Now: ClimatePrediction.net wants to improve climate models that project up to 100 years in the future by better understanding how small changes in assumptions can impact the forecasts. By tweaking these assumptions ever so slightly, the program runs a global climate simulation and analyzes the final results in comparison to simulations run by thousands of other useres. This is important to better understanding global warming and quanitfying the amount of error in current models.
  • Turn Genes On and Off: The DNA@Home project (http://dnahome.cs.rpi.edu/dna/) is trying to better understand gene regulation and transcription, or how cells turn on and off their genes.  Using home computers to collectively examine the genome of a small bacteria, researchers hope to figure out what sets of DNA base pairs control transcription.  Once we understand transcription it becomes easier to turn on beneficial genes and turn off those that cause deadly diseases.  Click on our BOINC blog post for easy directions on getting started.
  • Fold Proteins: POEM@Home, or Protein Optimization with Energy Method (http://boinc.fzk.de/poem/), is a protein-folding project taking advantage of networked computers to run these computationally-intense tasks. The difference for POEM is the use of some novel new approaches that provide quicker results and allow researchers to investigate the characteristics of each protein shape. Click on our BOINC blog post for easy directions on getting started.
  • Investigate How Genes Become Proteins: RNAWorld (http://www.rnaworld.de/rnaworld/) is a collection of projects looking at how these molecules read the DNA code and perform their work in the cell.  Some of the projects are purely basic research while others focus on specific disease-causing aspects of RNA activity.  Click on our BOINC blog post for easy directions on getting started.
  • Dabble in Many Projects: The Lattice Project (http://boinc.umiacs.umd.edu/) is not just a single project but a method for allowing multiple projects to all share the power of distributed computing networks.  In a nutshell, researchers can add their projects to the Lattice, and the system will distribute the work for all those projects to the networked projects.  This benefits smaller projects that may not want to create their own, free-standing applications but want to take advantage of existing networks instead.  Click on our BOINC blog post for easy directions on getting started.

If you have time take a look at some of these for me and let me know your thoughts.  I'm particularly interested in how you think these projects fit within the definition of citizen science we've been working on.  Some people think this should not be considered true citizen science while others disagre.  Before considering that question more I'd like to hear your informed opinions first.

Tuesday, September 6, 2011

Time to Shake, Rattle, and Roll...for Science


Photo Courtesy:
Quake Catcher Network
Last week a rare strong earthquake hit the U.S. eastern seaboard.  Although damage was minimal the shaking reminded us easterners that the Earth is always in motion.  That's not news for anyone from California or Japan, and especially not for the Stanford Geology Department or the Quake Catcher Network of citizen scientist seismologists (citizen sci-esmologists?).  They've been tracking geologic activity across the country with low-cost seismometers and built-in laptop accelerometers.  This network is contributing to better understanding of active quakes and helping understand how future quakes will impact individual areas at the very local level.

One citizen scientists member in particular, Carolyn McPherson of Charlottesville, Virginia, had the closest sensor to last week's Virginia earthquake and was highlighted in a Washington Post article (summarized here on OpenScientist).  A $50 Christmas gift of a Quake Catcher Network (QCN) seismometer was all it took for her to get started, and though this area had to wait a while for a large enough quake to be interesting, her patience paid off as she gets to see her data be used to better understand this recent event.

Stepping back a bit, the Quake Catcher Network started as Stanford researchers wanted a method to augment the existing network of seismographs without spending huge amounts of money.  They were working on theories about how earthquakes travel over different types of terrain, including differences from city to city and even block to block.  Developing a large network was vital to their research, but they could not afford to set up hundreds of sensors costing up to $100,000 each.  There had to be a better way.  So they devised a cheaper version that could be made for under $50, and though each would not be as sensitive the value of having a pervasive network was much more important than finely detailed data.  They could also take advantage of existing accelerometers many laptop makers have been recently including in their devices.  They just had to repurpose the internal sensors and collect the data.

Now that they've made literally thousands of devices, how to distribute them?  Well, for those people in the most earthquake-prone areas such as those near the San Andreas fault in parts of California or the New Madrid fault (in parts of Tennessee, Missouri, Arkansas, and Kentucky), sensors are free to individuals willing to set them up and keep them running.  Low-cost ($5) sensors are also available for classrooms across the county: not just for data collection but also as a learning tool for students.  For the rest of us (like me), sensors can be shipped fora low fee of $49.  A small price to pay for the fun of understanding earthquakes (if you ask me).  They also make sensors available through their Rapid Aftershock Mobilization Program to capture data on local aftershocks taking place after major earthquakes hit.

