Hostname: page-component-77c89778f8-9q27g Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-23T03:30:53.395Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

There and Back Again, or the Problem of Locality in Biodiversity Surveys

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  01 January 2022

Ayelet Shavit  and
James Griesemer
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

We argue that ‘locality’, perhaps the most mundane term in ecology, holds a basic ambiguity: two concepts of space—nomothetic and idiographic—which are both necessary for a rigorous resurvey to “the same” locality in the field, are committed to different practices with no common measurement. A case study unfolds the failure of the standard assumption that an exogenous grid of longitude and latitude, as fine-grained as one wishes, suffices for revisiting a species locality. We briefly suggest a scale-dependent “resolution” for this replication problem, since it has no general, rational solution.

Type
Research Article
Information
Philosophy of Science , Volume 76 , Issue 3 , July 2009 , pp. 273 - 294
Copyright
Copyright © The Philosophy of Science Association

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

‡

We thank Eli Gerson, Eva Jablonka, Yemima Ben Menahem for thoroughly reading and improving the manuscript, the MVZ for sharing its valuable archive online, and especially the MVZ people—Steve Beissinger, Carla Cicero, Chris Conroy, Karen Klitz, Michelle Koo, Bill Monahan, Juan Luis Parra, Jim Patton, John Perrine, John Wieczorek, and the director Craig Moritz—for their time, openness, scientific integrity, and warm hospitality, both indoors and outdoors.

