SUNDAY 8TH MAY, 2016 – UWI TODAY
7
RESEARCH SYMPOSIUM
“Incubation lasted three days
because this is how
long the undergrad forgot the experiment in the fridge.
#overlyhonestmethods”. Tweeted by a scientist with the
trending hashtag started by a neuroscience postdoctoral
researcher in January 2013.
It was meant to pull back the veil on some of hiccups
behind scientific study.
There are some fields of work that we tend to imbue
with an air of gravitas. Sciences are how we figure out the
world around us; they use rigorous research to decipher
the cogs that make the system work. It’s serious stuff. And
sometimes nigh incomprehensible to the layman.
With #overlyhonestmethods, scientists spanning
all fields detailed the simplistic and sometimes hilarious
limitations to maintaining the scientific rigour we associate
with research papers. One said of an experiment he had
been working on that “the beam shutter was held stable by
an in-house built support made from BluTak and the top
of an old Biro.”
Whatever movies might have us think, scientists are not
always functioning with limitless technology, funds, time
or manpower. Especially when those scientists are students.
Sometimes a little ingenuity is necessary.
The presenters at the sixth annual research symposium,
a collaboration between the Department of Life Sciences
and the Departments of Physics and Computing and
Information Technology atThe UWI, put forward a myriad
of thought-provoking studies. The two-day theme was
‘Sustainable Development,’ and most of the presentations
looked at ways we can make improvements to the country
and the region.
“Science is a very creative process. Not only do students
have to come up with a question about a topic, they then
have to figure out how to collect their data, how to analyse
it and then compare it with what is already known,” says
Mike Rutherford, Zoology Curator in the Department of
Life Sciences. “Often the creativity comes when things
don’t go according to plan… for example if you are in the
field with a piece of equipment designed to do X and you
discover that that is not working for your particular project,
then you have to improvise and get the equipment to do Y
instead. The other creative side is when you get results that
might not have been a part of your original plan, and then
find a way to use those results to answer different questions.”
Some of the conclusions were straightforward enough,
like Marianna Rampaul’s assessment of Macqueripe Bay,
where even a non-scientist could grasp the data showing
high levels of E. Coli and Enterobacter in the water draining
into the Bay (do not wash your feet in the drain water, I
repeat, DO NOT wash your feet in that water). Some of the
detailed charts and graphs, however, may have sailed over
the heads of those not majoring in the field.
But most, if not all the presenters gave the audience a
peek behind the glamour associated with scientific study.
Keshan Mahabir, recounting his trips up to the Asa Wright
Nature Centre to study the Oilbird population, showed
pictures of how he got his data on population size: by
standing on a precarious ladder in a giant blue raincoat,
counting the birds in the cave with a flashlight.
Shaazia Salina Mohammed, when asked by one of the
judges why she had chosen one type of perimeter in her
study of Lionfish in Tobago rather than another, admitted
rather bashfully that it was cheaper, and she was limited to
the equipment available from the university.
And nothing wrong with that; she found ways to get the
results she needed from the resources at hand.
There is no doubt that the students were rigorous in
their research; and hopefully some of their work may soon
be changing the way we live. Who wouldn’t rejoice at the
introduction of year-round fresh pigeon peas, which might
be on the market in the near future? Albertha Joseph-
Alexander enthusiastically detailed the breeding of pigeon
pea varieties that might be available for our collective
currying soon.
One of the posters on display at the symposium looking
for potential antibiotic activity at Nariva Swamp.
The Man in the
Giant Blue Raincoat
…and other scientific adventurers
B Y A M Y B A K S H
Amy Baksh is a graduate of The UWI St. Augustine with a BA in History.
Five years ago, she hadwritten about her research on the
link or genetic relationship between seed size, pod quality
and yield in UWI TODAY
/
archive/june_2011/article6.asp).
But some of the most fascinating parts of the
presentations were inevitably the parts of research that we
don’t always consider. How do researchers make do with
their limitations? Mike Rutherford’s look at mammals in
the Arima Valley was professed to be just an investigation
he found interesting, and he undertook it without quite
knowing what he was looking for or what new information
he might come upon. After detailing the animals he had
spotted using cameras set up for the Arima Valley Bioblitz
in 2013, Professor Christopher Starr helpfully suggested that
he could have urinated on some of the sites to attract more
animals. After all, that’s what the Prof. himself, a retired
entomologist, had done in his own groundwork.
Well, whatever works.
Keshan Mahabir’s giant blue raincoat helped him get
information that could garner attention to the dwindling
Oilbirds up at Asa Wright, the only easily accessible colony
of this strange, nocturnal species that doesn’t get as much
good press as the flamboyant Scarlet Ibis.
Shaazia Salina Mohammed’s Lionfish study sheds light
on the sea creature that has been creating panic since it was
first spotted in Tobago’s waters, with many concerned that
it could wreak havoc in Tobago’s coral reefs.
As the symposium grows, (having started off as solely
Life Sciences to including Physics and Computing and IT)
so does the span of research. Now even undergraduate
students are given the stage to present alongside their
postgrad colleagues and professional scientists. And even
where data was limited by time, space or money, preliminary
studies could pave the way for more transformative work.
However they get there.
“Often the
creativity
comes when
things don’t
go according
to plan.”
Mike Rutherford,
Zoology Curator in the
Department of Life Sciences.
