I’ve got a few new scientists in the works for this series, but none of them was quite able to get back to me in time for May (it’s a busy time as many scientists prep for their field season or have already begun it), so I figured I’d share with you the scientist I know best: me! I received my Bachelor of Science in Biology with a Chemistry minor from Eastern Michigan University and I liked it so much that I earned my Master of Science in Ecology, Evolution, and Organismal Biology there as well.
What first sparked your interest in science?
I don’t really remember it being any one thing. I always enjoyed playing with bugs and my aunt has always been really into bird watching which probably helped. More than that though, I was a curious kid. I liked that the scientific method was a framework for finding out anything you could want to know. It was comforting to know that a well designed experiment could answer any question I could come up with. In fact, I contend that the scientific method is one of the three most important inventions in human history.
Describe your research in laymen’s terms:
For my thesis research, I assessed the feasibility of using two crayfish species (rusty crayfish and Louisiana crayfish) as biomonitors for microcystin-LR. I’m going to break that down for you. A biomonitor is a living organism that is used to assess the toxicity of chemicals in its environment. This can be done using blood or urine tests, by analyzing the tissues of an animal or plant, or by assessing behavioral changes related to a specific substance. Microcystin-LR is a toxin produced by blue-green algae (or cyanobacteria) that is toxic to humans at pretty small levels (1 part per billion in water), as well as livestock, pets, and some aquatic organisms. Under the right conditions, the algae that produce this toxin form large blooms that release dangerous levels of toxin into the water. Often, as is the case in Lake Erie, this water is used for drinking water and recreation, so the toxin’s presence is putting human lives at risk. However, the toxin takes about 24 hours to test for in water treatment plants and the chemical treatment to remove this toxin has to start immediately when the water is removed from the lake to be most effective. Basically, they just treat the water when there is a bloom and hope that it’s enough. Usually it is, but in August 2014, the entire Toledo area (400,000 people) went without running water for a weekend because there was toxin in the water that made it to their homes. In my research, I determined that Louisiana crayfish can sense microcystin-LR at levels at least as low as 5 ppb, and tried to train them to move to the center of a tank when the toxin was present. They didn’t learn this behavior correctly, but based on a third experiment I conducted, I think they could learn it in the future if positive reinforcement (food) was used to train them instead of the negative reinforcement (shocks) I used.
What are your hopes/plans for your scientific future?
In an ideal world, I’d like to be doing research on the Great Lakes or in the associated coastal wetlands. I’m interested in a lot of difference topics pertaining to wetlands and would love to work on fish habitat or life history research, algal community dynamics, macroinvertebrates, or wetland plant community dynamics. I’d also be interested in ecological restoration if I can’t do research. I also enjoy volunteering for environmental groups like the Huron River Watershed Council and Friends of the Rouge since my day job right now doesn’t get me outside at all.
What do you think is the most important thing for the general public to know about science?
Every scientific study is the same at its core. They all follow the scientific method to answer the specific question of the study. Because of this, you can’t pick and choose which bits of science you “believe in” and which you don’t. You either believe the scientific method is an accurate and valid way to learn about the world or you do not. If you do not, you don’t believe in gravity, electricity, or that any pharmaceuticals do their jobs to make us better. If you do, you believe in all of those things, and you also believe in vaccinating your children, that climate change is real, and that evolution is real. Period. The only exception to this is if the scientific method was not followed faithfully (falsification, etc). If you are picking and choosing which things to believe and which to ignore, you’re only fooling yourself. As the great Neil deGrasse Tyson says, “The good thing about science is that it’s true whether or not you believe in it.”
What non-scientific interests do you have?
Way too many. Obviously I write this blog. I have recently joined a Crossfit gym and have always enjoyed working out. I horseback ride, I love to go kayaking and canoeing, and I love to travel. I have also always enjoyed reading and the company of animals. I like to play volleyball and softball for fun as well.
References for any scientific publications:
MCROBB, K., 2016. Crayfish as a Biomonitor for the Algal Toxin Microcystin-LR. Order No. 10254056 ed. Ann Arbor: Eastern Michigan University Dissertations & Theses @ Eastern Michigan University; ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. ISBN 9781369624816.