保护生理学研究的实验室领域连续体:利用多种方法为政策和实践提供信息。

IF 2.5 3区 环境科学与生态学 Q2 BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION
Conservation Physiology Pub Date : 2025-09-02 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1093/conphys/coaf063
Sandra A Binning, Kerri Lynn Ackerly, Steven J Cooke, Marco Fusi, Daniel F Gomez Isaza, Emily A Hardison, Sidney Martin, Amelia Munson, Mar Pineda, Gail D Schwieterman, Martin Reichard, Andrea Rummel, Tamzin A Blewett
{"title":"保护生理学研究的实验室领域连续体:利用多种方法为政策和实践提供信息。","authors":"Sandra A Binning, Kerri Lynn Ackerly, Steven J Cooke, Marco Fusi, Daniel F Gomez Isaza, Emily A Hardison, Sidney Martin, Amelia Munson, Mar Pineda, Gail D Schwieterman, Martin Reichard, Andrea Rummel, Tamzin A Blewett","doi":"10.1093/conphys/coaf063","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In the field of conservation physiology, there is often a trade off between conducting research in controlled laboratory settings or in inherently variable field environments. However, this belief sets up a false dichotomy where laboratory experiments are perceived as providing precise, mechanistic understanding with low variability at the cost of environmental realism while field studies are ecologically relevant but criticized for generating inconsistent evidence that is difficult to interpret and replicate. Despite the perceived binary view, these approaches are not in opposition to one another, but rather form a continuum along increasing ecological complexity. Here, we argue that it is possible to mindfully and purposefully design studies and develop integrative collaborations in conservation physiology that span the lab-field continuum to address pressing environmentally-relevant questions that can be used to inform policy and practice. We first outline the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to knowledge generation. We then highlight ways to bridge the lab-field divide though leveraging the advantages provided by different approaches to build a more comprehensive understanding of the natural world, including how recent technological advances can help connect lab- and field-based research. Next, we discuss the importance of partnership and collaboration across sectors for informing our understanding of ecological patterns and physiological processes. Finally, we reflect on how to best translate physiological research into action and the reciprocal role that environmental practitioners can have in driving research questions in conservation physiology.</p>","PeriodicalId":54331,"journal":{"name":"Conservation Physiology","volume":"13 1","pages":"coaf063"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-09-02","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404662/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The lab-field continuum in conservation physiology research: leveraging multiple approaches to inform policy and practice.\",\"authors\":\"Sandra A Binning, Kerri Lynn Ackerly, Steven J Cooke, Marco Fusi, Daniel F Gomez Isaza, Emily A Hardison, Sidney Martin, Amelia Munson, Mar Pineda, Gail D Schwieterman, Martin Reichard, Andrea Rummel, Tamzin A Blewett\",\"doi\":\"10.1093/conphys/coaf063\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In the field of conservation physiology, there is often a trade off between conducting research in controlled laboratory settings or in inherently variable field environments. However, this belief sets up a false dichotomy where laboratory experiments are perceived as providing precise, mechanistic understanding with low variability at the cost of environmental realism while field studies are ecologically relevant but criticized for generating inconsistent evidence that is difficult to interpret and replicate. Despite the perceived binary view, these approaches are not in opposition to one another, but rather form a continuum along increasing ecological complexity. Here, we argue that it is possible to mindfully and purposefully design studies and develop integrative collaborations in conservation physiology that span the lab-field continuum to address pressing environmentally-relevant questions that can be used to inform policy and practice. We first outline the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to knowledge generation. We then highlight ways to bridge the lab-field divide though leveraging the advantages provided by different approaches to build a more comprehensive understanding of the natural world, including how recent technological advances can help connect lab- and field-based research. Next, we discuss the importance of partnership and collaboration across sectors for informing our understanding of ecological patterns and physiological processes. Finally, we reflect on how to best translate physiological research into action and the reciprocal role that environmental practitioners can have in driving research questions in conservation physiology.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":54331,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Conservation Physiology\",\"volume\":\"13 1\",\"pages\":\"coaf063\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-09-02\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12404662/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Conservation Physiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"93\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/coaf063\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"环境科学与生态学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Conservation Physiology","FirstCategoryId":"93","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1093/conphys/coaf063","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"环境科学与生态学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"BIODIVERSITY CONSERVATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在保护生理学领域,通常在受控的实验室环境或内在可变的野外环境中进行研究之间存在权衡。然而,这种信念建立了一种错误的二分法,在这种二分法中,实验室实验被认为以环境现实主义为代价,提供了精确的、机械的、低可变性的理解,而实地研究与生态相关,但因产生难以解释和复制的不一致的证据而受到批评。尽管存在二元观点,但这些方法并不是相互对立的,而是形成了一个连续体,随着生态复杂性的增加。在这里,我们认为有可能有意识地、有目的地设计研究,并在保护生理学领域开展跨实验室领域的综合合作,以解决紧迫的环境相关问题,这些问题可用于为政策和实践提供信息。我们首先概述了不同的知识生成方法的优缺点。然后,我们强调了通过利用不同方法提供的优势来建立对自然世界更全面理解的方法,包括最近的技术进步如何帮助连接实验室和现场研究,从而弥合实验室和现场鸿沟的方法。接下来,我们讨论了跨部门伙伴关系和合作的重要性,为我们了解生态模式和生理过程提供了信息。最后,我们反思了如何最好地将生理学研究转化为行动,以及环境从业者在推动保护生理学研究问题方面可以发挥的相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

