« Copper could help keep Africa clean | Main | Pros and cons of egg donation »

ESA: Mixing with metaphors

Often, the best way to explain a scientific idea to someone is to put it in terms they can easily envisage, using a cleverly chosen metaphor, simile or other quip. A bon mot can clarify a tricky concept more easily than all the powerpoint presentations in the world – a case in point being Mark Twain’s pithy meteorological explanation: “Climate is what you expect; weather is what you get.”

So the ESA decided to hold a competition to find the best analogy to explain an ecological concept – in a field where ecologists often have problems explaining ideas to each other, let alone to the public. The runner-up’s prize went to the following explanation of the staggering odds against an individual salmon successfully reproducing: Imagine you have to drive from the centre of a city all the way to the highway on the outskirts without stopping even once. Thus, if you come up against just a single red light anywhere on the journey you don’t make it.

The winning entry sought to explain the complex issue of ecosystem stability in terms of Jenga. Say each brick represents a species – at first, removing a piece makes the system a little more unstable, but overall it still stands up. But remove too many bricks and there comes a point when it all comes crashing down.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://blogs.nature.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-tb.cgi/962

Comments

Who/what is ESA? European Space Agency? Environmental Studies Academy? Well what?
Where is the corroboration, the out going link?
I would like to know more, the metaphors you highlighted were powerfully effective.

[Hello, the editor here. ESA in this case stands for Ecological Society of America. The landing page for this conference blog is here: http://blogs.nature.com/news/blog/conference_reports/ecological_society_of_america/
Sorry for the confusion!]

I can't get to this link, either...

Post a comment

Comments will be reviewed by staff before being published. You can be as critical or controversial as you like, but please don't get personal or offensive, and do keep it brief. Excessively long entries may be cropped. Remember this is for feedback and discussion - not for publishing papers or press releases.

We strongly encourage you to use your real, full name. Email addresses are required: this is just in case we need to discuss your comment with you privately. They won’t be published.


Please enter the numbers you see below - this helps us to cut down on spam. If you are having trouble with this system, you can instead e-mail a comment to 'inthefield at nature.com'.