Blog – Maripoldata

Tweeting Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction (#BBNJ): the story of a hashtag

23. May 2023/in General /by MARIPOLDATA Team

By Arne Langlet, Paul Dunshirn & Glen Wright

#BBNJ – Twitter Network

Twitter has become a central platform for political [1] and scientific communication [2], offering a unique data source for researching digital communication and discussions between diplomats, stakeholders and scientists. During the COVID-19 pandemic, digital communication may have been particularly important for international negotiation processes such as the recently concluded negotiations for a treaty on biodiversity beyond national jurisdiction (BBNJ) [3, 4, 5].

Here we introduce a dataset of tweets related to BBNJ discussions, which we collected from the first of January 2018 to March, 9th, 2023. The resulting dataset contains 72727 tweets from 26137 unique users. We included all tweets that mentioned the hashtag #BBNJ. Below we present a preliminary analysis of the data, focusing on themes such as the intensity of online engagement with BBNJ-related discussions over time, network community structures, and content of tweet texts. We consider these themes as pathways for further research.

We want to invite anyone with an interest in using the data to get in touch with us to discuss possibilities for further engagement.

How did the BBNJ discussion on Twitter evolve?

Our data shows that in early 2018, #BBNJ was already used in an average of around 12 tweets per day. The use of #BBNJ sparked for the first time during the first Intergovernmental Conference (IGC1) in September 2018. Particularly during the first three days of the IGC1 (4-6 September 2018), we can see high activity, peaking at 757 tweets in just one day. A total of 13465 BBNJ-tweets were posted during IGC1, averaging around 250 per day. The discussion subsequently went quiet, ahead of the next peak during the IGC2. By then, the hashtag was well established. During the intersessional period between IGCs2 and 3, more tweets were published than in the previous intersessional period.

Tweeting continued during the intersessional period between IGCs3 and 4, which stretched to 30 months owing to the COVID-19 pandemic. This period saw around 17 daily BBNJ-tweets. This continued engagement may indicate that the online dialogues (‘High Seas Dialogues’ and ‘BBNJ Intersessional Work’) helped to maintain some momentum and visibility during the COVID-19 pandemic [3, 4, 5].

The fourth IGC was originally planned to be the final round of negotiations, and the flurry of BBNJ-tweets on the opening day was relatively high. Nonetheless, this IGC ultimately garnered fewer Tweets in comparison to the previous rounds. Tweets on BBNJ dropped markedly after IGC4 – at around 11 per day, – this period was the quietest since we started sampling in 2018. Usage of #BBNJ once again picked up during the UN Ocean Conference, with civil society and ambitious States using the occasion to call for the finalisation of the BBNJ treaty.

The #BBNJ hashtag exploded during IGC 5 and 5.2, when the hashtag was used in more than 1000 tweets. This correlated with increased media and public attention on the negotiations. The days with the most tweets were March 5th, 6th and 7th 2023 with 5325, 3913 and 2056 Tweets respectively. We were unable to plot these dates on the following graph as they were outliers, and thus, outside of the limits of the visualization.

This analysis reveals a couple of trends. Firstly, BBNJ-related Twitter activity primarily occurs during the in-person negotiation sessions and strongly increased when the negotiations were getting closer to the finish line. After usage of #BBNJ was cemented during IGCs 1 and 2, the hashtag began to occur more often in other ocean events (such as the aforementioned UN Ocean Conference, which was not BBNJ specific). The days after BBNJ was concluded showed the strongest Twitter activity as it became part of the general media coverage.

How did the BBNJ network develop?

From the #BBNJ tweets emerged a social network, which we can visualise by analysing the interactions between users (i.e. retweets and mentions). We found that 13739 users interacted with at least one other user, creating 31842 connections. The following video shows how the BBNJ network has grown since the beginning of 2018.

