Shortage of mycologists

[SheffieldLass]

I've read this all and I'm confused ...... what actually do these rapidly becoming extinct mycologists do? Is it taxonomists that we are losing, or fungi molecular engineers, or both and everything in between ...

It seems to me most of the just qualified biology graduates know next to nothing about the natural world around them, don't recognise very easy things, or even have much interest. Those people with a good field knowledge gained by observation and interest don't have the 'biology' credentials to take it further, even if they have the academic ability. And it seems quite a bit of the Ecology/conservation education is about learning to talk the talk rather than do the hands on field study and analysis to know whether the talk is factually founded .... or it's the very practical management skills, the scrub cutting etc.

I ask because I have a personal interest in this .... if they want someone who wants to do field study backed up by analysis, that's what I'd be good at, though would need the right training, that is the sort of work I'd jump at .... But stuck looking at petri dishes all day long every day isn't my idea of fun. (I'd enjoy fieldwork all day long, day after day though ... ). And age isn't on my side .... 15-20 years more working life ....

Chris - Years ago Tony Lyon ran evening classes and forays on fungi which I went to, 3 years running ... his enthusiasm for field mycology was infectious ... whatever it was he was researching back then he certainly didn't lose sight of the 'real' world of fungi!

Melanie

Oops ... Was writing this as Posch was writing the above ... that's clarified it quite a bit

[Chris Yeates]

Originally Posted by SheffieldLass

I've read this all and I'm confused ...... what actually do these rapidly becoming extinct mycologists do? Is it taxonomists that we are losing, or fungi molecular engineers, or both and everything in between ...

two splendid posts above . . .

Melanie we are losing the taxonomists, the describers of new species, the producers of the Kew books such as the ones on Chantarelles & Tooth Fungi, Truffles, Gastromycetes etc.

the "fungi molecular engineers" will still be around, providing they can come up with the new Marmite or Quorn in the commercial world . . .

it probably won't - initially - impinge too much on the average forayer until they may wish to pursue the subject more deeply; when you do that you start to find lots of things which aren't in the popular books; I fully understand that not everyone is that 'driven' but for those who are an almost unseen level of help will not be there

as I have said before the literature is the key; if someone was prepared to subsidise the scanning and indexing of the thousands of books, journals, papers, illustrations etc (many of them out of print) which are out there then the people who visit this site wanting to know what it is they found today would be well served, and those who have 'got the bug' would be even better served

but somehow the idea of a wonderful new mycology building at Kew without mycologists fills me with dread

when Pauline (PMG) recently found Phaeolepiota aurea near Wigan I encouraged her to save some dried material and send it to a herbarium; she would be totally justified in saying why should I go to the trouble of sending it to somewhere like Kew when it will never be looked at, never be used in studies trying to work out how that strange genus fits in to the bigger picture? The only consolation is that it will sit there, in perfectly monitored environmental conditions, until someone in the future has the vision to employ taxonomists again . . .

Chris

[Ukwildlifeo]

I think this is happening to a lot of science and science business world in general - the currently employed are mostly 40-50+ and no one is willing to train up new graduates. Add to this going to university is getting more and more expensive (they want to un cap course fees now - and the said they wernt making it so only the rich could afford to go...) so all the students do buisness studies as they think there more likely to pass and/or get a job at the end of it. Then theres the idiots running alot of universities who seem hell bent on closing down science departments. At UCL they recently closed the micropalaeontology msc, despite it making a profit, and now seem to have their sight on closing the whole earth science department - this from supposedly the 4th best uni in the country...

[flaxton]

Chris
How come they are still publishing new books in Europe there must be some funding? I know some of our "amateur" mycologists still have a lot of input into these books but we have very few recent genera specific books for the UK. We have to resort to B&K Flora Agaricina Neerlandica or Nordica Macromycetes.

Mal

[SheffieldLass]

Originally Posted by poschiavanus

Many biologists have a certain scorn for taxonomists and systematic biologists usually associated with the phrase "stamp-collecting". Consorting with amateurs is even more demeaning. This has been true for a least 30 years to my knowledge. ....

... Furthermore physicists and mathematicians looked down on them as 'not-proper' scientists
...

The only way to create jobs which people will see as viable careers is jumping on a band-wagon. There are a couple of excellent opportunities in the area of bio-fuel: Fungi as bio-fuels? Fungi as pests of bio-fuel crops? Importance of mycorrhizal fungi for efficient generation of bio-mass?

