4.0 Article

Symbiosis research in the anthropocene: science as usual in unusual times?

期刊

SYMBIOSIS
卷 89, 期 2, 页码 157-162

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s13199-022-00892-7

关键词

Anthropocene; Climate change; Transdisciplinarity; Symbiosis; Scientific community

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The Joint ISS-Holobiont Conference held in July 2022 focused on symbiosis in the Anthropocene era. Symbiosis biologists are experiencing immediate threats to their model systems, but have yet to form a comprehensive response. This commentary discusses the challenges posed by the Anthropocene and advocates for cross-disciplinary approaches to address climate and ecological crises.
The Joint ISS-Holobiont Conference held in July, 2022 brought us together under the title Symbiosis in the Anthropocene era . While the effects of global change are already clearly visible, how this situation questions our scientific practices is seldom directly addressed. As symbiosis biologists, we witness immediate threats on some of our model systems. However, we have not yet engaged in building up a reaction that would go beyond a description of the damage to ecosystems or an analysis of the biological mechanisms that underlie these degradations. In this commentary, we discuss how we could take on the challenges posed by the Anthropocene as a scientific community, with a special emphasis on transdisciplinary approaches. The bottom line is that the climate and ecological crises cannot be addressed by the natural sciences alone, as they are deeply rooted in historical, political and social contexts. Cross-disciplinary approaches are becoming commonplace in other research domains, notably environmental restoration and management, and we wish to foster these relationships between symbiosis researchers and social scientists, but also traditional knowledge holders and decision makers. Only then can we hope for a collective move that would allow us to scale up our long overdue response to the environmental emergency.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.0
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据