Video editing: Alexander Medgett

Pathways for further research

Community Analysis

The network is quite closely connected in one large component, and we only see a few entirely disconnected user groups. A modularity-based community detection algorithm nonetheless identifies different communities within the main component (distinguished by colour in the video). Looking at network evolution over time reveals that certain core communities formed around IGC1, but that subsequent communities joined the discussions at later stages. Particularly, the purple and black communities formed around a small number of highly influential users that attracted a high number of otherwise disconnected users.

Network properties of #BBNJ discussions

Apart from analysing community structures, the relational nature of our data allows the use of established indicators from social network analysis, such as “centralization”. Centralization refers to the distribution of links between nodes [7]. An increase in centralization means that a small number of users are highly connected compared to the majority of people in the network. Table 1 shows that the centralization of the BBNJ network grew steadily after IGC1, indicating that the network grew closer together and a few users became very well connected. During the IGCs (in red), many new users joined the network and the centralization decreased. This indicates that the distribution of connections became more equal, i.e. the gap between hyper- and weakly-connected users shrank and new users joined the BBNJ community. After IGC3, the dynamics of the network did not significantly change and the network grew ever closer around a few highly central nodes for a long time. However, with IGCs 5 and 5.2, the centralization suddenly decreased strongly as many new nodes joined the network by tweeting about #BBNJ and tagging or retweeting other users.

Period	Centralization
Pre IGCs	0,16
IGC 1	0,11
Intersessional IGC 1-2	0,16
IGC 2	0,21
Intersessional IGC 2-3	0,22
IGC 3	0,20
COVID-19 Intersessional IGC 3-4	0,31
IGC 4	0,32
Intersessional IGC 4 – UN Ocean Conference	0,32
UN Ocean Conference	0,34
Past UN Ocean & pre IGC 5	0,34
IGC 5	0.23
IGC 5.2	0.21

Content analysis: other hashtags used in connection to the BBNJ hashtag

Our dataset also contains the actual #BBNJ tweet texts, allowing for a closer analysis of the content of discussion. For example, we can identify other hashtags that were used jointly with #BBNJ. #highseas co-occurs most frequently, reflecting the use of that term as a more readily intelligible alternative and recent discussion about the possibility of renaming the BBNJ Treaty to the commonly used “High Seas Treaty”.

#	Freq
highseas	7230
ocean	3134
highseastreaty	2059
biodiversity	1914
igc5	1754
oneoceanoneplanet	1130
stronghighseas	1045
abnj	1044
igc4	872
sdg14	691
unclos	649
oceans	580
mpas	511
igc2	462
deepsea	417
protecttheoceans	398
igc3	394
oneoceansummit	381
30×30	300

Contact us for collaboration:

We are excited to announce that our comprehensive Twitter dataset on the #BBNJ (Biodiversity Beyond National Jurisdiction) negotiations is available now. The dataset encompasses more than 72.000 tweets and can offer valuable insights into the global discourse surrounding conservation of marine biodiversity and sustainable use of marine resources. We invite fellow researchers, including early-career researchers and master students to utilize this rich dataset for their scholarly investigations, enabling a deeper understanding of public opinions, key themes, networks and emerging trends during the BBNJ negotiations.

Should you wish to access this dataset and collaborate on groundbreaking research, please do not hesitate to contact us:

maripoldata.erc@univie.ac.at

References:

[1] Jungherr, A. (2014). Twitter in politics: a comprehensive literature review. Available at SSRN 2865150.; Jörgens, H., Kolleck, N., & Saerbeck, B. (2016). Exploring the hidden influence of international treaty secretariats: using social network analysis to analyse the Twitter debate on the ‘Lima Work Programme on Gender’. Journal of European Public Policy, 23(7), 979-998.; Pearce, W., Holmberg, K., Hellsten, I., & Nerlich, B. (2014). Climate Change on Twitter: Topics, Communities and Conversations about the 2013 IPCC Working Group 1 Report. PLOS ONE, 9.

