Resultados da Busca

Por Juliana Leonel Ilustração: Caia Colla O Gordon Research Conference (GRC) é um grupo de aproximadamente 200 conferências de alto prestígio internacional coordenado por uma organização sem fins lucrativos com o mesmo nome. Os tópicos das conferências cobrem as mais diversas áreas da ciência. Durante esse eventos pesquisadores de várias partes do mundo se reúnem para discutir os assuntos mais recentes e as últimas descobertas científicas de um determinado campo científico. No final de julho ocorreu o GCR de Geoquímica Orgânica na cidade de Holderness nos EUA. O GRC - Geoquímica Orgânica ocorre a cada 2 anos e é a terceira vez que tive a oportunidade de participar deste evento, o que me deixou muito feliz. Mas o que esse ano teve de tão especial comparado aos anos anteriores? Foi o evento que mais houve participação de representantes das universidades brasileiras. E mais que isso, todas mulheres! Foram seis oceanógrafas brasileiras de quatro instituições diferentes (UFSC, UFBA, UFPR e PUC-RJ) de três regiões distintas do Brasil. E isso não foi notado só por mim ou minhas colegas, foi notado por várias pessoas que vieram salientar como a participação brasileira estava aumentando e, alguns destacaram também o fato de serem todas mulheres. Algumas pessoas chegaram até a comentar que o Brasil devia ser um país onde há grande incentivo para mulheres seguirem a carreira científica... infelizmente, essa parte tivemos que explicar que não era bem assim. Entre as muitas atividades que compõem o evento houve um momento para pensarmos e discutirmos sobre a diversidade de gênero no evento e na geoquímica orgânica, e como poderíamos aumentar a igualdade de participação. Nesse momento foi possível perceber que embora as oportunidades e incentivos para pesquisa sejam maiores em países da América do Norte e da Europa do que no nosso país, no quesito incentivo e participação da mulher na ciência não somos muito diferentes. Na conferência mesmo, havia um número maior de homens participantes e, principalmente de palestrantes. E, da mesma forma como ocorre no Brasil, há mulheres e homens que negam que haja qualquer tipo de desequilíbrio nas participações. Ao mesmo tempo que essas informações entristecem, é bom saber que há muitas pessoas conscientes do problema, dispostos a discutir e tomar atitudes para tentar mudar essa realidade. Mas como podemos mudar isso? Como podemos incentivar mais mulheres a participarem da ciência (principalmente de áreas como ciências da terra e ciências exatas)? Como aumentar a participação de mulheres em conferências, tanto como participantes ou palestrantes? Como aumentar o número de mulheres nos programas de pós-graduação, departamentos, institutos? O primeira passo talvez seja mostrar que mulheres também podem fazer pesquisa. Pode parecer bobagem, mas muita gente acha que isso é coisa só de homem. Depois precisamos incentivá-las! E esse incentivo deve ser feito em todas as faixas etárias, começando quando elas são novas e ainda estão a procura de exemplos, como é o caso da iniciativa Meninas com Ciência USP. Mas deve continuar também quando elas estão na graduação, na pós-graduação ou até mesmo jáinseridas no mercado de trabalho. Afinal, sempre surgem dúvidas e, em um ambiente que exalta homens e deixa as mulheres de lado, não é difícil surgirem questionamentos (haja autoestima e perseverança!). Um outro ponto importante, é dar visibilidade para essas mulheres, a regra quem não é vista não é lembrada se aplica aqui. Pesquisas mostram que homens têm maior facilidade em se auto indicar e/ou indicar os colegas para cargos, prêmios etc. E se nós fizermos o mesmo? Como fazer isso? Comece conhecendo as mulheres da sua universidade, instituto, departamento… quem são? O que fazem? Onde vivem? Do que se alimentam? Converse com elas, dividam histórias, dúvidas, alegrias e aflições de serem pesquisadorAs. Depois de conhecê-las será fácil de lembrá-las na hora de escolher/indicar uma representante, uma palestrante, um exemplo, etc. Além disso, que tal começar a pedir que as comissões organizadoras dos eventos se preocupem em incentivar, aumentar e facilitar a participação feminina? Por exemplo, as comissões devem 1) refletir a diversidade que se espera em um evento científico (uma comissão formada por homens brancos de meia idade não vai saber quais são as necessidades do restante das pessoas); 2) determinar que haverá igualdade de gênero no número de palestrantes; 2) inserir em seus códigos de conduta ações para que as mulheres se sintam confortáveis e não sejam desrespeitadas durante a conferência (a propósito, as conferências que você participa tem código de conduta?); 3) orientar os revisores dos trabalhos submetidos a terem consciência das suas tendências (olha que legal esse código que foi passado para os revisores do SciPy2018); 4) oferecer espaços de cuidado/recreação para as pessoas que levarem suas crianças; 5) oferecer um espaço adequado (atenção aqui, espaço adequado e não simplesmente um espaço!) para mães que precisam amamentar ou retirar leite (está em dúvida sobre o que é um espaço adequado, consulte as usuárias, há até mesmo um artigo discutindo isso) A participação de mulheres em eventos internacionais é super importante para o estabelecimento de parcerias e estudos de maior importância. Para fazer ciência de ponta, precisamos de interação internacional. E as possibilidade de interação aumentam enormemente se você estiver nesses eventos, bem como se você der uma palestra para outras pessoas do seu campo de atuação. Por isso mulheres, não esqueçam da sororidade (= união e aliança entre mulheres, baseada na empatia e companheirismo, em busca de alcançar objetivos em comum)! Com ela somos mais fortes e vamos mais longe! #julianaleonel #caiacolla #eventoscientíficos #mulheresnaciência

Em setembro de 2018, nossa editora Gabrielle Souza participou da XIII Semana de Biologia da UFBA em Salvador- BA. A semana tinha como tema IBIO 50 anos: Perspectivas do Biólogo no século XXI. Gabrielle apresentou um trabalho intitulado “Descomplicando Netuno: aprimorando a comunicação entre a ciência e a sociedade”, que foi fruto da seção criada aqui no blog “Descomplicando Netuno”, enquanto a Gabrielle era bolsista de Iniciação Científica pelo CNPq. Gabrielle Souza apresentando o pôster na XIII Sembio-UFBA em Salvador -BA. #netuniandoporai #cnpq #divulgacaocientifica #gabriellesouza

Por Jana M. del Favero Antes de responder essa pergunta, precisamos entender alguns conceitos e teorias. Então pegue um mapa-múndi e observe. Uma impressão que esse mapa nos passa é que os continentes estão ancorados de forma duradoura em um determinado ponto da superfície da Terra, certo? Mas, na verdade sabemos que eles estão “vagando” pelo mundo com o passar do tempo. No momento em que você lê esse post, o local no qual você se encontra está derivando lentamente e sem parar. Observando novamente o mapa-múndi nota-se um impressionante quebra-cabeça formado pelas linhas de costa de ambos os lados do Oceano Atlântico, principalmente  as bordas opostas da África e da América do Sul. Isso sugere que se você combinar cuidadosamente as bordas de todos os continentes eles podem ser reagrupados em uma única massa de terra, como se um quebra cabeça fosse resolvido. Foi então, baseando-se em informações geológicas e paleontológicas (em fósseis) que o meteorologista alemão, Alfred Wegener, apresentou ao mundo em 1915 uma nova hipótese de compreensão da história da Terra: a deriva continental.  Segundo Wegener, entre 100 e 150 milhões de anos atrás essa única massa de terra, a Pangeia, se partiu e os pedaços, ou melhor, os continentes, se afastaram, abrindo novas bacias oceânicas entre eles (aqui vale fazer um parênteses pois, se existia um único supercontinente, também existia um único oceano, o Panthalassa). Porém, diversos pesquisadores contestaram a afirmação de Wegener de que a crosta de granito dos continentes poderia “arar” seu trajeto pela crosta basáltica, mais densa, dos oceanos e alguns geofísicos afirmaram, com base em cálculos, que a deriva continental não era possível de ocorrer. Além disso, o próprio Wegener não conseguia explicar porque  os continentes derivaram. Assim, a teoria da deriva continental de Wegener foi ignorada por mais de meio século. Com a posterior descoberta da cordilheira mesoceânica do Oceano Atlântico (Cordilheira Mesoatlântica), pôde-se notar a semelhança do seu recorte com o das bordas dos continentes às margens do Atlântico. Além disso, foi constatado que o assoalho do vale desta cordilheira é composto por basalto jovem recém-cristalizado. Assim, em meados dos anos 60, geólogos e geofísicos propuseram uma nova hipótese: o fundo oceânico novo e a crosta são criados continuamente! Eles surgem a partir da  intrusão e extrusão de basalto na crista de todas as cordilheiras mesoceânicas. A crosta recém-formada se move lateralmente liberando espaço na crista das cordilheiras mesoceânicas para a formação da nova crosta basáltica. Este processo, chamado de espalhamento do assoalho oceânico, provoca a expansão das bacias oceânicas e, assim, os continentes de cada lado da bacia são movidos junto com o assoalho