Ecological Society of America

Safe authorization of patient discharge after thoracic surgery must be ensured following chest tube removal. This decision is commonly based on chest X-ray findings. Chest ultrasound (US) has emerged as a potentially valuable alternative. The aim of this study was to assess the interobserver reliability of discharge authorization decisions based on chest X-ray compared with chest US findings. We conducted a single-center prospective study including 60 consecutive patients undergoing thoracic surgery. A semi-quantitative evaluation of pneumothorax, pleural effusion, subcutaneous emphysema, and lung consolidation was performed in a blinded fashion using both chest X-rays (interpreted by surgeons) and chest US (performed by pulmonology residents) at three time points: day 0, day 1, and after chest tube removal. Discharge eligibility was determined using a score derived from imaging findings. AMONG THE 60 PATIENTS (MEAN AGE: 60.7 ± 14 years, 70% male), 42 (69%) underwent lung resection, and the remaining patients had mediastinal or pleural surgery. Both imaging modalities identified the same three patients who did not meet the theoretical discharge criteria (concordance rate: 100%, Po = 57+3/60, p < 0.0001). Agreement according to Fleiss' kappa was excellent for discharge decisions, but poor to slight for the evaluation of postoperative complications using chest X-ray and US. Chest US reliably identifies patients requiring continued monitoring or repeat drainage after chest tube removal in the postoperative thoracic surgery setting. However, the interpretation of mild to moderate complications differed substantially between chest X-ray and chest US. NCT05545566, ID: 87RI22_0022.

The ocean is rapidly changing through warming, sea-level rise, ocean acidification, declining oxygen concentrations, and altered circulation patterns, which are reshaping marine ecosystems worldwide. These changes necessitate a complete and holistic view of affected marine ecosystems. Long-term ocean monitoring programs are crucial for understanding these changes and guiding sustainable management. The California Cooperative Oceanic Fisheries Investigations (CalCOFI)*1, initiated in 1949, is one of the world's longest-running and most comprehensive marine ecosystem observing programs. CalCOFI collects extensive ocean data across all Essential Ocean Variables in the Southern California Current four times a year (Gallo et al. 2022). This encompasses over 36 physical and chemical parameters, 2,500 biological parameters, and 50,000 environmental DNA sequences, measured simultaneously (Satterthwaite et al. 2025). These data have illuminated long-term ecosystem patterns, supported marine management, and enhanced our understanding of how climate variability and change impact the California Current. Given its long history and collaborative nature, CalCOFI's data are fragmented across more than 30 disparate datasets, managed by different entities, served in various locations, with inconsistent naming and limited integration (Fig. 1), which hinders a holistic ecosystem understanding. Thus, CalCOFI exemplifies similar challenges and opportunities of mobilizing and integrating ocean data on a global scale. Our vision has been to modernize and build an integrated data system for CalCOFI that automates dataset ingestion, integration, and serving for timely use in research and management (Fig. 1). We are developing workflows to publish these datasets into portals promoting Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable (FAIR; Wilkinson et al. 2016) data principles. Our initial efforts focused on two core CalCOFI datasets: Conductivity, Temperature, and Depth (CTD) bottle data and larval fish data to develop a workflow for easier access, integration, and use (Fig. 2). Data providers upload processed datasets into a shared Google Drive in simple formats (e.g., .csv), with globally unique identifiers and standardized naming conventions (Suppl. material 1). Data are automatically detected and integrated into a PostgreSQL database (Fig. 2). Newly added data trigger a system rebuild and validation, checking primary keys, spatial geometry, taxonomy, and metadata. Managers are notified of errors; otherwise, the system updates production databases, records a new version, and publishes a Github release with source files and a DOI via Zenodo. Original source data files are retained for past version reconstruction. While PostgreSQL maintains relationships between data, we also produce an analytical database in DuckDB for a single, portable database with fast querying, even on remote servers (Fig. 2). CalCOFI data and observations are accessible through multiple repositories and platforms, tools, interfaces, and portals based on user needs and funder requirements (Fig. 2; Suppl. material 1). For example, some tools support flexible analysis and visualization (e.g., NOAA Environmental Research Division's Data Access Program), others provide long-term archiving with standardized metadata (e.g., Environmental Data Initiative). We are also publishing biological observations in DarwinCore (Wieczorek et al. 2012) format with Extended Measurement or Fact and uploading them to the Ocean Biodiversity Information System (OBIS) so that CalCOFI data can be integrated with global biodiversity datasets worldwide. CalCOFI program information is on the Global Ocean Observing System Biology &amp; Ecosystem Portal, and dataset records are structured for indexing by portals like Ocean Data Information System (ODIS) and Google Dataset Search. To facilitate data access and visualization, we also developed the CalCOFI Integrated Data Viewer*2 (Fig. 3). This web app allows users to explore decades of CalCOFI oceanographic and larval fish data across space, time, and depth. We plan to integrate additional CalCOFI datasets and collaborate with other data providers to build a more complete ecosystem-level view of the California Current. Our ultimate goal is to enhance CalCOFI data findability, integration, and usability for scientific and management communities, enabling a better understanding of ocean changes and ensuring a sustainable future for marine ecosystems and human communities.