[2] Boteler, B. (2016). Scientists and Twitter: How does this Group of Fact Finding Professionals use Twitter? Journal of Visual and Media Anthropology, 1(2), 5-18.; López-Goñi, I., & Sánchez-Angulo, M. (2018). Social networks as a tool for science communication and public engagement: focus on Twitter. FEMS Microbiology letters, 365(2), fnx246.; Su, L. Y.-F., Scheufele, D. A., Bell, L., Brossard, D., & Xenos, M. A. (2017). sci. Science Communication, 39(5), 569-597.

[3] Vadrot, A. B. M., Langlet, A., Tessnow-von Wysocki, I., Tolochko, P., Brogat, E., & Ruiz-Rodríguez, S. C. (2021). Marine Biodiversity Negotiations During COVID-19: A New Role for Digital Diplomacy? Global Environmental Politics, 21(3), 169-186.

[4] Vadrot, A. B. M., & Ruiz Rodríguez, S. C. (2022). Digital Multilateralism in Practice: Extending Critical Policy Ethnography to Digital Negotiation Sites. International Studies Quarterly 66(3). Article sqac051, https://doi.org/10.1093/isq/sqac051

[5] Langlet, A., Wanneau, K., Dunshirn, P., Ruiz Rodríguez, S. C., Tessnow-von Wysocki, I. & Vadrot, A.B.M. (2022). A matter of time: the impacts of Covid-19 on marine biodiversity negotiations. Négociations, 37, 39-65. https://doi.org/10.3917/neg.037.0039

[7] Borgatti, Stephen P. (2005). “Centrality and Network Flow”. Social Networks. 27: 55–71.
[/av_textblock]

A laboratory ethnographer in the deep-sea lab BEEP of IFREMER

26. April 2023/in General /by Krystel Wanneau

Since 2018, the MARIPOLDATA research team has followed the BBNJ negotiations and provided extensive insights of the diplomatic practices, science-policy interactions and conflicts shaping the development of a new high seas biodiversity treaty (Tessnow-von Wysocki & Vadrot, 2020; Vadrot, 2020; Vadrot et al. 2022). In parallel, we studied the emerging scientific field of marine biodiversity to understand the state of what scientists knew and delve into the global inequalities of the scientific field, which were reappearing at the negotiation sites (Tolochko & Vadrot 2021a, 2021b). To close the gap between the scientific field and the negotiations though, MARIPOLDATA has taken a closer look at the national level to study marine biodiversity monitoring policies and practices from the perspective of deep-sea laboratories. With the aim to compare these perspectives, the laboratory life of laboratories adds a new key site to understand the structure of the politics of marine biodiversity research entangled between science and policy.

This MARIPOLDATA blog series shares insights from three laboratory ethnographies undertaken between October and December 2022 by three researchers of the ERC MARIPOLDATA team. These ethnographies will take our readers to the United States at Scripps Oceanography [1] at the University of California San Diego, France at the IFREMER [2] of Brest and Brazil at the Oceanographic Institute [3] of São Paulo. Our intention in sharing three singular experiences of laboratory ethnography is to provide a first outlook of how national knowledge infrastructures produce marine biodiversity knowledge.

A dive into the French ocean institutions to explore the “last frontier of the planet”

The French laboratory ethnography was conducted at the Biology and Deep-sea Ecosystems^[1] (BEEP) unit, the deep-sea laboratory of IFREMER^[2] (French research institute for exploitation of the sea). Overlooking the beautiful bay of Brest, the lab premises also plunged me into the headquarters of IFREMER, a campus within the Technopôle Brest Iroise located side-by-side with the European Institute for Marine Studies (IUEM) of the University of Western Brittany (UBO). The well-established IFREMER is a pioneer of ocean science and was created in 1984 from the merger of the worlds of marine fisheries and ocean exploration. Under the joint authority of the French Ministry for Higher Education, Research and Innovation, the French Ministry for the Ecological and Solidary Transition, and the French Ministry of Agriculture and Food, its mission is to protect and restore the ocean, sustainably use marine resources and create and share ocean data. Engaging into these French ocean institutions, I was embarking on an ethnographic journey located in what felt to be a central site from where marine biodiversity data originated.

