Moderator: Allison R. Brigham, Supervisory Biologist, USGS National Water Quality Laboratory,
    Arvada, CO
 

John C. Kingston, USGS, National Water Quality Laboratory, Arvada, CO

As taxonomists associated with a Bureau that uses high-diversity aquatic assemblages (algae, benthic invertebrates and fishes) as environmental indicators, we see biodiversity value to continental-scale sampling programs that extend beyond original organizational objectives of resource interpretation. These large numbers of samples represent a significant taxonomic and biogeographic resource if made available to the scientific community. Although samples are collected for Bureau objectives, they have value beyond the original project=s needs. We view this as a Atriple-duty@ scenario of value:

• original assessment objectives
• snapshot or time capsule view of biodiversity at a particular time and place, and
• raw material for biodiversity research.

This session presented the perspectives on the biodiversity value of federal samples by scientists at governmental agencies in both the U.S. and Canada, museum, the academic community and the professional organization representing the collections community. Although we used algal collections as the focal point of this discussion, these issues are applicable to virtually all biological assemblages.
 

Edward C. Theriot, Director, Texas Memorial Museum, Austin, TX
Roberta Faul-Zeitler, Association of Systematics Collections, Washington, D.C.

The Association of Systematics Collections represents the concerns of a wide range of North American institutions that house natural history collections under governance structures that may be federal, state or local government or private, non-profit entities. Federal collections have many sources of origin, ranging from federal scientists conducting research on private and public lands in the U.S. to scientists at universities and private museums working on federal lands. Such collections are nominally the property of the U.S. government. Increasingly these collections are at risk. One solution is to house such collections at universities and private museums. However, museums often face similar resource issue-critical needs in maintenance/conservation of collections, institutional funding shortages, and reduced collections priorities. It may not always be in the best interest of the collections for museums to assume responsibility for materials and specimens not in their ownership or to which they have highly restricted rights. We discussed the ASC view of the meaning of ownership of such collections; how such collections might be shared; ASC=s perspective on best museum practices in ecological studies; the relationship(s) between federal government and museums with regard to biological collections; and pros and cons of policies that require deposition of specimens collected at public expense.
 

J.P. Kociolek, Executive Director, California Academy of Sciences, Golden Gate Park, San Francisco,
    CA

Biological specimens have been used to a great extent, and with much success, in short- and long-term monitoring and assessment studies. Specimens have added value in terms of representing a record of the original research (and offering the ability for future scientists to reproduce/re-examine the original study), as well as affording additional research opportunities to a diverse community of scientists. The storage, maintenance and accessibility of these specimens is critical to their overall value, yet programs for which they were originally procured may be ill-equipped to handle this function, in both the near and long term. Strategies are necessary to preserve, house and make accessible these specimens to the scientific community at large. Such strategies should include organizations that are able to handle the specimens, are known to the scientific community as repositories for natural history specimens, and those that can minimize costs associated with specimen care and distribution. Strategies with this component will maximize the scholarly and practical returns from the high initial investment costs of these information-rich resources and allow the monitoring/assessment programs to focus resources (space, personnel, materials, other budgetary items as well as intellectual) on their mission.
 

Eugene F. Stoermer, Center for Great Lakes and Aquatic Sciences, University of Michigan, Ann
    Arbor, MI

- The University Side
    - Reasonably good for charismatic groups
        Established tradition of study
        Well understood economic basis
        Most Universities have active researchers
        Most Universities have active collections
        Wide interest and recognition
            Good supply of highly trained people
            Some concerns for future field Biologists
    - Poor to completely lacking for many less recognized groups
        Few have an established tradition of study
        Economic basis is poorly understood
        Few Universities have active researchers
        Very few universities have active collections
        Very low level of early student exposure
            Poor supply of future researchers
            Few with significant modern systematic training