Forests are a substantial terrestrial carbon sink, but anthropogenic changes in land use and climate have considerably reduced the scale of this system1. Remote-sensing estimates to quantify carbon losses from global forests2–5 are characterized by considerable uncertainty and we lack a comprehensive ground-sourced evaluation to benchmark these estimates. Here we combine several ground-sourced6 and satellite-derived approaches2,7,8 to evaluate the scale of the global forest carbon potential outside agricultural and urban lands. Despite regional variation, the predictions demonstrated remarkable consistency at a global scale, with only a 12% difference between the ground-sourced and satellite-derived estimates. At present, global forest carbon storage is markedly under the natural potential, with a total deficit of 226 Gt (model range = 151–363 Gt) in areas with low human footprint. Most (61%, 139 Gt C) of this potential is in areas with existing forests, in which ecosystem protection can allow forests to recover to maturity. The remaining 39% (87 Gt C) of potential lies in regions in which forests have been removed or fragmented. Although forests cannot be a substitute for emissions reductions, our results support the idea2,3,9 that the conservation, restoration and sustainable management of diverse forests offer valuable contributions to meeting global climate and biodiversity targets.

This seminar is part of a series to provide societies and their journals with information and resources to help their communities be more knowledgeable and prepared to share data (and software) in a way that is relevant and meaningful for each discipline. This is a 12-month series. <strong>The Data You Document are the Data We Love</strong> 5 November 2021, 10am ET (1400 UTC) <strong>Speakers:</strong> <strong>Joy Davidson</strong>, Coordinator, Digital Curation Centre (DCC) <strong>Eva Méndez</strong>, Associate Professor, Universidad Carlos III de Madrid <strong>Moderator:</strong> <strong>Zsolt Silberer</strong>, Director of Publishing, Ecological Society of America <strong>Description:</strong> Our research data are critical to our work. We don’t always document them as well as we should. If we restructure our thinking that our research data are just as important a contribution to the scientific record as our peer-reviewed papers, then what would “well-documented” data look like? Our speakers Joy Davidson and Eva Méndez will share current work on helping researchers improve their data documentation (i.e., metadata) and give us reasonable steps as societies to help encourage our researchers with their own documentation practices. Seminar Recording: https://youtu.be/SoFxBN-Jnbg

The murder of George Floyd on May 25, 2020, symbolizes the long history and impact of systemic racism and suffocation of minority communities, particularly the Black community, in the US. Systemic issues force these communities to contend with a vast array of obstacles: access to schools (including higher education), healthcare, affordable housing, livable income, jobs and career opportunities, security, and funding for their research. In science, minorities, especially Black scientists, are starkly underrepresented in every sector: academia, NGOs, government agencies, industry, and – indeed – professional societies. Undoubtedly, there is no shortage of minority undergraduate students interested in pursuing Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (STEM) majors. Enrollments for both underrepresented minorities and White students are on par. Yet, far fewer minorities graduate with a STEM degree, and they take longer to do so. Fewer than 2% of PhDs in the sciences are earned by Black scholars. Everyday, minorities question whether they belong in science classrooms, tenure-track positions, and careers. Everyday, others question their presence. For decades, attempts to address this underrepresentation have focused on “pipeline” issues of minority recruitment and retention, with billions of dollars spent on programs to promote interest in science, provide authentic research experiences, and offer peer and professional mentoring as well as community support. Regardless, the numbers have not changed. When viewed from a landscape perspective, we see a multitude of distinct, unconnected, and isolated programs. From an equity and justice lens, no single program will ever succeed in effecting change throughout an individual's career journey. Success requires attention to support both on and off campus: mentoring and advising; development of technical and “soft” skills; leadership training; and induction into professional networks. Each and all of these have profound and positive impacts on a young person's career trajectory. The processes of recruitment, hiring, grading/evaluation, professional advancement, and overall institutional culture also must be addressed as they have too often shut doors to minority inclusion. There are simply too many factors for any single program to sufficiently manage. Programs are stuck in a system in which only a few rare individuals triumph – those who persist in spite of these obstacles. We propose a comprehensive, collective approach that encourages multiple entities and initiatives to work together to intentionally address both personal experiences and institutional culture as individuals move through each career stage. The Collective Impact (CI) model developed by Kania and Kramer (Stanford Soc Innov Rev 2011; https://bit.ly/3gEJLEh) provides a framework for coherent action. With five key characteristics – a common agenda, shared measurement, mutually reinforcing activities, continuous communication, and backbone support – the CI approach shifts the actions and results of siloed activity to coordinated, cohesive, and durable outcomes. The purpose of a CI alliance is not to develop a new program, but to create a new structure that coordinates and shares existing resources, networks, and expertise. In 2017, ESA was awarded a US National Science Foundation INCLUDES grant to pilot EcologyPlus (ecologyplus.esa.org), an alliance of Historically Black Colleges and Universities; federal, state, and local government agencies; environmental NGOs; and professional and community networks. Led by partner organizations, EcologyPlus facilitates skills workshops, research, networking, internships, and job opportunities that serve diverse undergraduates, graduate students, and early-career professionals. It also offers individuals a mentoring platform to organize and track career goals with their mentors. One of the hallmarks of a CI design is agreement on success metrics. EcologyPlus extended the traditional definition of success beyond academic research careers to include “STEM-capable” careers. We regarded participation in science-related fields not as “leaks” in, but as extensions of, the pipeline into other disciplinary areas. In doing so, we recognized that participant interests were not the same as ours and that there are many types of environmental careers. We see an opportunity to acknowledge the need for ecologists and other scientists to advance in careers ranging from exploratory research to communication, from policy to public health. In recent months, anti-racism conversations have exposed the systemic roots of the low numbers of Black and other minority scientists in the discipline. Furthermore, we see that numerical metrics alone are insufficient. We believe that other measures like a sense of belonging, an ability to navigate career pathways, and an effective use of professional networks must be included. We invite universities, employers, and organizations to connect within an intentional, anti-racist, CI framework in order to construct comprehensive approaches that will bring about the changes necessary to welcome Black and other minority scientists in all places and across all sectors. TERESA MOURAD Ecological Society of America, Washington, DC GEORGE MIDDENDORF Howard University, Washington, DC