oceânico, explicando a deriva continental! A hipótese da deriva continental tornou-se parte de uma teoria maior, a teoria da tectônica de placas. Essa teoria foi formulada nos anos 60 e é baseada na ideia de que a superfície da Terra é dividida em uma série de placas com bordas definidas pela sismicidade, ou seja, frequência/número, magnitude/força e distribuição de terremotos. Essas placas, que também são conhecidas como  placas tectônicas ou placas litosféricas, são como finas panquecas, pois são de 10 a 50 vezes mais largas do que espessas. Em todas as bacias oceânicas, algumas placas estão se separando nas cordilheiras mesoceânicas e formando um novo assoalho (conforme visto anteriormente esse processo é chamado de espalhamento do assoalho oceânico). Já outros pares de placas, principalmente nas bordas do Oceano Pacífico, estão sofrendo um processo chamado subducção: quando pares de placas colidem ativamente e uma placa “obriga” a outra a mergulhar para a astenosfera (segunda camada da Terra, logo abaixo da litosfera), onde se derrete e produz magma. Quando os continentes de duas diferentes placas se encontram em uma zona de subducção, eles colidem e esmagam os sedimentos marinhos que ficam entre os dois, erguendo-os e criando os grandes dobramentos montanhosos, como ocorre nas elevações do Himalaia. Por fim, os limites das placas onde a litosfera não é criada e nem destruída são chamados falhas transformantes, e, neste casos, as placas apenas deslizam lateralmente uma pela outra. Agora estamos prontos para responder a pergunta inicial: o Pacífico está diminuindo? E a resposta é sim! Como há pouquíssimas zonas de subducção nos Oceanos Atlântico, Índico e Ártico, essas bacias estão se expandindo com passar do tempo, por causa do espalhamento do assoalho oceânico a partir de suas cordilheiras mesoceânicas. Por outro lado, nas bordas do Oceano Pacífico encontramos a maioria das zonas de subducção. Como as taxas de subducção são muito maiores do que as taxas de produção do assoalho nas cordilheiras mesoceânicas, pois existem mais regiões de espalhamento do que zonas de subducção, o resultado é o encolhimento do Oceano Pacífico em tempo geológico. Fonte: Garrison, T. Essentials of oceanography. 5a edição. Brooks/Cole, Cengage Learning, 464 p. Pinet, P.R. 2014. Invitation To Oceanography. 7a edição. Jones & Bartlett Learning. 662 p. #janamdelfavero #ciênciasdomar #assoalhooceânico #baciasoceânicas #derivacontinental #tectônicadeplacas

Por Veronica Slobodian Post original aqui. Ilustração: Joana Ho A Academia tem o costume de se achar diferente do restante dos agrupamentos humanos. Os acadêmicos se consideram gozar de um alto grau de questionamento, de maneira que não sucumbiriam às crendices populares e quaisquer tipos de argumentos que não sejam respaldados somente em fatos, dados empíricos, experimentos regulados. Entretanto, o ambiente acadêmico apresenta crendices populares, como qualquer outro agrupamento humano. Inclusive crendices com personagens dignos de criptozoologia ou folclore, com espécies lendárias, mitológicas e hipotéticas, as quais teriam sido avistadas por diversos acadêmicos ao longo de suas carreiras. Personagens como a “mulher não gosta de exatas”, a “mulher não tem aptidão para determinado campo científico”, a “mulher não serve para assumir posição de liderança”, dentre outros tantos. Essas são figuras folclóricas do ambiente acadêmico as quais estão arraigadas há tanto tempo no imaginário popular de seus membros, que muitos juram terem visto tais espécimes, argumentam até ter registros concretos de suas existências, e acabam passando os contos referentes a esses personagens através das gerações. Mas é isso que elas são: figuras folclóricas. E cada vez mais temos dados empíricos para argumentar este posicionamento. Na Ictiologia não era diferente. O ser mitológico mais famoso da ictiologia era a “mulher não gosta de trabalhar com peixes”. Os argumentos do folclore para a existência de tal personagem eram geralmente referentes ao “fato” de que a maioria das pessoas que decide trabalhar com peixes tem esta vontade derivada de terem pescado muito quando crianças. Esse ser mitológico também foi aventado como uma condição madura da espécie “menina não gosta de pescar”, afinal, pescaria é algo que os pais fazem com seus filhos. Que pai leva sua filha para pescar, não é mesmo? “Meninas não gostam de lago, grama ou peixes". Argumentam que por termos menos meninas pescadoras, seria natural termos menos mulheres trabalhando com peixes e, portanto, menos mulheres sendo convidadas a palestrar em congressos de peixes. De maneira a sairmos do ambiente folclórico, e trabalharmos com dados concretos (afinal, cientista gosta de dados, não é mesmo?), iniciamos uma pesquisa sobre o perfil de gênero na ictiologia. Há um grande desbalanço de gênero na ictiologia brasileira? Se sim, quais fatores podem levar a tal? O estopim para tal pesquisa foi observar que nos últimos congressos ictiológicos brasileiros o número de palestrantes mulheres era muito inferior ao de homens, compreendendo de 21–32% (em média 25,8%) na última década. E para tal fato muitas hipóteses foram traçadas ao longo do tempo, que pudessem explicar e justificar tais números. Claro, se o ser mitológico de “mulher não gosta de trabalhar com peixes” realmente existisse, e devesse ser descrito pela ciência, provavelmente a porcentagem de mulheres na Sociedade Brasileira de Ictiologia (SBI) deveria ser semelhante à de mulheres palestrantes. Para a surpresa de muitos, encontramos que as mulheres compreendem 40% da SBI. Então aventamos que provavelmente o ser mitológico não era necessariamente a “mulher não gosta de trabalhar com peixes”, mas “mulher não gosta de trabalhar com sistemática e taxonomia de peixes”, de maneira que há muito menos mulheres formadas na área que homens. Para tal, levantamos os dados de mestrados e doutorados em sistemática e taxonomia de peixes nos últimos anos, e obtivemos que as mulheres são 43% de tais formações. Posteriormente, a dúvida que surgiu é se o ser mitológico não seria “mulher publica menos, por isso é menos convidada a palestrar”. E num levantamento de 2003–2017 na revista Neotropical Ichthyology encontramos que as mulheres são primeiras autoras em 39% dos artigos, em média. Dessa forma, acabamos por executar algumas lendas do folclore acadêmico: “mulher não gosta de trabalhar com peixes”, “mulher não gosta de trabalhar com sistemática e taxonomia de peixes” e “mulher publica menos, por isso é menos convidada a palestrar”. Entretanto, matar as lendas não as tira do imaginário popular. E, muito menos, explica como elas vieram a existir. Talvez essa seja uma pergunta que nunca será respondida propriamente, ao menos não ao rigor que nós, acadêmicos e acadêmicas, gostaríamos que tivesse. Portanto, nossa intenção com tal trabalho não foi apenas de matar as lendas, mas de despertar a conscientização sobre o assunto da desigualdade de gênero na participação e representatividade das mulheres na ictiologia brasileira. Admitimos que tal desigualdade existe e ela é fruto de seres mitológicos que, apesar de muito arraigados na crendice popular, não têm dados empíricos para justificar sua descrição formal. Ao admitirmos, podemos pensar então em estratégias para enterrar propriamente esses personagens, e dar lugar às personagens reais, às mulheres fortes e grandes cientistas que compõem a ictiologia brasileira. Sobre a autora: Veronica Slobodian é coordenadora do projeto de levantamento da participação e representatividade de mulheres na ictiologia brasileira. Entretanto, todo o trabalho citado foi feito e/ou corroborado por mais de 50 pesquisadoras, de todo o Brasil, que assinam o projeto em andamento. #mulheresnaciência #ictiologia #repost #veronicaslobodian #joanaho #convidados

Por Yonara Garcia Ilustração: Caia Colla Terminando de escrever minha dissertação comecei a refletir sobre todos os desafios pelos quais eu passei no decorrer dos dois anos do mestrado para eu poder entregar esse trabalho redondinho, como se tudo tivesse sido perfeito e fácil de concluir. É uma mistura de sentimentos, pois ao passo que fiquei feliz por ter conseguido concluir mais uma etapa, percebi que esse documento não contava nem um terço de todas as desventuras que ocorreram. Na minha opinião, um dos capítulos da dissertação deveria ser um making-of da pesquisa, só pra contar tudo que deu errado e que você teve que resolver para entregar um bom trabalho. Para ingressar no mestrado é necessário que, no dia da matrícula, você entregue uma Plano de Mestrado contando qual será o objetivo de sua pesquisa, qual a hipótese e o que você pretende fazer para responder essa hipótese. Nossa, até aqui foi fácil, é simples! Basta você seguir o método descrito que daí os resultados serão tratados, você discute com base em muita bibliografia estudada sobre o assunto e pronto. Em dois anos é tranquilo terminar isso. Quem dera! Pelo menos no meu caso não foi assim…Então vou contar um pouquinho pra vocês das desventuras que ocorreram durante o meu mestrado. Meu trabalho de mestrado consistia, basicamente, em um estudo comportamental de determinados organismos do plâncton marinho