View from the BEEP coffee room over the bay of Brest (Photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

Because IFREMER also manages an extensive infrastructure with the French Oceanographic Fleet, participates to the management of the national campaigns at sea and dedicates a considerable effort to ground-breaking technology, this dive was not only into the French ocean institutions, it rather felt to be the ideal playground for these scientists to explore the last frontier of the planet. From October 3rd to October 21st, I spent three weeks in Brest to embark on a laboratory ethnography. I attended an international scientific workshop for a week organized by BEEP and then stayed two weeks at BEEP to study how the laboratory staff thought, collected and managed marine biodiversity data using these technologies.

From the stories of marine images at the MIW to the laboratory life at BEEP

During the first week, I attended the 4th Marine Imaging Workshop^[3] organized by BEEP at the Océanopolis, Brest’s aquarium. This international workshop conveyed the ocean imaging community to push the boundaries of marine imaging, be it to advance (underwater) image acquisition or showcase new digital automatised imaging workflow to observe marine life. I encountered the excitement of reaching the last frontier while listening to the guest stars, marine biologist Dr. Eddie Widder^[4], a pioneer in bioluminescence who discovered the giant squid and Oxford Professor of Astrophysics Chris Lintott who shares a similar vertigo of infinite space in exploring the galaxies and invented a citizen science digital platform – the Zooniverse^[5] – that lets anyone with a computer classify galaxies or keep track of endangered species. The immersion into this imaging world exemplified the new approaches and new tools for investigating deep-sea ecosystems and was a premise for what awaited me in BEEP lab.

The story of deep-sea bioluminescence by Eddie Widder captured during the 4th MIW (Photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

Over this week, I met several members of BEEP who presented the results of their last research^[6], or were simply driven by curiosity to see what their colleagues from other IFREMER labs, or from other institutions represented, such as Ocean Networks Canada^[7], Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution^[8], Helmholtz Centre for Ocean Research Kiel^[9] (GEOMAR), Monterey Bay Aquarium Research Institute^[10], did. There were many reasons to be curious to discover this underwater imaging community. One that standed out as reinforcing ties between participants was innovating to see more into the invisible deep-sea. The organizers of the workshop held a photo contest and the winner was indeed a deep-sea creature photo. During this first week immersion, I collected stories about underwater marine images, technical prowess with the upcoming promises of artificial intelligence and limitations of monitoring practices.

Winner of the Marine Imaging Workshop photo contest (Photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

Sharing the imaging workshop experience with BEEP staff and being there among them opened up my fieldwork at IFREMER before diving into the day-to-day laboratory life. The next two weeks, I was immersed in the daily activities of BEEP’s technicians, researchers, engineers, and attended their meetings, coffee breaks, visited their instrument and laboratory rooms and participated in their research activities.

The lab ethnographer immersions (photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

Contrary to the image of immersing oneself into water, the lab ethnography is not a single immersion into a social world where you then swim, so to say, to explore the environment. The immersion repeats itself each day, and yet creates unprecedented configurations to observe the laboratory life and access to singular individual and collective routines. Despite the repetitive interaction with the same 30 individuals over the two weeks, I didn’t perceive the ethnographic immersion to be a single dive into one lab, but multiple dives to open the black box of BEEP and study the relations inside and outside the lab. Each dive created specific conditions of the immersion, some days wandering on my own in the hallways of the building to study the spatial biography of BEEP and at days trying on the IFREMER overalls suit to prepare myself to go to Roscoff, an emblematic ecosystem area in Brittany where is located an historical marine station dedicated to research and monitoring^[11].