-The Agency Side
    - Good for charismatic groups
        Well understood economic basis
            Clearly within agency missions
            Most agencies have had active researchers
                Some perception of decline in this function
            Widely variant Agency collection policies
                Current perception of serious decline in this function
            Wide and growing public interest
                Good supply of highly trained people
                Perceived decline in effective permanent positions
    - Highly variable for less recognized groups
        For many, expertise historically only present in agency labs
            Perceived decline in highly recognized labs
        Economic basis is poorly understood
            Particularly in complex environmental problems
        Perceived decline in active researchers
        Perceived decline in active collections
        Perceived decline in desirable research positions

- An Example (Diatoms)
    - Characteristics
        Eukaryotic
        "Regular" evolutionary processes
            Evolve very rapidly
            Endemic floras in ancient lakes
            Widely distributed pan-boreal flora
    - Primary producers
        First in line for ecological insults
    - Widely distributed
        All habitats where free water exists, even periodically
    - Large number of species
        Ca. 60,000 described
        On the order of 106 estimated
    - Large number of individuals easily collectable
        Possibility of doing justifiable statistics
    - Mineralized cell walls
        Easily preserved
        Easily curated
        Easily identified (compared to most microorganisms)
        Excellent fossil record for Tertiary, Quaternary and Recent
            Widely used in reconstructive studies
                Acid rain
                Eutrophication
                Climate change

- History
    - Ca. 1650 -1800
        Discovery with first light microscopes
    - Ca. 1800 - 1900
        Grand period of growth
            Cutting edge science
            Many dynamic researchers
                Privately wealthy
                Supported by Royal Academies
                Virtually no university support
                    Little formal training
    - Ca. 1900 - 1950
        Period of regression
            Few, mostly self-trained, researchers
            Mostly supported by ecological concerns
                Some agency support for applied studies
            Virtually no University involvement
                Very few formally trained researchers
            Amateur tradition in U. S.
                Most work done in Academies
            Taxonomic regression
                Extremely broad generic concepts
                Limited species recognition
                Assumption of pandemic distribution
    - Ca. 1950-2000
        Period of explosive growth
            Electronic revolution
                Electron microscopes
                Computer-enabled multivariate statistics
            Rise in ecological concerns
                Eutrophication
                Acidification
                Climate change
            Extensive Agency engagement
                Mostly ecological interest
                Some taxonomy
                Little formal systematic training
            First university engagement
                Question, rather than answer driven
                Introduction of Phylogenetic Systematics

- Current Situation
    - Massive changes in taxonomy and nomenclature
        Freshwater genera in common usage doubled since 1990
        Species described at ca. 500/yr and accelerating
            Mostly outside North America
        Few investigators trained to deal with these changes
            Limited number of University programs
                Most programs peripheral to mainstream
                Most not engaged in modern systematics
            Limited North American Literature
                Modern primary taxonomic literature largely European
                Modern monographic literature almost entirely European
    - Greater Agency need
        Poorly served by current University situation
            Unrealized opportunities
            Inability to implement fundamentally sound programs

- Suggested Solutions
    - University side
        Leadership
            Realistic program assessment
                Stabilization of quality programs
                Adopting orphaned taxonomic groups
            Realistic economic assessment
    - The Agency side
        Direct investment in academic training
            Joint programs with NSF
        Direct investment in monographic research
            Current NSF PEET initiative
        Stable funding of well recognized research laboratories
      Quality rather than price criteria
            Rigorous review of laboratory qualifications
        Re-establishment of key Federal positions
            Greater cooperation with University training functions.
        Re-vitalizing and stabilizing infrastructure
 

Paul Hamilton, Research Division, Canadian Museum of Nature, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada

The importance of biological collections and their associated historical data as markers of our changing global environment is well documented. For example, the use of pre-atomic-bomb mollusk collections for accurate C14-dating illustrates the relevance of temporal biological collections. Although this foundation of biological markers is available from national collections, the present-day association between collections institutions and environmental monitoring programs is weak. In Canada, the development of monitoring programs and protocols is the jurisdiction of Environmental Canada while national collections are not associated with the same ministry. As we attempt to monitor anthropogenic changes in our global environment, the need to link biodiversity and environmental monitoring programs with national collections and collection databases is evident and relevant.