por meio de filmagens em um sistema óptico tridimensional. Para construir esse sistema, eu e mais uma equipe de alunos da pós que também usariam esse sistema nos reunimos e, com base em estudos anteriores, fizemos o sistema preliminar, achando que já daria certo. Foi aí que a novela começou. Com os primeiros sistemas, percebemos alguns itens que não estavam legais como aumento, a cor do LED e a forma como o sistema estava disposto sobre a mesa. Então desmontamos o sistema e montamos outro sistema com as alterações necessárias. Essa última frase pode ser repetida mais 3 vezes, pois a cada nova montagem notávamos defeitos e tínhamos que repensar uma nova configuração do sistema. Até que depois de muitos arranjos e rearranjos e com a ajuda de pesquisadores especialistas nesta parte óptica, conseguimos chegar no sistema definitivo. Nossa, até aqui já se foram alguns meses. Enfim consegui fazer meus primeiros experimentos. Agora sim, é gerar os resultados e partir para o abraço. Infelizmente, não. Nesta etapa do trabalho eu precisaria filmar as trajetórias que o meu organismo-alvo realizava na coluna de água. O software que tínhamos para que as duas câmeras filmassem ao mesmo tempo travava após 20 segundos de filmagem, o que não era muito representativo para mim. Achamos que era memória do computador, mas mesmo trocando para um computador mais turbinado o software apresentava o mesmo defeito. E agora? Para nossa sorte, nosso laboratório conta com um aluno da ciência da computação que desempenha um trabalho formidável. Para esse problema das filmagens nós trocamos o programa e começamos a utilizar um software que ele desenvolveu. Apesar de não limitar o tempo, esse software não disparava as duas câmeras ao mesmo tempo, então tivemos que utilizar dois computadores. Mas isso era passível de falha humana, pois mesmo que eu tentasse, não conseguia clicar com o mouse ao mesmo tempo nos dois computadores. A solução que encontramos foi utilizar dois microcontroladores que eram disparados por um potenciômetro e então as duas câmeras começavam a gravar ao mesmo tempo. Em meio a todos os testes que íamos fazendo o programa ia sendo modificando de acordo com as nossas demandas. Mais um problema resolvido! Agora sim é partir para os experimentos. Mas o desafio de trabalhar com organismos vivos é que você depende que o mesmo esteja presente no ponto da coleta. Para meu trabalho, infelizmente, esses ajustes foram concluídos em uma época em que não tinha tantos exemplares para que eu pudesse realizar os meus experimentos. Enquanto isso o jeito era fazer coletas diárias, até que o organismo surgisse e, então, realizar os experimentos. Até aqui vários meses já se passaram, mas eu consegui realizar os experimentos. Após as filmagens, os vídeos eram tratados por meio de um programa que nos dava como resultado final a trajetória realizada pelo organismo (além das coordenadas e dados numéricos relevantes para o estudo). Mas como esse texto é para relatar as desventuras que aconteceram, você já pode imaginar que alguma coisa aqui também deu errado. Pois bem, o programa que me forneceria as trajetórias do organismo não comportava vídeos tão longos quanto os nossos. Então mais uma vez fomos atrás de nosso “amigo-luz” e ele desenvolveu um software que nos daria a trajetória dos organismos, independente do tamanho do vídeo. Talvez aqui você esteja achando que é fácil desenvolver um programa, mas não é! Ele desenvolve para o objetivo que precisamos, nós testamos, verificamos o que precisa implementar, o que precisa mudar, e por aí vai, até chegarmos no ponto que precisamos e que talvez para outro trabalho ainda esteja sujeito a alterações. Mais um problema resolvido! Agora sim, tratar os dados e analisar os resultados. Não que esta etapa seja fácil, mas olha quanta coisa foi feita além do que estava escrito no Plano de Mestrado inicial (isso porque contei resumidamente!). Eu não esperava me deparar com tantos desafios. Sabia que não seria trivial, mas também não esperava que nesse período eu tivesse que resolver tanta coisa. Para o mestrado eu precisei ser mais que uma bióloga...aprendi a soldar, fazer ligações elétricas, entender de física, ser técnica de computador, entender um pouquinho de programação e tudo o que foi necessário para que meu trabalho saísse. Além de tudo o que vai acontecendo, todos os obstáculos da pesquisa, você ainda tem que lidar com sua vida pessoal. Essa parte é complicada! Muitas vezes, por problemas pessoais me senti empacada diante de um monte de coisas pra resolver. Não importa o tamanho do problema, sei que muitos passaram por coisas piores no decorrer de sua pesquisa, mas sendo ela pequena ou grande, é algo que mexe com você e te faz sentir incapaz de avançar (Veja como exemplo nosso post, O que aprendi sobre saúde mental na pós-graduação). Bem, mas apesar de tudo o que foi contado aqui, eu cheguei ao final do mestrado com o sentimento de dever cumprido. Para mim, é muito importante compartilhar com vocês todas as minhas desventuras, pois mostra o que envolve fazer uma pesquisa...são muitas tentativas, erros e acertos, para no final publicarmos um trabalho lindo, impecável e redondinho. Mesmo com toda a pressão e obstáculos que tive que passar, eu amo o que eu faço e a cada dia tenho mais certeza que fiz a escolha certa, apesar de todos os desafios para chegar até aqui! E você, qual foi o desafio que você teve que enfrentar na sua pesquisa? Compartilhe com a gente um pouquinho de sua história! #vidadecientista #yonaragarcia #pesquisa #pósgraduação

By Letícia Portella Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker Original post here Art by Silvia Gonsales This week I was asked to tell a little about how I became programmer (or at least, I’m in the process). I wrote this text to tell a little bit more about my story. Let’s start from the beginning: I am oceanographer graduated from the Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil) in December 2013. Well, only that is usually enough to scare people. Oceanowhat? Oceanography is beautiful and exciting. I learned many interesting things and I fell in love with some disciplines that were frightening. To begin with, we studied calculus, physics, etc. When I started working in the area, I hesitated between geological and physical oceanography until 2011 when I entered an internship at a Navy Research Institute and, finely, I decided by Physical Oceanography, which is the area closest to the exact sciences. It is usual for oceanographers to work with matrices and arrays, thus it is very common to use a software called MATLAB. Therefore, during the college course I ended up learning a bit of MATLAB which is similar to a programming language with logic loops, conditionals, etc. However, when I joined the Navy, I met two oceanographers working with Python. Python? What is it? We had several discussions about how MATLAB was a paid software and at the university we were using a pirate version, which was not cool nor legal, right? Surfing this this wave, they started telling me about how Python would be the future of oceanography, thanks to its flexibility, ease application and, furthermore, it was free! Cool. Let’s learn, right? And so I had my first contact with a real programming language, so to say. My colleagues were very smart, you know why? Every day they challenged me to do something new. “I doubt you can read this txt”, “Now do this activity with the least possible amount of lines,” and so on. I thought it was fantastic! How they were creative! Later on I found out it was all online. OK! In the meantime I also had contact with Linux, remote access, Ubuntu, terminals, etc. A new world was opened to me, and it was very interesting! Coming back from internship, I fell into the real world: nobody was working with Python, nobody used Ubuntu / Linux and things can’t be changed. Okay, then, back to MATLAB. Things quite demotivating were that I had to learn by myself, become stuck with my doubts and, moreover, to learn something that people saw as useless (for our area). At the end of college I started working with a multinational which deals with port and coastal engineering. MATLAB and Windows full-time. But I’m stubborn; I started using Python wherever I could. Although away from further studies, I liked the language and wanted to continue learning (provided that I could do something useful). So I used Python to automate the production of maps in a software called ArcGIS. Afterwards I developed a software to calculate the size of a ship based on international tables and I even entered a brief adventure in the Web with Django. All of a sudden, I decided to enroll myself in a master degree course and I decided that all pre and post processing data would be made with Python. Also I chose a numerical model that could only be used in Linux environment. This time I actually challenged myself. Thus, I decided to get out of laziness and start learning! Even if I would have to do it by myself (But it was not so!). A very close friend helped me a lot and so I’ve been learning more and enjoying it more and more. Floripa Python group was formed by this time. I asked a friend to go