After the immersion into the lab, the translation task

I explained above that the immersion into the laboratory life was a detailed and in-depth observation of the laboratory interactions. Yet, our task didn’t stop at the description of interactions, because to understand for MARIPOLDATA is the laboratory perspective over the deep-sea, we needed to observe their research practices and put a meaning over their projects, instruments, triage and storage of samples and organisms studied. After the immersion into the lab comes the translation task to make sense of the expertise of BEEP over nematode, cold-water coral, foraminifera and other marine species for the novice. Our task was to translate our observations of the laboratory practices into a perspective to see into oceans the deep-sea like BEEP. For instance, what meaning do we put on this video of cold-water corals? It was a dive of the RUV (Robot Underwater Vehicle) Victor 6000 operated by IFREMER during the 2022 cruise ChEReef^[12] in the bay of Biscay to collect data for the project ARDECO^[13] coordinated by BEEP to improve the conservation of cold-water corals. On my last day in Brest, I visited the samples brought back and stored at the Océanopolis^[14] aquarium for both research and educational purposes. The translation task puts a meaning over the expertise that each laboratory provides and the services they offer to society.

Research practices of BEEP to study deep-sea ecosystems: deep coral reef in the Bay of Biscay ©ChEReef – Ifremer (2022)

During my stay, I discovered the deep-sea expertise of IFREMER in practice. The laboratory BEEP contributes to the department of deep-sea physical resources and ecosystems of IFREMER with a multidisciplinary study of the biology and ecology of deep-sea ecosystems. They conduct in situ exploring and sampling of the biodiversity of these ecosystems, ex situ studies of the interactions in the deep sea and focus on molecular mechanisms to study the responses and adaptation of organisms. For two weeks, my daily vocabulary changed radically to include nematodes, cold seeps, deep-sea canyons, hydrothermal vents, polymetallic nodules, deep-sea corals, foraminifera, new organisms I had never heard about. Past the feeling of amazement, I discovered what they were doing to study those organisms and the variation of practices to produce knowledge of the deep-sea. For instance, I followed the Blue Revolution^[15] project and observed sampling practices at Roscoff (image 7), storage practices in the Centob lab (image 8), imaging practices to prepare the sample before using the scanning electron microscope (SEM) to photograph tiny organisms (images 9). Observing these research practices informed about the scientific mission of BEEP’s researchers.

Sampling at the Roscoff marine station (Photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

Storage of samples at the Centob lab (Photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

A polychaete sample captured by the scanning electron microscope (SEM) (Photo credits: Krystel Wanneau)

Back to the land, in Österreich

Over the three weeks in Brest, I embarked in a laboratory ethnography of BEEP to study its practices and I learned through these practices about the perspective of a deep-sea lab. Being entangled between the purpose of

the mandate of IFREMER to provide expertise on marine life to support public policy-making and the scientific mission of researchers to discover and study marine life, the BEEP laboratory is a key site to understand to politics of marine biodiversity data in France.

I thank the ERC MARIPOLDATA project principal investigator Alice Vadrot for the opportunity to conduct a laboratory ethnography and the staff from BEEP who opened the doors of its laboratory life. In particular, I thank Daniela Zeppilli and Pierre-Marie Sarradin without whom this fieldwork wouldn’t have become real.

^[1] https://www.umr-beep.fr/en

^[2] https://en.ifremer.fr/

^[3] https://miw2022.sciencesconf.org/

^[4] https://www.ted.com/speakers/edith_widder

^[5] https://www.physics.ox.ac.uk/our-people/lintott/citizen-science

^[6] https://mobile.twitter.com/BlueRevProject/status/1577201635423817729

^[7] https://www.oceannetworks.ca/

^[8] https://www.whoi.edu/

^[9] https://www.geomar.de/

^[10] https://www.mbari.org/

^[11] https://www.sb-roscoff.fr/

^[12] https://campagnes.flotteoceanographique.fr/campagnes/18000571/

^[13] https://anr.fr/Projet-ANR-20-CE02-0006

^[14] https://www.oceanopolis.com/?p=23322

^[15] https://bluerevolution.ifremer.fr/

Exploring Deep Sea Ecology and Ecosystems at the Oceanographic Institute, University of São Paulo (IOUSP)

