By Bella Richmond, PhD student at Concordia University
I recently received a text from one of my best friends, asking me: “haven’t we all agreed that ecosystem services are just colonial garbage where white people consider nature as an economic entity?”. As I read this text, an internal debate that has been going on for approximately 5 years now, restarted. My PhD thesis is largely focused on the concept of ecosystem services. I’m not a big fan of colonialism or the economic valuation of nature, so naturally, this has led to the previously mentioned half-decade of internal debate.
Ecosystem services are defined as the benefits that humans receive from nature, and the term was widely popularized with the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment in 20051. I think a lot of people working in the field now would agree that ecosystem services used to be very colonial and focused on trying to put a price tag on nature. But is this still true? Certainly, a lot of ecosystem service work takes place that is not focused at all on the economic valuation of nature (mine included). Many people have acknowledged that it is very difficult, if not impossible, to quantify the value of nature, especially when discussing cultural values. For example, what is the monetary value of the memories you have climbing your favourite tree in the park near your grandparents’ house? It gets pretty hard to put a number on these things (though people still try). So, the study of ecosystem services isn’t necessarily premised on the idea of the monetary valuation of nature. But is this framework founded upon a colonial worldview? Does it perpetuate one? The easy answer? Yes, absolutely. Regardless of whether money is involved or not, the vast majority of ecosystem service studies are focused on the quantification of the benefits that nature provides to humans, with the end goal of arguing the importance of nature due to said benefits.This concept that nature is valuable because of the benefits it gives us falls under the category of instrumental values. Instrumental valuation aligns with the colonial worldview that values people, nature, and objects only when they bring the colonizer, and by extension colony, benefits. For example, the land of now-called Canada was valued by English and French colonizers not for its inherent beauty or the relationship that early colonizers had with it, but because the many resources found within brought the benefit of monetary value. By contrast, intrinsic and relational values are deeply integrated into many Indigenous peoples’ worldviews. For example, I am writing this post in Tiohtià:ke, where for thousands of years the Haudenosaunee people have stewarded their ancestral lands. In Haudenosaunee tradition, thanks to the earth, water, animals, plants, the sun, and many more entities are regularly given during the Ohenten Kariwatekwen, or Thanksgiving Address. The connection and relationships between nature and people is highlighted and honoured through this process. This is just one example which highlights the contrasting value systems of Indigenous communities.
Following this line of thought, there have been alternative frameworks suggested to build and extend on ecosystem services and integrate relational and intrinsic value systems. One of the most popular of these alternative frameworks is “nature’s contributions to people” proposed by the IPBES2. Nature’s contributions to people is a framework that emphasizes the role of culture and elevates the role of Indigenous and local knowledges. It is an interesting alternative to ecosystem services, and one that I find myself thinking about often. Depending on how it is implemented, it could very well be a step away from the colonial framework that dominates the field of ecosystem services.
The argument that I hear most often in defense of ecosystem services is that we exist in a colonial, capitalist system, thus, we are forced to use colonial, capitalist tools. We know that ecosystem services are at their base colonial, capitalist, and instrumentalist but so are the people in charge. Thus, the logic follows that we must use this broken tool to play a broken game, so that we can get the money/power/influence to do what is right. This argument has never compelled me – the master’s tools will never dismantle the master’s house3, after all. However, I acknowledge that ecosystem services are at times an effective communication tool in our current world. This does not stop me from identifying them as colonial, nor does it stop me from envisioning a future without ecosystem services, one with new frameworks for nature that emphasize its inherent and relational values. It does not stop me from hoping and struggling for a non-capitalist, anti-colonial world that values nature in many, many ways.
I would love to hear what you think. Stop me in the hallway at Concordia or at the next QCBS event to tell me your thoughts!
About the author:
Bella Richmond is a member of the Ziter Urban Landscape Ecology Lab at Concordia University in Montreal. They are doing their PhD on the benefits of urban green infrastructure. They love to bike, read, and take advantage of Montreal’s free public pools.
Attending the Microbial Genomics and Metagenomics Workshop in Berkeley, California, was a truly enriching and unforgettable experience. As my first major scientific meeting, I wasn’t quite sure what to expect—but it ended up exceeding all of my hopes. Over the course of five days, I had the opportunity to both expand my technical knowledge and connect with a global community of passionate scientists working in genomics and phage biology.