with me in the first meeting because I was afraid and ashamed of not knowing enough. But he canceled at the last minute! I didn’t give up and attended the meeting anyway. I was the only girl in that first meeting, and as things can get worse, the discussions were exclusively about web. I did not understand anything, but I thought that was a fantastic world. I decided not to go to the next meetings since I was scared by the contents and because I did not understand anything. But then, the “magic” of the Python community happened. The boys noticed my problem and called a person to give a speech that was more “like me” (less web and more data analysis). When the lecture was going to happen, many of them sent me warning messages saying that I should go. Fabulous, right? After that, I engaged myself and actually started to get involved with the organization of SciPy Latin America 2016, Python Brazil 12 and mainly with Pyladies. In addition, Anitas (a group to empower women in technology and entrepreneurship) was being structured and I met some wonderful and inspiring women. Finally, in 6 months everything changed and I had completely changed my life. And so I realized that I liked that. Very much. I loved programming Github, Python, Ubuntu, etc. I could spend hours studying it. As I got involved, I realized it could be a second option. However I did what most of us do: I thought I would never get into it. “I’m not good enough”, “I could never get fully involved in this,” etc. I really thought that. We know we usually think little of ourselves. But even thinking that way, I did not stop trying to learn and getting involved. That was not my goal! Then, suddenly I decided to show to that web folks what an oceanographer was doing attending to those meetings. After all, I programmed? Why? So I presented some of my master degree’s results, what kind of data I was working with, and a little video with a tidal wave being propagated which I achieved with my numerical model. On the same day, the project manager of a company told me that there was a vacancy for a backend position in Python at the company. At the end of the evening I found myself next to her and decided to learn more about the job she had mentioned and we started talking. In the end I said: “very nice, but unfortunately I cannot apply for this job.” She asked me why and I said — I know Python, but this work is in a completely different area. And then I got an answer I did not expect to hear: “No problem, what you do is as complex as we do, come talk to us in another moment!” And I did so. Thus, in three weeks my life was changed, I quitted my job to become a backend developer, where I am now entering my third week. When I told people that I was changing area, I was expecting to hear “you’re crazy!” But that was not what happened … I got a lot of support and encouragement, especially from the nearest people who endured my insecurities throughout the process from the first conversation until my first day at the new job. I will not lie. The night before my first day I panic. I cried a lot. What was I doing? I wouldn’t make it! It was crazy! What I had was not rational, it was purely emotional and out of control. I called who I knew would calm me down and I just threw myself into the next day, with a huge fear and a strong desire to make it work. So I would like to say a few things I learned in the process … The first thing I learned is that I did not make this change without fear and uncertainty. Those feelings can’t stop us of doing things ever! I received several comments saying that my courage was inspiring and I was an example. I do not consider myself as an example of anything! You can’t imagine how scared I was! But then I realized that people that are examples to us also are afraid and that’s no problem. Do it with fear, but do it anyway! The second thing is: do things with passion. Find out what you like and do it! Apart of having further prospects, even if you think you do not know and you won’t get there. The most important is to love something. And last but not least: surround yourself with and make sure you appreciate people who support you. I would never have achieved so much or would have courage to change my life if I wouldn’t count on the support of numberless angels, as from the first ones who challenged me to the present ones who support and continue supporting me. This is a place where I decided to share my story and try to help girls who want to learn programming. Come in, make yourself comfortable and I hope you fall in love as much as I do. Letícia Portella. Oceanographer, passionate developer and addicted reader. #letíciaportella #womeninscience #MATLAB #oceanographic #oceanography #programmer #programming #python #software #chat #invited #silviagonsales

By Katyanne Shoemaker Illustration: Caia Colla I had originally intended this post to be about the recent March for Science and the general idea of politicizing science, but after recently binge-watching “Bill Nye Saves the World” (a science education show targeting Millennials, hosted by a beloved host of a children’s science show in the 1990s—see trailer below) on Netflix, I have decided to focus on our failure as scientists to communicate to the public. Depressing, I know, but I truly believe there is a disconnect between our attempts to make science easily accessible and appealing to the general public so they actually listen. Public outreach is a major component of our grant proposals, but how much of that outreach is actually working, and how can we more effectively educate the masses? As I was watching Bill Nye’s new popular show, I felt saddened that this great figure from my childhood, who helped inspire my interest in science, could not effectively explain some major gaps in the public perceptions of science. The show feels gimmicky at points, and I think would probably deter some viewers based on the mocking of certain issues. For instance, the episode on debunking homeopathic medicine is entitled “Tune your quack-o-meter,” implying that anyone that believes in homeopathic medicine is a “quack.” If I were a believer in this alternative (read ‘imaginary’) medicine, I don’t think I would want to sit through an episode of people, namely a mechanical engineer, mocking me. Although, this is somewhat irrelevant because I think the majority of people watching this show are scientists who just really love seeing common-sense things explained in new ways (or just want to feel the nostalgia of watching their childhood science pal, Bill Nye). This is an example of scientists teaching/entertaining other scientists, and it is appropriate that it came out right on the heels of another similar, yet more global effort. The March for Science was organized as any peaceful rally for change should be: a community sensed a growing problem, and members of the community wanted to make that problem known. In the United States, this growing problem is the use of “alternative facts” (again, read ‘imaginary’) in place of real science, which have been marketed as truth within the current government. This has lead to budget cuts for science funding agencies and less enforcement for environmental protections. For those readers who may not be American, President Trump has named a man who denies that climate change is human-caused as the new head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). But this march wasn’t just in the United States. On Earth Day 2017, marches popped up all around the world to focus on issues specific to one location or important for all of us to pay attention to. Some reasons people around the world are marching have been published on the Science website (link below), including this quote from an Austrian biochemist: “Antienlightenment sentiments are rising worldwide. Many Austrians are against genetic engineering but don’t know what a gene is, for instance. I have a problem with that. Or antivaccine sentiment. It’s almost fashionable to be against science nowadays.” - Renée Schroeder Martin Stratmann, the president of the Max Planck Society, even marched, saying: “This is a march pro-science and pro-facts, not a march against Trump… Today, science is more important than ever before, but evidence and knowledge are being questioned in many places, including politics.” Don’t get me wrong. The march was a great event. I attended in Boston, MA, and we had an estimated 50,000 scientists and friends-to-science show up on a miserably cold and rainy day to show that this is something we care about. I heard inspirational stories from medical doctors, stories of overcoming adversity from a black, female engineer, and was urged to run for office by George Church (THE human genome guy – I had a major geek moment). It was a fun time to gather around with like-minded individuals and talk about the problems we are facing. But there lies the problem: we were talking to like-minded individuals. Someone who may be interested in learning facts, but does not run in our sciencey circle of awesomeness may not have known the march was going on, or what the march was for. My mother, an educated nurse, lies somewhere on