 So check out the Quake Catcher Network web site, and sign up for a sensor!

Getting Started is Easy:
  • We can't do much without the actual sensors.  So head to the Quake Catcher and click here to order one for $49 (or enter your zip code here to qualify for a free one).  Alternatively teachers in K-12 schools can click here for nearly-free ($5) sensors to use in the classroom.  Based on my experience they will arrive in 2-3 days.
  • Before the sensor arrives scout out a good place to install it.  The program requests it be placed flat on the lowest level of your building, and it will need access to your computer through a USB connection.  So find a place near a downstairs computer, or find a way to link it up to a wireless USB connection (I hope to provide more on this step in future posts).  It should also be a place the sensor can sit permanently...to accurately measure earthquakes it needs to be stable when the rumbling starts.  So it will need to be glued or strapped into place.
  • Once the sensor arrives secure it in place, making sure it is on a flat surface and the compass is compass on top is pointing North.  Don't worry about being exact...the alignment can be off by a few degrees and still provide very accurate data.
  • Install the QCN-Live program on your computer.  If you have already installed the BOINC distributed computing software it's just a simple download from the Quake Catcher Network. All you should need to do is click on the appropriate software for your computer here (review the full user manual if you have any trouble).  If you do not have BOINC installed already, click on the BOINC Installer and then upload the QCN software.  You may also want to review the OpenScientist Distributed Computing page to learn about the many other citizen science projects that use the BOINC system software.
  • For laptop users, many of you already have sensors installed that can provide data too.  Just click on the Laptop Network page to see if yours qualifies, and to download the QCNLive software for you machine.
  • Once all the software is installed it's time to let the fun begin. Just attach the USB cable to both the sensor and your own computer.If you see the following earthquake map, you're in the right place.
  • Click through the interface and you should see a seismograph reading like this:
Photo Courtesy: Quake Catcher Network
  
That's all there is to it. The computer will record data automatically in the background and submit it to QCN-Central on a regular basis. Of course it can't record unless the system is left running but keeping your machine on low power while not in use should help conserve energy while still providing important data.

With all of this data project scientists are looking to validate their own micro-zoning theories they also want everyday citizen scientists to have access and manipulate it also as they desire.  The data is not yet available online yet, but check their Data site frequently for updates.

Finally, I can't let this post end without mentioning the project's need for continued money donations to support the discounted sensor project for classrooms.  They only cost the schools $5 but that only covers shipping and handling...it costs the project even more to make the device available in the first place.  So won't you help them out?  Donate a sensor or two to a school and help this worthwhile project continue.

Photo Courtesy: Quake Catcher Network




Sunday, September 4, 2011

More Citizen Scientists in the News

Photo Courtesy:
Iván Martínez / Wikimedia Commons
It's been a big week for citizen scientists.  The media is taking notice of the everyday people contributing to science on a daily basis, and highlighting their achievements for everyone to learn from.

Yesterday I stumbled across a recent Washington Post article about the work of high school student Alexa Kenzler.  She asked a very simple question: "How much dry cleaning fluid remains on clothing after it is cleaned"?  Given the environmental and personal health ramifications this question should have been answered years ago.  When she discovered nobody ever had, she contacted Georgetown University professor Paul Roepe and they began working the problem together.  As the Post describes it:
...what started out as something to “sponsor the kid’s curiosity” prompted a chain reaction in the university lab: an e-mail exchange, an invitation to collaborate and, this week, a paper published online in a peer-reviewed environmental journal. The paper gives new details about the amount of a toxic chemical that lingers in wool, cotton and polyester clothing after it is dry-cleaned.

“At the end of the day, nobody, I mean nobody, has previously done this simple thing — gone out there to several different dry cleaners and tested different types of cloth” to see how much of the chemical persists, said Roepe, who supervised the study.
Since then what started out as a school research paper (Grade - 100 out of 100) also won her first place in Chemistry at the Arlington County Science Fair, and she hopes to compete in the much larger Intel International and Engineering Science Fair next year. 