References

Begon, Michael, Townsend, Colin R., and Harper, John L. (2006), Ecology. 4th ed. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Bowker, Geoffrey C. (2005), Memory Practices in the Sciences. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar
Brandon, Robert (1990), Adaptation and Environment. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cicero, Carla, and Conroy, Christopher (2005), “Locality Data Justification”, in MVZ Basics. Unpublished collection of documents intended for new workers at the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology at Berkeley.Google Scholar
Collins, Harry M. (1992), Changing Order, Replication and Induction in Scientific Practice. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Elith, Jan, et al. (2006), “Novel Methods Improve Prediction of Species’ Distributions from Occurrence Data”, Novel Methods Improve Prediction of Species’ Distributions from Occurrence Data 29:129–151.Google Scholar
Gannett, Lisa, and Griesemer, James (2004), “The ABO Blood Groups: Mapping the History and Geography of Genes in Homo sapiens”, in Rheinberger, Hans-Jörg and Gaudillière, Jean-Paul (eds.), Classical Genetic Research and Its Legacy: The Mapping Cultures of Twentieth-Century Genetics. London: Routledge, 119–172.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gerson, Elihu (2007), “Reach, Bracket, and the Limits of Rationalized Coordination: Some Challenges for CSCW”, in Ackerman, Mark S. et al. (eds.), Resources, Co-evolution and Artifacts: Theory in CSCW. Dordrecht: Springer, 193–220.Google Scholar
Griesemer, James (2000), “Development, Culture, and the Units of Inheritance”, Development, Culture, and the Units of Inheritance 67 (Proceedings): S348–S368.Google Scholar
Griesemer, James, and Gerson, Elihu (1993), “Collaboration in the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology”, Collaboration in the Museum of Vertebrate Zoology 26:185–203.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (1994), “Developmental Systems and Evolutionary Explanation”, Developmental Systems and Evolutionary Explanation 91:277–304.Google Scholar
Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (2001), “Darwinism and Developmental Systems”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russel D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 195–218.Google Scholar
Grinnell, Joseph (1910), “The Methods and Uses of a Research Museum”, The Methods and Uses of a Research Museum 77:163–169.Google Scholar
Grinnell, Joseph (1917), “Field Tests of Theories Concerning Distributional Control”, Field Tests of Theories Concerning Distributional Control 51:115–128.Google Scholar
Grinnell, Joseph (1924), “Geography and Evolution”, Geography and Evolution 5:225–229.Google Scholar
Grinnell, Joseph (1938), “Suggestions as to Collecting”, unpublished document, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology Archive.Google Scholar
Guisan, Antoine, and Thuiller, Wilfried (2005), “Predicting Species Distribution: Offering More than Simple Habitat Models”, Predicting Species Distribution: Offering More than Simple Habitat Models 8:993–1009.Google Scholar
Hacking, Ian (1983), Representing and Intervening. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hacking, Ian (1999), The Social Construction of What. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
Huston, Michael A. (2002), “Critical Issues for Improving Predictions”, in Scott, J. Michael et al. (eds.), Predicting Species Occurrences: Issues of Accuracy and Scale. Washington, DC: Island, 7–24.Google Scholar
Hutchinson, George Evelyn (1978), An Introduction to Population Ecology. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
Kiester, A. Ross (2001), “Species Diversity Overview”, in Levin, Simon (ed.), Encyclopedia of Biodiversity, Vol. 5. Dordrecht: Academic, 441–451.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kiester, A. Ross, et al. (1996), “Conservation Prioritization Using GAP Data”, Conservation Prioritization Using GAP Data 10:1332–1342.Google Scholar
Kiester, A. Ross, and White, Denis (forthcoming), “Two Concepts of Space in the Policy Analysis of Biodiversity,” working paper.Google Scholar
Kingsland, Sharon E. (1991), “Defining Ecology as a Science”, in Real, Leslie A. and Brown, James H. (eds.), Foundations of Ecology. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1–13.Google Scholar
Kohler, Robert A. (2002), Landscapes and Labscapes: Exploring the Field-Lab Border in Biology. Chicago: Chicago University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Levin, Simon A. (1992), “The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology”, The Problem of Pattern and Scale in Ecology 73:1943–1967.Google Scholar
Richard, Levins, and Lewontin, Richard (1985), The Dialectical Biologist. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
MacKenzie, Darryl I., et al. (2003), “Estimating Site Occupancy, Colonization, and Local Extinction When a Species Is Detected Imperfectly”, Estimating Site Occupancy, Colonization, and Local Extinction When a Species Is Detected Imperfectly 84:2200–2207.Google Scholar
National Research Council (1995), Finding the Forest in the Trees: The Challenge of Combining Diverse Environmental Data. Washington, DC: National Academy.Google Scholar
Odling-Smee, John F., Laland, Kevin N., and Feldman, Marcus W. (2003), Niche Construction: The Neglected Process in Evolution. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan (2000), The Ontogeny of Information: Developmental Systems and Evolution. 2nd ed. Durham, NC: Duke University Press.Google Scholar
Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russell D. (2001), “What Is Developmental System Theory?”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russel D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1–10.Google Scholar
Patton, Jim (2003), “Yosemite 2003 Report”, http://mvz.berkeley.edu/Grinnell/Yosemite_Survey_2003.html.Google Scholar
Perrine, John (2007), “Data Fields to Capture for Grinnell Resurvey Project”, http://mvz.berkeley.edu/Grinnell.html.Google Scholar
Peterson, A. T., and Cohoon, K. C. (1999), “Sensitivity of Distributional Prediction Algorithms to Geographic Data Completeness”, Sensitivity of Distributional Prediction Algorithms to Geographic Data Completeness 117:159–164.Google Scholar
Porter, Theodore M. (1995), Trust in Numbers: The Pursuit of Objectivity in Science and Public Life. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.Google Scholar
Sarkar, Sahorta (2005), Biodiversity and Environmental Philosophy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shachak, Moshe, et al. (2008), “Woody Species as Landscape Modulators and Their Effect on Biodiversity Patterns”, Bioscience 58:209–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shavit, Ayelet, and Griesemer, James (2010a), “Mind the Gaps: Why Are Niche Construction Processes so Rarely Used?”, in Jablonka, Eva and Gisis, Snait (eds.), The Transformations of Lamarckism: From Subtle Fluids to Molecular Biology. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Shavit, Ayelet, and Griesemer, James (2010b), “Transforming Objects into Data: How Minute Technicalities of Recording Species Location Entrench a Basic Theoretical Challenge for Biodiversity”, in Nordmann, Alfred, Carrier, Martin, and Schwartz, Astrid (eds.), Science in the Context of Application. Bielefeld: Zentrum für interdisziplinäre Forschung, forthcoming.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim (2001), “Niche Construction, Developmental Systems, and the Extended Replicator”, in Oyama, Susan, Griffiths, Paul E., and Gray, Russel D. (eds.), Cycles of Contingency: Developmental Systems and Evolution. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 333–349.Google Scholar
Sterelny, Kim (2003), Thought in a Hostile World: The Evolution of Human Cognition. Oxford: Blackwell.Google Scholar
Wimsatt, William (2007), Re-engineering Philosophy for Limited Beings. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Windelband, Wilhelm ([1894] 1980), “History and Natural Science”, History and Natural Science 19:169–185.Google Scholar