the edge of being a part of the scientific community and not. Even with her daughter posting about the upcoming march, my mother did not know why I was in Boston wearing a weird knitted hat (see image below). Somehow we sciencey people got caught up in the fun of having a rally and forgot to tell the rest of the world what it was for. So if these forums are not useful at conveying our science to the general public, what is? How do we effectively communicate sometimes very difficult ideas to the masses? I believe the key is in starting young. We need to reach out to schools to mold minds to think about the basic scientific method and teach kids how to come to their own conclusions based on facts, rather than media. Let kids fall in love with knowledge and the quest for knowledge, just as Bill Nye the Science Guy taught me, and Carl Sagan taught the generation before me. I don’t think the non-academic minded adults are a lost cause, but I do think it will take more effort to recondition their minds to not always trust what they read. Lets face it, seeing and sharing a facebook post about secret government plans to infect us with disease through the flu vaccine is a little easier and a lot more exciting than looking up the sources for that post to see it is false. Perhaps, this blog may be a good start for introducing the public to science. We write posts with the intention of making our tales of oceanography and being women in science broadly accessible, yet we tend to share it among other scientists. Why? I challenge you to invite a person that may not be otherwise interested in ocean science to read a blog post you find interesting. Share your science with that friend who studies literature! Or law! Or liturgy! You never know what they will find interesting, and it is bound to lead to good discussion. Trailer for “Bill Nye Saves the World”: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g-_HKOcYBK8 References: Science article: Why the rest of the world is marching Science News Staff (April 13, 2017) Science 356 (6334), 119. [doi: 10.1126/science.356.6334.119] http://science.sciencemag.org/content/356/6334/119.full #chatkatyanneshoemaker #scientistlife #communicate #culture #science #scientist #chat #caiacolla

By Catarina Marcolin Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker Image by Caia Colla Hello to all again. It has been some time since I last wrote for this blog, even longer since I've boarded a ship, but many memories came to me after the World Ocean Day. Most memories are good, but some, not so much. In posts published on this blog, you might have read about the adventures of working at sea, diving to the bottom of the ocean, or traveling the world in foreign ships. But working on an oceanographic vessel is not always a fantastic experience, especially if you are a woman. It is important to be mindful that, when on a ship, one is also confined, surrounded by the ocean. Often, there is no access to a telephone, no internet, no way of visiting friends or family, and no way of going home whenever you want. In at least the last five oceanographic cruises I have participated in, I met only one female crewmember - she was a nurse on a supply ship which assisted oil platforms. On oceanographic ships, don't expect to see crew-women. In the scientific crew, yes, it is easier to find women, even when there's clear preference for men, because many tasks involve body strength. There's a need to carry boxes, nets, flasks, and other heavy equipment. But that’s not all! To be successful, the science crewmembers need strong skills in leadership, taking initiative, communication, management, and dealing with equipment. The work is very challenging, but against the common sense, I met women that are far better than a lot of guys in crew. I was once stopped from boarding a boat that was poised for my doctoral research, under the “argument” that there were no suitable facilities on the boat for a woman. If you think that this isn’t a big deal, and that this male to female imbalance in passengers on ships is normal, maybe you can imagine some level of vulnerability that women may be subjected to in such an environment. I have always been aboard research cruises with large groups of researchers and wonderful ship crews. I have always been treated with respect. Unfortunately, this level of respect is not always found in day-to-day research cruises. To illustrate this vulnerability, I interviewed two biologists that told me about very inadequate situations they've been through while aboard a boat off of the Brazilian coast. In this post I'll tell the story of one of them; she decided to stay anonymous, so I'll refer to her as M. CWN: Have you ever been excluded from an expedition so a man could go in your place? M: That has never happened to me, although there is a preference in our laboratory for men to go, under the argument that there is a need to carry heavy objects on board. CWN: How many times have you worked on a boat, and in how many of those trips did you feel uncomfortable or find yourself in inconvenient situations that made you feel insecure? M: I have been on four cruises. Two of them put me in very uncomfortable situations, and I felt insecure in one of them. CWN: Could you share a story about an uncomfortable situation you've been through? M: I was on a ship twice, consulting in an environmental monitoring study. One of the crewmembers that worked on the deck made constant jokes about my accent. But he had issues with other members of the staff too. The second situation, the one that made me feel insecure, happened on a ship that I rather not say the name of or the institution it's related to. I never thought I would go through that experience on a vessel connected with such a respectable institution. I had heard rumors about expeditions from the past, and I confess, I was a little worried about this experience, but I never thought that what happened, could have. Some of the crewman had very inappropriate behavior. Everyday we would share the dining room with them. Before we had the chance to finish our meals, some of them (that had a high position in the boat's hierarchy) would play music videos of half-naked women (funk, axé, pagode) that always had images of men and women in insinuating situations, alluding to sexual acts, and very loud. Aside from that, every day there was drinking, and the crew would exhaustively offer us alcoholic beverages, especially to women, with the clear intention of trying to get us intoxicated. They would try to exalt their merits all the time, as an attempt of conquest. I would leave the room when those activities started, and some men would come after me asking why I wouldn't join them, insisting, and harassing me. This didn't bother only the women, several of our male colleagues were also bothered, but they never spoke up. This situation kept growing, leading up to my next story. It is important to say that this was not everyone's behavior. While we were harassed by some, other crewmen treated us respectfully. On one particular day, there was a get-together with a barbecue, and drinking started early in the morning. One of the crewmen drank so much he threatened to jump off of the boat, which caused a lot of confusion and trouble. During dinner, one of our male colleagues was eating while one of the falling-over drunk crewmen, spilled beer on the table. After a useless effort to clean it, he threw a dirty napkin on our colleague's plate, which really upset our colleague, as the action was interpreted as a racist move. Facing all of that mess, I could not even have dinner that day because of all the embarrassment. I went to the pantry to get a piece of fruit and stopped for a while to talk to one of the crewmen about the situation. Then, another drunk crewman came over and started asking questions about one of my female colleagues. I tried to leave, but he kept stopping me and asking me to bring my friend. The other crewman that I was talking to defended me, so I could get out. I realized there were a lot of crewmembers feeling a sense of indignation, because their professional class could not tolerate this kind of behavior. What left me feeling more insecure was the fact that we could never talk to the captain of the ship; we could never see him and he never answered our calls or our contact attempts. Luckily for us, one of the crewmen took our case to the captain, who took some action, we don't know what, but we didn't see the crewman that caused most of the trouble again. We were called to a meeting with the chief mate that finally listened to our claims and had a meeting with the “troublemakers,” forbidding the use of alcohol, the insulting videos, and the behaviors that caused us discomfort. The captain asked the harasser to publicly apologize to me and my colleague (about the dinner event), but nothing else happened to the other harassers. During that expedition, something broke on the ship, so it was not possible to collect all of our research samples. The ship lost its speed and couldn't sail properly. The ship didn't land where it should have, taking us straight to the