Beyond academics and and feel-good story about a local kid rising to the top, this is important data necessary to understand the impacts of the nearly 15,000 dry cleaners nationwide using perchloroethylene as the main cleaning solvent.  It also underscores importance of everyday people getting involved and asking questions about the world they live in.  "Professional" scientists can teach us much and government can protect public health when it understands the dangers.  But people need to keep asking the questions, whether they are tenured professors, government regulators, or bright 15-year-olds who just want to make a difference.

Saturday, September 3, 2011

Finalizing a Definition of "Citizen Science" and "Citizen Scientists"

Photo Courtesy: Booksworm
Over the last two weeks I've been thinking a lot more about our question of "What is a Citizen Scientist?"  On the one hand the various definitions we've already talked about seem even stronger than they did on first glance; incorporating many of the thoughts I presumed would be missing.  But yet there are still some holes we need to fill.  So let's look more closely at some of the proposed definitions.

There are two definitions that come closest, so let's examine each one in turn.  The first is from Silvertown:


"A citizen scientist is a volunteer who collects and/or processes data as part of a scientific enquiry."

 
The main issue I have with this entry is the use of the term "volunteer".  Certainly there is a hobby or avocational aspect of citizen science, but making money from scientific contributions should not be ruled out.  For starters, many of the Challenge-type projects (such as the Innocentive project or the Ansari X Prizes) rely on profit motives to encourage participation and to inspire innovation.  Even further, they recognize that key insights to problems may come from outside the established scientific community (or at least from outside the targeted discipline).  There are also projects that rely on profit motives for the collection of data...I term these "Bounty" projects.  These would also be excluded from a volunteer-based definition.

I haven't talked much about Bounty projects on this site since there haven't been many good examples of them developed so far.  But I expect to see them in the future and think this is an exciting area for future development in the field.  Not only will it help science generally but it will also help overcome the monetization problem needed to make citizen science increasingly mainstream and incorporate citizen scientists more firmly in the corporate science environment.  Similar to Challenge projects they use profit as a motive, but don't use it to spur innovation.  Instead rewards are used to incentivize the collection of data that may not be a goal in and of itself, but which is needed for others to fulfill the scientific goal.  Examples are data collection projects that base raffle-style drawings based on the amount of data each user collects, or which offers prizes for hitting certain levels of participation.  I'll have much more on this in future posts (after doing some more research) as it's an exciting new area for potential growth.

The second definition is more of a description, and comes from the Po Ve Sham blog of Muki Haklay (who is apparently writing a book chapter on citizen science in GIS - Geographic Information Sciences):


"[Citizen Science is defined as]...scientific activities in which non-professional scientists volunteer to participate in data collection, analysis and dissemination of a scientific project..."

 
What I like about this one is that it includes the a brief, but concise and encompassing range of activities citizen scientists perform.  It even adds dissemination, which I had not initially included but which may be appropriate.  In my understanding dissemination involves teaching others about science and the scientific process, and activity performed by our most illustrious professional scientists as well.  But the distinction between "professional" and "non-professional" scientists in this description does cause some problems for me.  It neglects the many scientists who are active in one field "professionally" but whose love of scientific inquiry in general leads them to become involved in citizen science projects outside their current discipline.  Anecdotally I'd say this describes the majority of currently active citizen scientists since these people are most likely to have both the general tools and personality to be interested in this research.  So we have to make sure they are included too.

Another problem with this description is it's circularity that defines citizen scientists as performing scientific activities in a scientific project.  Instead I'd prefer a definition that describes the nature of science without using that term, such as dictionary definitions involving systematic explorations/discoveries of natural phenomena.  Or we could just use synonymous terms such as "Investigator" or "Researcher". It's admittedly a minor point, and possibly a bit pedantic, but we should keep it in mind.

Looking at everything said over the last few blog posts (here, here and here),  any definition needs to capture professional scientists working outside their discipline.  And it can't be relegated to just certain disciplines currently popular in citizen science such as ecology or astronomy.  So I'm offering the following alternatives for people to comment on.

Citizen Scientist: Researcher who participates in the systematic collection and analysis of data; development of technology; testing of natural phenomena; and the dissemination of these activities on an avocational basis.

Citizen Science:  The systematic collection and analysis of data; development of technology; testing of natural phenomena; and the dissemination of these activities by researchers on a primarily avocational basis.

So what do you think?  Does this go to far?  Is there anything missing?  Should dissemination be included?  Is it too wordy or even just not very poetic?  Leave me your comments below and we can come up with the most definitive (no pun intended) version we can.