Just a thought ....

It is interesting that the BTO uses amateurs really extensively in collecting the information (and we do a good job!), that then gets analysed ... OK the BTO is a charity, funded by its supporters, workers are probably not well paid ... I presume it tenders for work too (and birds are popular, and give the impression of being easier to identify...) Much of the info provides insights into biodiversity, indicator species and changes in biodiversity due to human influences .... There seems to be some money for this area, driven by the EU I guess ... Could getting fungi pushed into the limelight as important biodiversity indicators provide an area of opportunity? Indeed researching into which are important indicators, with uses for environmental monitoring? Maybe it is already happening? I.e. Fungi ecology in the much broader sense ... It might at least keep the field mycology research area ticking over, and enable handing on of skills, until the academic institutions start to remember what use non-commercial applied knowledge is, or the value to the store of human knowledge of non-wow-factor pure research.

Melanie

[poschiavanus]

Economics are hugely important.

My guess is a university academic costs around £100,000 a year (fully loaded costs including salary, social charges, admin etc.).

If we take a simple example the Psathyrella key desired by Nick Cantle. This might take 5-10 years of field collection, visits to herbaria, lots of scrutiny of specimens and microscopy. Perhaps 50 days effort a year, lets call it 250 man days or £125,000. All this for a short little paper which will not get a massive citation rate (at least not in the short term). The rate of return measured in citations a year for the same amount of work for a molecular study would be much higher.

Furthermore a proficient amateur could perform much of the same work, for next to nothing.

Elsewhere in Europe many universities are funded locally so there is a huge incentive to be seen to provide something for the local community. Many of these academics have less access to centrally distributed grants and might be deeply involved as part of their day job in defining local environmental policy. Furthermore they will be less affected by the Anglo-American "publish-or-die" philosophy.

As for the BTO etc. In Britain my understanding is that the demand for professional ornithology jobs far exceeds supply: there are lots of people willing to give their time for free in the hope of getting a foot in the door. This applies to many wildlife jobs (and indeed professions such as journalism). It is unfortunate that this tends to favour people with wealthy parents rather than the most talented. It also distorts the true costs involved in these activities.

posch

[cybershot]

Originally Posted by FungiJohn

It would be very interesting to know what thoughts Brian Spooner and Peter Roberts have on this at Kew?

Maybe I should suggest a Mycology degree course here at Sheffield Hallam

I wish you luck Nick, I really do

John

Whilst doing a bit more reading up on this subject I came across this article from CABI:

Out of sight, out of mind fungal taxonomy faces extinction in UK

Furthermore I understand from Stuart Skeates of the Hampshire Fungus Recording Group that Peter Roberts is leaving Kew at the end of this year, and the conclusion of the House of Lords report was that although the state of Taxonomy in the UK was felt to be generally fair, Mycology was described as 'in a state of crisis'.

The situation is made all the more tragic by the fact that there are enthusiastic and knowledgeable youngsters like Nick Cantle around desperate to follow in the footsteps but finding it impossible to progress far enough up the ladder other than by their own devices.

David

[SheffieldLass]

Thanks for posting that link, David. I'm glad that it raised the relationship to ecology, biodiversity and conservation ... "Assessing ecosystems without taking into account the fungi is like taking care of computer boxes but not the chips inside. Yet major pieces of work continue to be published considering ecology and climate change without any mention of fungi.”

Originally Posted by RobSutton

Modern university courses seem to have very little taxonomic content. I think there are, for example, only one or two who do botany courses anymore its all Environmental Studies, or similar, which are perhaps too broad to service the country's taxonomic requirements.

Yesterday I was speaking to a friend who studied botany at university back in the 1970s, when there were many studying botany .. she recently overheard a couple of students talking, saying that there were only 2 this year on the botany course ... she couldn't tell if they were referring to Sheffield Uni or elsewhere. Which seems to add confirmation that youngsters are not interested in these course even where they do exist. I must admit I wasn't interested in doing biology at A level or beyond, it seemed too heavily geared to just learning facts rather than analysis, so I went for physics and maths. However if it had been biology with an ecology overview that would have been much more up my street, learning and using that knowledge for analysis. My impression is that it may have swung too far in the opposite direction, analysis without all the necessary tools, so is more about 'policy' (i.e. learning to talk the talk) than rigorous research ...

I've also heard it said that there is a shortage of good field ecologists. Is that true?

Melanie