final destination, and the reason for that was not disclosed to us researchers. It took seven days to get to the final spot, all while we didn't know what was happening. This same ship and crew were available to us again to finish the work that was not concluded. I was again in that expedition, and thankfully, we didn't have any other embarrassing situations arise. However, there was a stressful and worrying situation. We were dragging a bongo net, which was supposed to go down to 200 m. We realized that was taking too little time. We found out that the person responsible for operating the hoist received orders from a superior crewmen to release less rope than needed so the work would be finished faster, which compromised our sampling and data quality. CWN: Why do you think the crewmember responsible for the operations tried to sabotage your work? Do you think it was ignorance or a deliberate attempt to “get revenge”? M: I have no idea. We didn't get an explanation. We don't know if it was revenge, if it was disrespect for us being women (the chief of the expedition was a woman), if it was laziness, impatience to get back home, disrespect for the work environment… Anyway, whatever the motive was, it is very lamentable for all it represents, and it is a waste of public money! It is also very important to consider the loss of valuable scientific information, caused by irresponsible and unreliable work from the ship crew. This is especially true for the current state of our country, where obtaining resources for field collections in ocean research has been increasingly difficult. In the end, all stories I hear and share show clearly that while on a ship, being it for scientific research or parallel consulting, there is prejudice coming from the male crew towards women. Women are still thought of as the “fragile sex.” This inappropriateness makes life on board even more challenging when the day-to-day work already demands physical strength and adaptations to the labor done in an environment ruled by the movement of the marine currents. #chatcatarinarmarcolin #boarding #caiacolla #genre #interview #scienceship #violenceagainstwomen #chat #womeninscience #chatkatyannemshoemaker

By Fernanda Imperatrice Colabuono Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker The oceanic islands of Brazil are not well known by the majority of people, despite the fact that they hold significant strategic, economic, and scientific importance. They harbor a rich diversity of life, including endemic species – species that can only exist there. Two of those islands, Fernando de Noronha and Abrolhos, are inhabited and/or used for tourism purposes, with some restrictions. Three other island regions, The Saint Peter and Saint Paul Archipelago, Rocas Atoll, and Trindade Island are still little known remote places with restricted access. During my doctorate at the Oceanographic Institute of the University of São Paulo, I had the opportunity to join scientific expeditions to these three places, through a research project with the objective of studying the persistent organic pollutants occurring in remote places. Photo: Fernanda Colabuono. Saint Peter and Saint Paul Archipelago is located about 1100 km (680 miles) from the coast of the Rio Grande do Norte state, almost midway between Brazil and Africa. These are the only Brazilian oceanic islands located in the Northern hemisphere. The trip from the state capital, Natal, to the Archipelago was a three day journey made in a fishing boat. I went there in March 2009, and I distinctly remember arriving to Natal's Harbor to meet the vessel that was to carry three other researchers, the crew, and myself; upon seeing the boat, it was hard to believe that we would cross nearly half of the Atlantic ocean in that way! Of course everything was fine, and we were neither the first nor the last group of researchers to make this journey. The fisherman were experienced, and the seas were in our favor. When we were close to the Archipelago, we could see a group of tiny rocky islands. Those are, in fact, peaks of the Mid-Atlantic Ridge, which extends all the way through the Atlantic Ocean, from Antarctica to the Arctic. When we landed on Belmonte Island, the main island of the Archipelago and where the research station is, we could see that birds occupied all areas on the island with nests or resting spots. These hosts of the Archipelago, which welcome all visitors with strong pecking, are known as Boobies. Space is a limiting factor for these birds, so they always try to protect their territories, even amongst their own species. Photo: Fernanda Colabuono Rocas Atoll, also located near the Equatorial Line, is, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful and preserved places on Earth, thanks to the courage and perseverance of the people that work and care for that spot. By the way, those are the two main qualities that one must have to work in environmental conservancy. In the beginning of 2010, I spent around 20 days acquiring samples on the atoll, collecting plastic pieces around the island. Plastic waste arrives daily from different places, probably from other islands, the continent, and passing ships, and they accumulate on the atoll beaches. It's impressive that human actions can impact such remote places, sometimes places that we don't even know exist. My last expedition was to Trindade Island, in January 2012. Located around 1200 km (750 miles) from the continental coast, it is the biggest of the three islands and is part of the Vitoria-Trindade seamount chain. The island hosts several species of birds, invertebrates, fish, and diverse flora, and it is an important destination for sea turtle reproduction. Since the island's discovery hundreds of years ago, the Trindade Island has been visited by illustrious personalities, such as the astronomer Edmond Halley, and the naturalist James Cook. Consequently, the island also suffers from the impact of human actions, such as the introduction of exotic animals, which has changed the environment and caused negative effects that can still be seen today. Nowadays, the island is the location for the Oceanographic Station of Trindade Island, a scientific station run by the Brazilian Navy, which is used by researchers from all over. Photo: Fernanda Colabuono. By being a part of these expeditions, I was given an incredible opportunity to get to know these different ecosystems, experience the local's lives, observe the behavior of the animals, and gain knowledge through experience, just as naturalists did decades and decades ago. To spend time, even if brief, in places where you need to adapt to such unique environments, so different from the ones we are used to, was a deeply personal experience of developing self-knowledge, detachment, and learning to overcome. In this age of technology, it's become usual to not be able to communicate with the “external world.” You have to deal with the fact that you won't know about your friends and family for a while – and they won't know about you. To spend a month showering only in seawater, or having no “real” toilet to use may seem a little odd, but one can adapt. Some of these experiences may sound scary, but they become pleasant and can even be missed. The feeling I had when visiting these places, where nature is the dominating force, is that man is only a visitor; we don't belong and we were not invited. My intention is not to be negative, but rather to show how strong Nature's presence is in places where humankind has not imposed itself as much. These are places that belong to the fauna and flora that have adapted to inhabit there. It would be great to maintain these islands as they are for the benefit of the great diversity of fish, birds, plants and other unique organisms that call these remote places home. About Fernanda Colabuono: Fernanda Imperatrice Colabuono is a biologist that has been working with seabirds since 2001. She is enrolled in a post-doctorate program in the Oceanographic Institute of the University of São Paulo, where she conducts ecological and conservation research on Antarctic birds, using pollutants and stable isotopes as ecological and environmental tracers. #scientistlife #fernandaimperatricecolabuono #invited #oceanicislands #rocasatoll #saintpeterandsaopauloarchipelago #chat #chatkatyannemshoemaker