View from the JGI, you can just about see the golden gate bridge on the other side of the bay!
The first half of the week focused heavily on theory and foundational knowledge. Through a series of engaging lectures and hands-on sessions led by scientists from the Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute (JGI), I deepened my understanding of genomics concepts that I had previously only encountered superficially. One of the most valuable aspects of this portion was learning the proper terminology to refer to various levels of genome assembly—terms like reads, contigs, scaffolds, bins, and metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs). These distinctions are essential when interpreting and comparing genomic datasets, and gaining clarity on them helped me better understand the datasets we work with in my own research.
Another highlight was learning how to use IMG (Integrated Microbial Genomes), a powerful web-based interface developed by the JGI. IMG allows researchers to analyze their own metagenomic datasets and mine the extensive JGI database for comparative data. Getting hands-on training from the creators of this platform was extremely useful, especially because my lab relies heavily on such tools to study phages in complex microbial communities. The interface includes built-in features for statistical analysis and data clustering, which make it incredibly versatile for various types of genomic inquiries.
The second half of the week was dedicated to group projects, where we applied what we’d learned using the IMG system. Working in teams of 3–4, each group developed a mini research question to investigate, with the goal of presenting our findings on the final day. My group chose a topic directly relevant to my research interests: is CrAssphage a universal marker of human feces? CrAssphage is a well-known bacteriophage commonly found in the human gut, and we were curious to see how universally it appears across different samples and datasets. We tackled 3 core questions using the IMG database: exploring prevalence, host associations, and geographic variation.
The analysis process was rewarding. Using the statistical and clustering tools within IMG, we were able to uncover interesting data, ultimately ending in our presentation coming in second place out of twelve! For me, this moment really reinforced how collaborative science can lead to strong outcomes, even in a short timeframe.
Beyond the academic aspects, one of the most inspiring parts of the workshop was the chance to talk with other students who are also working in microbial genomics and viromics. It was eye-opening to learn about the diverse approaches and projects people are undertaking—everything from studying phages in marine ecosystems to exploring microbial diversity in extreme environments. These conversations sparked ideas and made me feel connected to a broader scientific community.
Equally exciting was the opportunity to meet some of the researchers who have developed the very tools we use in our lab. Being able to thank them in person and discuss our applications of their work was incredibly meaningful. It made me appreciate just how interconnected the scientific process is, and how every tool or method created can massively affect other projects.
To top it all off, I took the afternoon of the last day to visit San Francisco. Riding the city’s vintage tramways, I got to see iconic sites like Alcatraz and the Golden Gate Bridge. I was struck by how beautiful and unique the city was—it was the perfect way to end an amazing week.
The Iconic golden gate bridge in all its glory!Alcatraz island, which houses the (in)famous Alcatraz prison, now turned museumOne of the many styles of vintage streetcars found in San Francisco!
I’m extremely thankful to the Quebec Centre for Biodiversity Science (QCBS) for funding this trip. Without their support, I would not have been able to attend, and I’m so grateful for the opportunity to learn, connect, and be inspired. This experience will stay with me for a long time.
About the author:
Tommy is a PhD student at McGill University in the lab of Dr. Corinne Maurice. His research focuses on the human gut microbiome, specifically on how bacteriophages shape bacterial communities during early life and influence childhood health and malnutrition.
In January of 2024, I had the privilege of attending the International Biogeography Society’s biennial meeting in the historic city of Prague, Czechia. It was an incredible opportunity not just to immerse myself in the latest ecological and biogeographical research, but also to share the stage with my brilliant peers from McGill University, Jory and Dom. Together, we presented our research, exchanged ideas with scientists from around the globe, and absorbed the electric atmosphere of a city steeped in history and culture. This experience was made possible through funding by the QCBS to attend this conference.
Our daily commute to the conference centre involved riding these wonderful red trams!
One of the highlights of the trip, beyond the inspiring talks and thought-provoking sessions, was simply being in Prague. Wandering through its cobbled streets, we found ourselves captivated by the architectural charm, hearty food, and cozy cafes—ideal settings for long, post-conference chats about everything from ecosystem dynamics to where to find the best chimney cake.