17. April 2023/in General /by Arne Langlet

Since 2018, the MARIPOLDATA research team has followed the BBNJ negotiations and provided extensive insights of the diplomatic practices, science-policy interactions and conflicts shaping the development of a new high seas biodiversity treaty (Tessnow-von Wysocki & Vadrot, 2020; Vadrot, 2020; Vadrot et al. 2022). In parallel, we studied the emerging scientific field of marine biodiversity to understand the state of what scientists knew and delve into the global inequalities of the scientific field, which were reappearing at the negotiation sites (Tolochko & Vadrot 2021a, 2021b). To close the gap between the scientific field and the negotiations though, MARIPOLDATA has taken a closer look at the national level to study marine biodiversity monitoring policies and practices from the perspective of deep-sea laboratories. With the aim to compare these perspectives, the laboratory life of laboratories adds a new key site to understand the structure of the politics of marine biodiversity research entangled between science and policy.

This MARIPOLDATA blog series shares insights from three laboratory ethnographies undertaken between October and December 2022 by three researchers of the ERC MARIPOLDATA team. These ethnographies will take our readers to the United States at Scripps Oceanography [1] at the University of California San Diego, France at the IFREMER [2] of Brest and Brazil at the Oceanographic Institute [3] of São Paulo. Our intention in sharing three singular experiences of laboratory ethnography is to provide a first outlook of how national knowledge infrastructures produce marine biodiversity knowledge.

The IOUSP in São Paulo

Photo credits: Arne Langlet

The Oceanographic Institute (Instituto Oceanográfico) at the University of São Paulo (USP) is a research and teaching institution focused on marine science. It was founded in 1948 with the goal of promoting the study of oceanography in Brazil and contributing to the development of the country through research and education. The Oceanographic Institute is located in the city of São Paulo. São Paulo is the largest city in Brazil and the capital of the state of São Paulo. It is located in the southeastern part of the country, and is known for its cultural, economic, and political importance. The city is the major economic and cultural center in Brazil and home to a diverse population and a vibrant culture. The IOUSP about a 1-2 hour drive from the Atlantic Ocean, and is affiliated with the University of São Paulo, one of the top universities in Latin America. It possesses more than 40 labs researching all aspects of oceanography, including biological, physical and chemical oceanography, marine geology, marine chemistry, and marine governance.

Over the years, the Oceanographic Institute has played a significant role in the development of marine science in Brazil, conducting research and providing education to students from a variety of disciplines. It has largely contributed to the understanding southern Atlantic Ocean – a previously understudied region – and its role in the earth’s climate and ecosystems but also partakes in missions to the Antarctic station, fulfilling Brazil’s research presence on the Antarctic continent. The institute possesses numerous research facilities and equipment, including a fleet of research vessels, and is home to a large number of researchers, professors, and students. In addition to its diverse research activities, the Oceanographic Institute has been pivotal for marine sciences in Brazil by offering undergraduate and graduate programs in marine science, as well as continuing education courses and workshops. Hence, it is also the Brazilian hub for the UN Decade of Ocean Science, for which a large mural painting was inaugurated during my research stay.

Professor Paulo Sumida inaugurates the new wall painting to celebrate the UN Decade of Ocean Science (Photo credits: Arne Langlet)

Deep Sea Ecology and Evolution Laboratory (LAMP)

The Deep Sea Ecology and Evolution Laboratory (Laboratório de Ecologia e Evolução de Mar Profundo – LAMP) is mainly focused on the deep-sea biodiversity assessment and on the mapping and description of deep-sea habitats and fauna. Further research interests include ecological and biogeochemical benthic processes in the continental margins of the Atlantic Ocean and Antarctica. The laboratory is led by Professor Paulo Sumida who himself was a master student at the IOUSP in 1994 before pursuing his PhD National Oceanography Centre, Southampton, UK and becoming a Post-Doctoral Fellow at Craig Smith Lab in the University of Hawaii at Manoa.