By Sabine Schultes Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker While writing this post, I'm at my work desk in the Munich Biology Faculty. From the window, I see green fields; the only salt water in a 600km (~370 mi) radius is a mere 20L (~5 gal) of artificial seawater in the laboratory, in a bucket containing copepods of the species Acartia tonsa. That's what is connecting me with my great passion, the study of biological oceanography. Copepods are minuscule crustaceans, around 1 millimeter (~0.04 in) in length. With the naked eye, they look like jumping little dust particles in water. They live in all water ecosystems including lakes, rivers, underground water, and oceans. Their numbers seemingly rival the stars in the universe, and as they are so numerous, they have an important role in ocean ecology. They consume the biomass created by microalgae through sun energy – in a process called primary production – and transfer it to fish, as fish like to eat copepods. (Learn more about it here) I have worked with copepods from the temperate waters of the North Atlantic, from the cold Antarctic ocean, and in 2007 I went to work as a post-doctoral researcher in the Oceanographic Institute of USP (University of São Paulo) to get to know the tropical copepods. What a joy! …and, at the same time, what an adventure to live in São Paulo, in a country 12000 km away from Germany. I jumped in without thinking twice and, when in a taxi at “Marginal Tietê,” between Guarulhos and the University City, I suddenly realized that I was far away from home. It is in these transitional moments, moving from one world to another, that all details are fixed in our memories. I was warmly welcomed by the “Paulistanos” (those who live in São Paulo) and, although Brazil is known for its beaches, samba and caipirinha, I had the opportunity to work with high-end technology in my research field. I was in charge of two sophisticated instruments for my copepod analysis. My job was to establish measurements and calibration protocols. There was no bias or concern that “a woman does not understand technology.” Every day my learning experience was huge: living in a big city in a tropical country, Portuguese, image analysis techniques, electronic data exchange. Also huge was the help I received from science colleagues from Brazil, Canada and France. In only a short while, it was possible to christen the equipment in the Oceanography base at Ubatuba. For a marine science researcher, that was a dream coming true. Another dream was coming true with the expedition of the project PROABROLHOS: to study with said equipment the zooplanktonic (copepods and other tiny animals) distribution on the Abrolhos Bank. There's a bunch of fish there, and remember that fish like to eat copepods! In this project, researchers from various universities of Brazil and the world joined forces in order to enhance the understanding on how this ecosystem operates, in order to protect the great biodiversity of Abrolhos and it's value to society. To spend one month on board of the old oceanographic ship Prof. Besnard was quite the adventure (it has finally been retired – now the oceanographic institute has a new ship), but all worked out. Our results were published in the following years (2009 to 2013), but I decided to go back to Europe before that. How come?! Wasn't that a dream come true?? Yeah, well, looking back, I can sense I lacked some faith. But also, maybe I needed to be around my own people, culture, and family to get the faith to keep on studying the oceans of the world. Unfortunately, life in science is filled with uncertainties and short work contracts (1 year). At the same time, scientific realizations take years. To write a project, get funding, execute it, analyze the results, and communicate that new knowledge all happens in 5-10 years’ time. Back from Brazil, it took me another 4 years of coming and going between France, Brazil (I fell in love), and Germany for me to finally get a position as a teacher in the Faculty of Biology of Munich in 2012, when I was 40. I live near my parents' house, and I am teaching zoology, ecology, and scientific initiation to undergrad and grad students. For the first time, I know where I will work, live, and study the ocean, until at least 2020, when the future may take me down another path. I had few preconceived ideas before coming to Brazil. I like living in other countries. I usually try, at first, to observe and go with the flow. I discovered the “Brazilian way” of doing things, the São Paulo coldness, and I learned how to dance forró. I thought – still do – that all of the people around me were very dedicated to work, friends and family. The most important thing I learned in Brazil? That sometimes things may take a while, but all works out in the end! About Sabine: Sabine Schultes likes to see herself as biologist and oceanographer. She studied biology and hydrobiology in the Hamburg faculty, defended her masters in oceanography at the Université du Québec Rimouski, Canada and her doctorate at Alfred-Wegener-Institut, Bremerhaven. After some post-doctoral contracts in France and Brazil, she is now a teacher at the Munich Faculty (LMU), teaching zoology and ecology. She says that her parents taught her how to look for new paths and to socialize with people and cultures around the world. She is convinced that today, more than ever, we need to take care of our oceans. Sabine has also published: Sun protection cosmetics - good for you, bad for the aquatic environment? #womeninscience #sabineschultes #carrer #internationalization #invited #marinebiology #chat

By Deborah Apgaua Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker Illustrated by Caia Colla In 2016 this year I received an international award that changed my life and perspectives about many aspects on science. This award was granted by the Schlumberger Foundation under their Faculty of the Future program, and is intended for women from developing countries to conduct research in the fields of science, technology, engineering and math (STEM). The program aims to form a transformative network where men and women have similar opportunities in the job market. To be a woman in science is still a challenge, especially in a developing country like Brazil, where the biggest portion of professors in STEM are men, and where gender imbalance is evident in leading positions. According to a post already published in this blog (o sexo realmente importa?), it may help to reverse this scenario by accepting that this gender imbalance exists, but this has still not happened. Even more importantly, an increase in self-confidence in women could help to break this barrier towards a greater female participation in STEM. The possibility of pursuing post-doctoral research overseas is of course an important component of the satisfaction that I feel after winning the award. To be part of the Faculty for the Future community that searches for new directions for science enhanced my self-confidence to develop research and to become a role model to inspire other women to follow a similar path. Therefore, way before I started my research, I already felt a big change in the way I expressed my ideas and guide students in their work. When I decided to try this program, I had to remember and mentally organize my entire academic carrier from my undergrad to my doctorate. I had to search for value in each experience and think about how these experiences can help me inspire other women. Thus, I discovered a new force that was inside me, something that I did not know. Before submitting the proposal for my research, I reread it and felt fulfilled, regardless of the application results. I asked myself how many women could feel this contentment if they remembered each step of their journey and add value to their work. For example, I realized that I have more teaching experience than I was aware. During my undergrad, I developed research in traditional communities where I participated in giving short courses and presenting user-end research outcomes.  Besides this, during my postgrad I had acquired experience through teaching placements, and this counts as teaching experience even if it was with the assistance of my supervisor. While doing part of my doctorate studies overseas, I kept in touch with my work mates back in Brazil, and helped in reviewing academic texts. Therefore, I could see the relevance of all those moments when I had to convince the Schlumberger Foundation that I am a candidate that deserves the award. To believe in this reality without diminishing myself, but on the contrary, finding merit in my academic choices, I did not worry about what I could have done but I didn’t. When I was interviewed in English with the intention to confirm what I wrote, I did not present myself as a “serious and baddie” person trying to show a masculine stereotype to express power. On the contrary, I was friendly and feminine finding confidence being myself. When I received the positive results on my proposal, the “insecure girl that could not express her scientific ideas because she did not believe it was relevant” disappeared. As I resonate with the philosophy of the Faculty for the Future program, I decided to accept the mission to engage and encourage more women in science. I have chosen to embrace the strong woman that was sleeping inside me and see myself as a scientist that searches for even more experiences knowing that I still have a lot to learn. Since that moment, with my self-confidence renewed, I have talked to women in my university and from other institutions and I see their countenance changing as I point to the possibility of a simple path to achieve their goals. The change is inside us, because many times we boycott ourselves, with insecurity and low self-esteem. Focus and self-confidence are the key ingredients for our transformation. Talking with female post-grad students in my department, I noticed that some of them are afraid to become a “shadow” of their male counterparts.  