The lab-field continuum in conservation physiology research: leveraging multiple approaches to inform policy and practice.

The lab-field continuum in conservation physiology research: leveraging multiple approaches to inform policy and practice.

The lab-field continuum in conservation physiology research: leveraging multiple approaches to inform policy and practice.

In the field of conservation physiology, there is often a trade off between conducting research in controlled laboratory settings or in inherently variable field environments. However, this belief sets up a false dichotomy where laboratory experiments are perceived as providing precise, mechanistic understanding with low variability at the cost of environmental realism while field studies are ecologically relevant but criticized for generating inconsistent evidence that is difficult to interpret and replicate. Despite the perceived binary view, these approaches are not in opposition to one another, but rather form a continuum along increasing ecological complexity. Here, we argue that it is possible to mindfully and purposefully design studies and develop integrative collaborations in conservation physiology that span the lab-field continuum to address pressing environmentally-relevant questions that can be used to inform policy and practice. We first outline the advantages and disadvantages of different approaches to knowledge generation. We then highlight ways to bridge the lab-field divide though leveraging the advantages provided by different approaches to build a more comprehensive understanding of the natural world, including how recent technological advances can help connect lab- and field-based research. Next, we discuss the importance of partnership and collaboration across sectors for informing our understanding of ecological patterns and physiological processes. Finally, we reflect on how to best translate physiological research into action and the reciprocal role that environmental practitioners can have in driving research questions in conservation physiology.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Conservation Physiology
Conservation Physiology Environmental Science-Management, Monitoring, Policy and Law
CiteScore
5.10
自引率
3.70%
发文量
71
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Conservation Physiology is an online only, fully open access journal published on behalf of the Society for Experimental Biology. Biodiversity across the globe faces a growing number of threats associated with human activities. Conservation Physiology will publish research on all taxa (microbes, plants and animals) focused on understanding and predicting how organisms, populations, ecosystems and natural resources respond to environmental change and stressors. Physiology is considered in the broadest possible terms to include functional and mechanistic responses at all scales. We also welcome research towards developing and refining strategies to rebuild populations, restore ecosystems, inform conservation policy, and manage living resources. We define conservation physiology broadly and encourage potential authors to contact the editorial team if they have any questions regarding the remit of the journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信