In November 2022 the laboratory had five ongoing projects that aimed at exploring different aspects of largely unknown ecosystems in the southern Atlantic ocean and the Antarctic. One of them is the DECODE project which seeks to understand the dynamics of deep-water coral ecosystems in the south-west Atlantic. The LAMP team used a combination of an ROV (with camera) Lander (with camera) and a sediment trap for this study. First they explored the area with an ROV and then installed the lander and the sediment trap for continuous monitoring. The sediment trap checked what kind of sediment (and tiny animals in it) was floating around and the lander shot videos in regular intervals to research which fauna visited the coral reef. In this way cold water corals and the potential impacts of oiling activities were monitored.

Providing high quality images of a largely unstudied area

Daniel Couto using the multi-use Leica magnifying glass to take a high-resolution picture of an Ophiuroidea sampled in the Santos Basin (Photo credits: Arne Langlet)

Much of the research at LAMP is aimed at the Santos Basin (Bacia de Santos) which is located in the EEZ of Brazil off the coast of the two large Brazilian cities Rio de Janeiro & Sao Paulo. Here, the research team is active in describing the coral ecosystems. As this part of the Atlantic Ocean remains largely undescribed, one of the main tasks of the research team is to produce images of the flora and fauna of ecosystems in the depth of 400-800 meters. Indeed, producing high quality imagines of rarely seen species was repeatedly highlighted as a “speciality” of the lab, with Sumida famously spending “up to 10 hours” to take the perfect picture of a new species during a cruise.

Collaborative taxonomy

“It is normal that every researcher discovers a new species in this area,” the doctoral student Bruno Henrique told me when I congratulated him to describing a new species in his PhD thesis. Indeed, also Bachelor student André Calloni described a new brittle start in his bachelor thesis which consists of a catalog of spectacular photographs of brittle stars. When asking about their methodology how to identify new species, I began to learn about the collaborative working method that characterizes this laboratory. I learned that when they discover something unknown, “here everyone speaks to everyone” so that everyone´s taxonomic knowledge is quickly aggregated to discover the species at hand – or if unknown – realize that it is indeed a new species. One could describe their method as “visual collaborative taxonomy” – as researchers identify species collaboratively and based on images.

André Calloni presenting the taxonomy of Ophiuroidea for his Bachelor thesis (Photo credits: Arne Langlet)

The condensed milk statistic & and strong collaboration with oil companies

Unfortunately, researchers in Brazil have faced significant funding cuts in recent years which has led to making them financially dependent on funding from private sources. The decrease of federal public funding for research in Brazil arguably reached its dramatic yet ironic peak in 2021 when a public spending statistic showed that the previous federal government spent more money on condensed milk than on financing research. Because extractive industries in Brazil are required by law to spent 1% of their yearly revenue on scientific or educative purposes, companies such as Petrobras have filled the spending gap in recent years. Petrobras – the company involved in the “Car Wash” scandal – a massive corruption scheme, in which executives and politicians had taken bribes in exchange for awarding contracts – is now a major cooperation partner as they not only provide funding for research projects such as the DECODE project but also provide crucial infrastructure for the researchers such as the necessary vessels to conduct sampling in the deep sea. This cooperation – as always – comes with advantages and disadvantages. One major disadvantage that researchers lamented is the strict data sharing policy that Petrobras requires from its scientifc project partners. This means that Brazilian researchers involved in Petrobras projects are not allowed to share data (particularly not outside of Brazil), which oftentimes prevents them from engaging in international research projects or cooperations.

Overall, I spent two insightful and fascinating weeks at the LAMP and also got to see the research station in Ubatuba.

Instruments at Ubatuba Research base (Photo credits: Arne Langlet)

Good bye IOUSP (Photo credits: Arne Langlet)

[1] https://scripps.ucsd.edu/

[2] https://www.ifremer.fr/fr

[3] https://www.io.usp.br/

Maripoldata Blog