Perhaps this is a result of a predominantly male work environment where only three out of 31 professors are women. However, this is a fear that freezes, and it is only by acting on our academic goals that we can be free from this self-perceived subordination. So when we overcome the insecurity and fear of being overshadowed by men in science, we are on our paths of knowledge that will bring us to academic success. Overcoming our insecurities and fears is also facilitated when we understand that we do not do science alone and that working together with others is essential. This way, we can transform competition to collaboration, and not have to feel that we are alone in our academic endeavors at every step of our work. Scientific knowledge is an ever-expanding thing.  Men or women alike, trusting that science moves forward by our combined efforts reduces our ego and dispels the perceived ideal that we have to know everything to be able to do good science. Relevant Links: https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Deborah_Apgaua http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0130799 http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/1365-2435.12787/abstract http://www.ufla.br/ascom/2016/09/06/estudante-da-ufla-e-contemplada-com-premio-internacional/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=deUQFTSX0EY About Deborah: I am a doctor in forest ecology, and I have a deep love for the world’s tropical forests. I have graduated in biology during which I studied ethnobiology. During my masters and PhD I worked with forest ecology to be in contact with Brazilian forests. During my Ph.D however, I ended up going to Australia where I developed a project with plant functional traits in rainforest plants. More recently, I am preparing to go back to Australia again to pursue a post-doc, supported by an award that I received for women in science. I aim to understand how plants cope with drought through their traits and bring this knowledge to Brazil. I hope to inspire other women to pursue the academic career. #deborahapgaua #neptuneinvites #femalepower #selfconfidence #selfsteem #caiacolla #invited #chat #womeninscience

By Sabine Schultes Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker Most people who like the sea and the shore also enjoy a sunny day at the beach, playing in the water when the weather is warm. Luckily, the education campaigns for skin cancer protection have made us all aware of the importance of protecting ourselves from harmful ultraviolet (UV) radiation which is a part of natural sunlight. UV light is at the lower end of the light spectrum and is divided into UVA, UVB and UVC. The highly energetic UVC is absorbed by our atmosphere, but UVA and UVB reach the surface. So, we all adopted the habit to regularly apply cosmetic sunscreens before sunbathing, but we are typically not as attentive when it is time to take a dip in the lake or ocean. Probably, you are just like me and are so anxious to cool off, that you rush over the hot sand and to take a wonderfully refreshing dive head first into the waves. © worldartsme.com/ UV radiation is not only a problem for us, but for all living beings, especially if they are without protective pigmentation, feathers, fur, or scales. Single-celled organisms have it even harder, so much so that one way to kill bacteria to make a sterile environment is to expose the lab bench to a couple of minutes of UV radiation. Sunburn for a single cell is lethal! Plankton are, in most cases, single celled or transparent, so they are very sensitive to UV light. Luckily, ocean and lake water progressively absorbs the incident sunlight. Depending on how clear the water is, UV light only reaches a few meters below the surface. Planktonic organisms have nevertheless evolved repair mechanisms to cope with the constantly occurring DNA damage. Alternatively, plankton can avoid UV radiation by migrating to water depths with no or little UV radiation. This strategy has been adopted by the zooplankton such as some copepods . Other copepods that live in very clear alpine lakes or in the surface layer of the tropical ocean are pigmented, often orange or even blue! Instead of getting a suntan - when our skin cells produce melanin - the zooplankton simply accumulates the pigments from their algal food. One example are the beautiful blue copepods from the genus Anomalocera, in the family of the Pontellidae. Now, what happens if you and I take our dive into the waves and the sunscreen we have applied to our skin is washed off, into the sea? Yes, large parts are washed off, even if you use waterproof lotion. Looking through the scientific literature makes it clear: sunscreen cosmetics are a source of pollution with growing concern. Waters of popular beaches all show high concentrations of the organic molecules used as chemical UV filters in sun protection creams. Very low concentrations (10µg/L) are sufficient to promote coral bleaching. The chemicals persist in the aquatic environment and accumulate in mussels, fish and dolphins. Lakes and rivers are also subject to this type of contamination. This is why I have decided to do at least two things: Before taking a swim I will try to get rid of most of the cream on my skin. Many modern beach facilities have showers connected to a wastewater system. So why not have a quick wash before you dive? If showering is not an option, I bring baby wipes and rub off the excess. I started to do my own research into the question. I am interested in learning how plankton growth and diversity is affected by sublethal concentrations of sunscreen. Is the pelagic food web disturbed? Are there alternative cosmetics available with potentially less harmful effects for the aquatic environment? Sunscreen cosmetics are complex mixtures of organic UV-filters (e.g. oxybenzone, octocrylene, …), oils, perfumes, stabilizers and often nanoparticles. Our experiments also try to find out, which of the components are particularly harmful, and if sunscreen cosmetics that are solely based on natural oils may be a better option for the aquatic environment. I will tell more about this in my next post - so wait and see! Preliminary results show that plankton growth can either be enhanced or reduced when the water is polluted with conventional sunscreen, depending on the concentration we add and whether the water comes from an oligotrophic or eutrophic environment. The community composition of the phytoplankton is modified because some algal groups are more sensitive to sunscreen pollution than others. The use of sunscreen may even be one of the causes of cyanobacterial blooms in recreational lakes leading to skin irritation in summer swimmers. We need recreation, and we need to protect ourselves from UV radiation to prevent skin cancer. How can we fulfill the needs of human society without totally spoiling our environment?  This question is exemplary for many issues in nature conservation!  So, I am passing this question on to others and will make an opinion poll at the beach... Beach life in Ubatuba, Brazil Beach life in Munich, Germany Further reading: Balmer, M., Buser, H.R., Müller, M.D., Poigner, T. 2005. Occurrence of some organic UV filters in wastewater, in surface waters, and in fish from Swiss lakes. Environ. Sci. Technol. 39: 953-962 Cunha, C.,  Fernandes, J.O.,  Vallecillos., L.,  Cano-Sancho, G., Domingo, J.L., et al. 2015. Co-occurrence of musk fragrances and UV-filters in seafood and macroalgae collected in European hotspots. Environ. Res.143: 65–71 Danovaro, R., Bongiorni, L., Corinaldesi, C., Giovannelli, D., Damiani, E., et al. 2008. Sunscreens cause coral bleaching by promoting viral infections. Environ. Health Perspect. 116:441–447 Gago-Ferrero, P., Alonso, M. B., Bertozzi, C. P., Marigo, J., Barbosa, L., et al. 2013. First determination of UV filters in marine mammals. Octocrylene levels in Franciscana Dolphins. Environ. Sci. Technol. 47: 5619−5625 Sánchez Rodríguez, A., Rodrigo Sanz, M., Betancort Rodríguez, J.R. 2015. Occurrence of eight UV filters in beaches of Gran Canaria (Canary Islands). An approach to environmental risk assessment. Chemosphere 131: 85–90 Tovar-Sánchez, A., Sánchez-Quiles, D., Basterretxea, G., Benedé, J.L., Chisvert, A., et al. 2013 Sunscreen products as emerging pollutants to coastal waters. PLoS ONE 8(6): e65451. About Sabine: With the goal to become a marine biologist, I studied biology and hydrobiology at Hamburg University and then earned a Master’s degree in oceanography from Université du Québec à Rimouski, in Canada. My doctoral studies in biological oceanography at the Alfred Wegener Institute in Bremerhaven were followed by various post-doc projects in Brest, France and Sao Paulo, Brazil. Since 2012, I teach ecology and zoology at LMU Munich. Growing up, my parents gave me the incentive to search new ways and to relate with people and cultures around the world. I am convinced that today, more than ever, we need to take good care of our Oceans. #marinescience #sabineschultes #copepods #invited #sunprotection #UVradiation #chat