Outside the city, we took a little time to recharge in the Czech countryside. The crisp winter air, quiet forests, and snow-dusted fields offered the perfect contrast to the busy conference halls and reminded us why we do this work in the first place.
Jory and I in the Czech countryside in near Národní park České Švýcarsko
A Place Rooted in Scientific Legacy
Being in Prague also offered a unique opportunity to reflect on the deep roots of biology and the natural sciences in the Czech Republic. This region has long been a fertile ground for biological thought. Perhaps most famously, it’s the homeland of Gregor Mendel—the Augustinian monk whose pea plant experiments laid the groundwork for the science of genetics. Mendel conducted his work in Brno, just a few hours from Prague, and his legacy is still deeply felt throughout the country.
Czechia also has a strong tradition of botanical and ecological research, with institutions like Charles University (founded in 1348!) playing a significant role in European science. Prague’s National Museum and its natural history collections have served as a foundation for generations of Czech scientists and remain a fascinating window into the region’s biodiversity and scientific curiosity.
Dom and I in front of Katedrála sv. Víta
To present biogeographic work in such a historically rich context added an extra layer of meaning to the experience—it felt like a full-circle moment, contributing to a lineage of thinkers who have long tried to make sense of the living world.
I left Prague feeling deeply inspired—not just by the research and discussions, but by the connections made, the beauty of the place, and the historical continuity of scientific discovery that we were lucky to be a part of. Here’s to more discoveries, both in science and in life.
About the author
Isaac Eckert is a PhD student at McGill University, supervised by Dr. Laura Pollock. His research focuses on transforming the rapidly increasing amount of publicly available biodiversity data into estimates of biogeographic patterns and biodiversity change to inform conservation. Learn more about Isaac on his website!
By Victorine Lambert, Master’s student at McGill University
In December 2024, I attended my first conference in Ottawa for the ArcticNet’s 5th International Arctic Change Conference (AC2024), thanks to the QCBS Excellence Award. Not only was it my first time presenting my research, which was incredibly exciting, but I was also thrilled to take part in such a unique and multidisciplinary event. The ArcticNet conference reunites scientists, engineers, and other professionals in the human health, natural and social sciences with partners from Inuit organizations, northern communities, federal and provincial agencies and the private sector to study the impacts of climate and socio-economic change in the Arctic. This conference brings a lot of different communities across the Canadian Arctic and ensures Northerners are an integral part of the conversation around current results emerging from Arctic research.
A moment for science
As I stepped up to present my research on killer whale feeding ecology in the Canadian Arctic, I was filled with both excitement and a deep sense of responsibility. Sharing my work in a room full of experts and students alike, I realized just how interconnected our scientific efforts are. I spent 4 days listening to inspiring talks given by well-established scientists as well as young scientists like me. The science was everywhere and people were excited to tell you about their journey. I listened to talks about permafrost, plants, birds, mammals or even bumble bees. Seeing so many people working toward the same goal was both exciting and inspiring. By the end of the conference, I wanted to study every topic I had heard about!
Presenting my research for the first time in the form of a poster
A moment for culture
One of the most memorable moments of the conference wasn’t in a lecture hall, but during a cultural night where Inuit communities shared their stories through music, storytelling and food. It reminded me that science in the Arctic cannot be separated from the lived experiences of the people who call it home. This night, even if short, was a unique opportunity to learn more about Inuit culture and to hear stories directly from Inuit people and not through our occidental prism and biased view. Attending panels led by Inuit leaders and community researchers grounded the scientific discussions in values of respect, reciprocity, and listening. It was a powerful reminder that culture and knowledge systems are deeply intertwined, and that truly inclusive science requires both humility and openness.
Opening remarks from the Arctic anthropologist, essayist, activist and also President of the Inuit Circumpolar Council Canada, Lisa Qiluqqi Koperqualuk
A moment for humans
Conferences are known to be very social and allow people to meet in another context. I met other students, professors, engineers, people from communities I had never had the opportunity to talk to before, and even made new friends. Every break was an opportunity to learn more about the Arctic and what people were passionate about, often just by joining a table at lunch or grabbing coffee between sessions. These informal conversations were often just as impactful as the scheduled talks. One thing I will carry with me is the genuine openness and approachability of everyone I met throughout the week. One evening, some of us gathered at a local pub in Ottawa. It was a casual setting that offered space for deeper conversations, shared laughter, and the kind of camaraderie that makes a scientific community feel like a shared journey. Moments like these reminded me that beyond the data and the presentations, it is people and their stories that truly shape the research.
