 |
 |
| Highlights |
| |
|
| Highlights |
|
 Information
about the Research Training Program:
go directly to the current RTP on-line application forms
Smithsonian
Center for Education and Museum Studies Smithsonian Office of Fellowships - internships
Smithsonian Office of Fellowships - fellowships POST GRADUATES
CONTACT US
- OR -
Research
& Collections
|
24
May 2003 - 2 August 2003
A total of 14 students are anticipated to participate in the '03 session of theResearch Training Program. Schedule
of Events |
Poster |
Program
Summary The
Ethics
Postdoctoral
Fellow OVERVIEW Since it's founding, the Smithsonian Institution's National Museum of Natural History (NMNH) has been dedicated to understanding the natural world and humanity's place in it. The NMNH is "where natural history lives" and over the course of history has amassed the largest and most significant collection of natural history objects, counting 124 million specimens of plants, animals, fossils, minerals, and human artifacts. Historically, specimen collection was loosely monitored and access to data freely shared. More recently, countries are recognizing the scientific value, and economic potential, of their natural and cultural resources resulting in not only more strict regulations but also requests for data and repatriation of remains, objects, and specimens. With the advent of modern technology, and increasing demands from various constituencies for specimen data, new questions now confront the new generation of natural history scientists: who decides ownership of museum specimens and data? The provenance of acquired collection items is a matter of public record. Sensitive information involving privacy, collecting localities, intellectual property restrictions, security, and restricted use may constrain access to collections information and certainly influences new studies. To address these issues, an ethics component is included in the schedule of Research Training Program activities. PRESENTATION FORMAT The component is organized as a one-day interactive workshop and debate with discussion designed to introduce students and teachers to the ethical issues that face the new generation of natural history scientists whose research is dependent on the use of historic museum specimens plus acquisition of new samples from worldwide localities. An expert guest lecturer will guide the workshop, in partnership with Smithsonian staff. To illustrate the issues, participants will be posed with a real life scientific dilemma guided by the researcher caught in the middle. The exercise deals with a rare, endangered, and phylogenetically critical species of plant known from only a few localities in Brazil. Currently growing in a US research greenhouse from samples collected years ago, and vouchered by several museum collections, specimens representing the species are sought by horticulturists for commercial trade and by researchers studying evolutionary lineages of the monocots. Here called Species X, this plant is a potentially profitable commodity and critical piece in a yet unresolved scientific puzzle. The species is a prime candidate for protection under endangered species regulations but is not yet listed. Participants will evaluate the case study collectively, work in small groups to discuss specific questions, have lunch with their mentor to apply parallel situations to their current research project, and debate with each other both sides of challenging questions representing topics in the biological, geological, and anthropological sciences. THE
ETHICS OF SPECIMEN-BASED RESEARCH
Part I: Morning Small Group Exercise 9:00 a.m. - noon Part I - DIscussion | Part II - Lunch | Part III - Debate Participants will divide into small groups of 3-4 each, read the background descriptive, discuss the exercise questions, and then present their conclusions to the whole group. Summary: The Atlantic forests of coastal Bahia, Brazil harbor some of the greatest diversity of plant life on the planet. Within the last few decades, however, these formerly extensive forests have been reduced to approximately 3% of their original cover as the result of increasing agriculture. An extremely rare, but evolutionarily significant species of an angiosperm family, referred to here as Species X, occurs in these forests. This species is known from only three populations along a 6 km stretch of road in the cacao-growing region of Bahia. At last count in 1994, approximately 80-100 individuals were known from the three populations. A more recent count estimated fewer individuals. One of the populations grows at the edge of a cacao grove, and none occurs within a protected area. Recent studies have shown that Species X is one of the few remaining representatives of the earliest lineage of its family. These ancient forest plants may have evolved in the late Cretaceous and coexisted with the dinosaurs. Several botanists have visited the natural populations of Species X over the last 20 years, and a few live plants were removed for cultivation in Brazil and the United States. Exact Geographic Positioning System (GPS) coordinates for the three populations of this species have been obtained, but have not been released to the general public or scientific community. Species X is currently in cultivation in two places in Brazil, but a dozen or so plants are cultivated at various universities and botanical gardens in the United States. Although the species has some attractive qualities, it grows slowly and probably has little potential for development as an ornamental. It would be of interest to collectors mainly due to its rarity. Species X is very rare and extremely significant evolutionarily, a combination that traditionally affords the highest conservation priority, but it has not yet been listed. Discussion Questions:
Part II: Lunch Group Discussion noon - 1:30 p.m. Part I - DIscussion | Part II - Lunch | Part III - Debate Following small group discussion and presentation, the whole group will discuss related issues. Student and teachers will break for lunch with their advisors to discuss the issues in context of their research project. The group will then reconvene to present their thoughts and findings. CITES: The Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora is an international treaty that "was drawn up in 1973 to protect wildlife against such over-exploitation and to prevent international trade from threatening species with extinction." Would it be a good idea to list Species X formally under CITES protection even though it does not appear to have much commercial value? Would your answer change if you knew that official CITES listing would make it impossible to rescue these plants and move them elsewhere, even if the natural populations were threatened with immediate destruction? Species equality: Do species representing basal branches within major clades deserve special conservation status? How many rare, more recently evolved species, is one Species X worth? Compare Species X to other taxa (e.g. coelacanths vs. cichlids, horseshoe crabs vs. beetles). In context: How are these issues relevant to your project this summer? What specimens are you using in your summer research project? What were the circumstances through which they were acquired by the Museum? Part III: Afternoon Debate 1:30 - 4:00 p.m. Part I - DIscussion | Part II - Lunch | Part III - Debate Participants will divide into three groups representing six teams to engage in a debate of three different propositions. Assignments will be decided by draw rather than background or bias. Groups not debating will serve as the audience. Each team will be responsible for defending either the pro (in favor) or con (against) side of one proposition, again decided by draw rather than personal preference. Teams will have five minutes to present their side. After the opposing positions are explained, each side will be allowed a two-minute rebuttal. The moderator will ask the first team a question (submitted by a member of the audience), followed by a rebuttal; then another question (again, submitted by the audience) will be asked of the second team, again followed by a rebuttal. The audience will decide which team won the debate and then discuss which side of the proposition the group favors.
§ Proposition B: The sale of rocks, minerals, and fossils for profit hinders geological research. § Proposition
C: The repatriation of Native American remains, following NAGPRA regulations,
should not be questioned. EVALUATION The goal of including a collection-based ethics component as part of the Research Training Program schedule of activities is to encourage participants to consider the dilemmas associated with research centered on the use of museum collections and to think through practical approaches for dealing with conflicts. To rate the success of this activity, participating students and teachers will complete an evaluation sheet prior to the workshop documenting their expectations and opinions. At the conclusion of the workshop participants will complete a similar document to determine if their opinions have changed and how they will apply their insights to current research topics. Evaluation elements address comparisons to standards plus personal expectations through qualitative factors and quantitative measures. |
Key Links to RTP Web Pages
Research
Training Program
Information |
Highlights
|
Alumni
Pages
Application
Process
|
Requirements |
Application
Status
Application
Form |
Cover
Letter Form |
Recommendation Form | Advisor
List
| NMNH Home | What's New ? | Calendar of Events | Information Desk | Search |
You are HERE. To continue select the next option.
Scientific collections, such as those housed at the Smithsonian, historically
have been made available to those researchers with a reasonable claim
for data about the specimen. Recent technological advances, including
internet capabilities, now offers the opportunity for scientific collections
to be scanned and the complete specimen and label data to be visually
available to anyone interested in viewing collections. 