One of the discussions I had with another scientist who was working on phytoplankton and isotopes in Cumberland Sound, one of my regions of interest
So, if you were doubting about going to that conference, I hope this convinced you! I came back motivated as ever and with stars in my eyes thinking about all the different fields and possibilities that were ahead of me.
About the author:
After a BSc in Marine Biology and Oceanography in Wales, Victorine Lambert decided to join McGill University in the Ecological Tracers Lab under the supervision of Melissa McKinney, where she pursues her MSc. Her research mainly focuses on the feeding ecology of killer whales (Orcinus orca) using compound specific stable isotopes. Victorine is curious and likes to discover new areas. She is also involved in other projects on the side related to bioacoustics.
By Erica Fellin, PhD Candidate at McGill University
With the help of QCBS, I was able to work on my research project predicting the blacklegged tick distribution in Québec. To better assess the distribution of ticks in the environment, I surveyed several different habitat types to determine where I was most likely to find these parasites. Since these ticks can transmit the bacteria causing Lyme disease – the most common zoonotic disease in North America – studying this species’ distribution can help determine geographic risks related to the disease. Current government practices only survey for ticks in forests, so I wanted to account for areas where ticks may also be found. There are several reports of people finding ticks on their bodies without having been in the woods, so I wanted to account for this when considering the tick distribution.
Tick surveys typically involve dragging a flannel sheet along the ground and methodically checking the sheet every few steps. Last summer, I surveyed four different habitat types (forests, forest edges, agricultural land, and urban green spaces) across southern Québec to see if I could find ticks beyond the forest, and my results were interesting.
The forests/forest edges I went to were consistently mixed woods, so the composition was consistent and there were not any irregularities – except one flooded forest! I surveyed across some interesting agricultural areas, including two dairy farms, a horse farm, a plant nursery, and a beer farm (a farm that grows barley, wheat, and hops for its brewery!). I also surveyed dog parks, driveways, and parking lots. To no surprise, I found ticks in forests and along the forest edge. I did not find any ticks at any of the farms I went to, although some of the farmers in more forested landscapes said they have seen ticks.
It seems proximity to forests is more important than the actual habitat itself, so as the temperatures increase and ticks become more active, I wanted to provide some tips to all those planning to spend some time outdoors!
How to stay safe this Summer (AND Spring AND Fall)!!!
Blacklegged ticks are quite small, especially immature nymphal ticks. Ticks “quest” for a host, searching for an individual to feed from. They can be active throughout the year if it is warm enough – there are records of ticks questing for hosts in January! Regardless of the time of year, when you are out in any wooded area, take note of whether the area is considered an at-risk area. In Québec, the Institut national de santé publique du Québec (INSPQ) publishes a map every year where they have assessed risks for ticks carrying the bacteria causing Lyme disease. Check out their website to be better aware of your potential risks: https://www.inspq.qc.ca/en/node/661896
When you’re outside:
-Put on DEET (insect repellent)
-Wear pants and long sleeves
-Wear long socks, tuck pants into socks
-If you have long hair, tie it up; ticks can travel more easily in loose hair
When you’re home:
-Full body examination; get out the mirror! Ticks like hard-to-reach spots that are damp and warm; armpits, inner thighs, and head
-Shower as soon as possible; loose ticks are likely to fall off
-Wash clothes and/or put them in the dryer; too dry for ticks to survive
If you find a tick:
-Take a picture and submit it to eTick.ca. This is a citizen science initiative developed to better monitor the distribution of ticks across Canada.
-If you can collect the tick, send it to your local public health unit! Recording where ticks are and submitting them to be tested for diseases they may carry can help all of us!
-If it is not attached to you, kill it by putting it in a jar or baggy and putting it in the freezer.
If you find an attached tick:
-Use tweezers/forceps or a tick remover to take it out. The tick should be positioned perpendicular to the attachment site (ticks should be vertically up). It is very important to make sure to remove the entire tick – if you remove the tick, but the mouthpart is still attached, it can still transmit diseases. If you are not comfortable removing, go to a doctor or vet.
Stay safe and have fun!
About the Author: Erica Fellin is a PhD Candidate studying spatial and disease ecology at McGill University in the biology department. She has been bitten by turtles more times than she has been bitten by ticks.
Par Maxime Clenet, Chercheur postdoctoral à l’Université de Sherbrooke
Après un an et demi au Canada, revenir en France pour participer au congrès international de la Société Française d’Écologie et d’Évolution (SFE²) à Lyon avait une saveur particulière. C’était un retour aux sources, teinté de nouveauté : retrouver des visages familiers, plonger dans de nouvelles idées, savourer l’énergie d’une communauté scientifique toujours en mouvement.
Retrouver les visages, les idées… et les bons plats
C’était ma première grande conférence en France depuis mon départ, et elle a été marquée par des retrouvailles riches en émotions, mais aussi par de nouvelles rencontres stimulantes. J’ai été impressionné par la vitalité de la communauté française d’écologie : la diversité des approches, l’enthousiasme des jeunes chercheur·e·s, et la qualité des échanges, même en dehors des sessions formelles.
Et puis… il faut le dire : la science a meilleur goût autour d’un bon repas. À Lyon, les discussions se prolongent autour de quenelles, de pralines, ou d’un plateau de fromages, et ça compte aussi dans l’expérience d’une conférence !
Courir la ville, courir après le temps
Entre les présentations, les projets en cours et une journée supplémentaire avec le groupe de recherche en écologie théorique (GDR TheoMoDive), le programme était dense. J’ai quand même réussi à m’échapper pour quelques joggings dans la ville : les quais du Rhône, la Croix-Rousse, le parc de la Tête d’Or… Des parenthèses bienvenues pour oxygéner l’esprit entre deux sessions.
Une présentation sur les habitats qui changent dans le temps
J’ai eu l’occasion de présenter un travail qui me tient particulièrement à cœur : comprendre comment les espèces persistent dans des habitats, non seulement fragmentés, mais aussi dynamiques. Les modèles classiques de métapopulations supposent souvent un paysage figé, ce qui est loin de la réalité actuelle.
En m’inspirant de méthodes issues de la physique, j’ai proposé une approche qui prend en compte l’évolution temporelle des habitats. Cette nouvelle métrique, analogue à la capacité de métapopulation, mais pensée dans un cadre temporel, permet d’évaluer la viabilité d’un paysage changeant à long terme. Une piste prometteuse pour mieux penser à la conservation dans un monde en transformation.
Des idées qui germent
La journée avec le GDR TheoMoDive a été un moment fort. En petit comité, nous avons exploré les liens entre dynamiques écologiques et temporalité des paysages. Ces échanges ont fait germer un nouveau projet collectif sur l’écologie temporelle — une thématique encore émergente, mais porteuse de nombreuses questions fondamentales. À suivre !
En résumé?
Une semaine dense, inspirante, pleine de science, de rencontres et… de gastronomie lyonnaise. Ces moments nourrissent nos idées autant que notre motivation. Je repars avec l’envie de continuer à bâtir des ponts, entre disciplines, entre pays, entre approches, pour mieux comprendre les systèmes vivants. Comme un réseau, finalement.
À propos de l’auteur:
Je m’appelle Maxime Clenet. Issu d’une formation en mathématiques théoriques, j’ai réalisé une thèse en mathématiques sur le modèle de Lotka-Volterra en grande dimension, en utilisant des outils probabilistes. Je suis actuellement en postdoctorat à l’Université de Sherbrooke, au sein des équipes du Pr. Guillaume Blanchet et du Pr. Dominique Gravel.
Mes recherches se concentrent sur deux axes principaux : d’une part, créer des passerelles entre l’informatique quantique et l’écologie ; d’autre part, intégrer une dimension temporelle à l’étude des métapopulations et des métacommunautés.
En dehors de mes recherches, j’aime prendre le temps d’aller courir… beaucoup.
