Challenges faced by women in science

By Catarina Marcolin

English edit by Katy Shoemaker

A debate at the Institute for Advanced Studies (IEA-USP) recently got my attention, entitled “Women in the University and Sciences: Challenges and Opportunities.” If you can understand a bit of Portuguese, it is worth watching the entire video (it is only available in portuguese). The debate lasts around an hour and consists of three female scientists telling incredible statistics and surprising facts about women’s participation in the academic world, and some of these facts are really hard to believe.

So this week, I want to discuss some of the facts included in this debate. To do that, I searched for more data so we can go deeper into the subject. First of all, I was happy to find out that women represent about 50% of the undergraduate students in Brazil. We are even the majority in some areas. However, when we look only at the sciences and engineering, women make up less than 40%. At the University of São Paulo, USP, a paltry 15% of the students enrolled in engineering courses are female.

Extending beyond undergraduate education, there are also as many women as men in graduate and postdoc positions in Brazil. In fact, in 2010, more women earned Masters and Ph.D. titles than men. But again, that is not the reality in science and engineering. There is still something hampering our inclusion in these areas, including oceanography.

Number of scholarships per area in 2014. Source CNPq. Women: Feminino; Men: Masculino.

The most shocking numbers are those related to the distribution of specific research grants called PQ grants. These grants are awarded to researchers for research excellence, and they determine the distribution of funding to research projects in the country. Therefore, PQ grants directly affect our performance as researchers. PQ fellowships are tiered, and women's participation decreases as we go up each level. Note that women receive no more than 38% of these grants, even at the lowest level.

PQ research grants per level in 2014. Level 2 is the lowest category that a researcher can apply for, whereas SR is the highest level. Source: CNPq. Women: Feminino; Men: Masculino.

It is clear from these two plots that there is both horizontal and vertical segregation of men from women. Women appear to be concentrated in certain careers (horizontal), but within a career, there is a vertical separation of power, with women having low representation in the highest positions.

We find more examples of vertical segregation when we analyze leadership positions in large research groups. In Brazil there are currently 126 National Institutes of Science and Technology (INCTs). Well, 109 of those INCTs are run by men and only 17 by women. There are 6 INCTs focused on oceanography/marine science, and only one of those is lead by a woman (Antarctic Environmental Research - INCT-APA).

An all too common scenario can be seen in the Brazilian Academy of Sciences (ABC). The following data was presented by the physicist Carolina Brito (Federal University of Rio Grande do Sul) in the debate I mentioned at the beginning of this post. For a researcher to join ABC, he/she is nominated by an ABC member and a committee decides whether or not that researcher will enter. This committee is massively comprised by men, and as you can imagine, the result is not at all encouraging for female scientists. There is a list of the current ABC members on their website. There are 795 men and 122 women in ABC. From these, 15% of the men are below the 1A level in the CNPq, and only 1% of the women are below level 1A researchers. A fast interpretation we can make is this: if you want to be a member of ABC, and if you are a woman, it is almost mandatory to be a level 1A researcher or higher. For men, this standing does not have the same impact.

Unfortunately, this reality does not seem to be getting any better. In 2008, 20% of the deans in universities were women, and 8 years later, this number dropped to 10%. Although 48% of the Ph.D. holders are women, only 23% of them occupy teaching positions in our public universities. In a previous post we have addressed some of the reasons for why women quit the academic career at a higher rate than men (When to add children to the academic timeline).

So, what can we do to change that picture?

1 - The data presented here is limited. We need numbers, we need more indicators.

2 - We need training on gender issues. In France, curriculum was recently modified to discuss gender in all undergraduate courses. That sounds like a good start.

3 - We need to fund women's projects, provide scholarships, and reward them. We have very few initiatives, but these have incredible effects. Check out the post Finding self-confidence as a woman in science to see Deborah's testimony on the importance of being recognized in her area.

4 - We need role models. Young female scientists do not see people like themselves in power positions regularly enough. Socially, girls are still discouraged to pursue scientific careers that are considered "hard." From a very young age, we are overwhelmed with ancient cliches telling us how to take care of the house, how to be good wives, mothers, true ladies of our homes. We have to give girls the opportunity to fall in love with science and make them confident that this relationship can work. The L'Oreal Foundation recently conducted an opinion poll that demonstrated how Europeans feel about the role of women in science. Five thousand people were heard (men and women), and 67% said that women are not qualified to hold positions of high responsibility. The main reason being that "women would suffer from lack of perseverance, lack of practical spirit, scientific rigor, rational, and analytical spirit."

All I have to say about this is: It’s time to get to work! At the VII Brazilian Congress of Oceanography there was a round table discussion on the subject, with a crowded room of people eager to speak. Although it was an excellent experience, there is still so much to discuss. So I want to invite you all to continue this discussion. Let's talk about gender in the spaces we occupy, spread this idea! Organize an event and call everyone you know. Share your experiences with us!

References on statistics:

http://cnpq.br/estatisticas1

http://memoria.cnpq.br/estatisticas/bolsas/sexo.htm

http://inct.cnpq.br/institutos/

Two reasons to watch the documentary “Mission Blue”

By Jana M. del Favero and Catarina Marcolin

Translated by Lídia Paes Leme

Edited by Katyanne M. Shoemaker

In our first post in the Women's session “Old challenges for current women” we received a suggestion by Prof. Otto Muller P. Oliveira to post about the documentary “Mission Blue.” Indeed this documentary deserves a special mention in our blog because, aside from the excellent production, its content is simply inspiring.

The documentary “Mission Blue” was released in 2014 and tells the story of the incredible biologist Sylvia Alice Earle, explorer, author, mother, grandmother (amongst a thousand other possible titles) and her campaign to create a global coalition of marine protected areas, called “Hope Spots.”

When watching the movie, it is impossible not to fall in love with and be inspired by two “characters.” The first is the organization itself, also called Mission Blue (www.mission-blue.org), which was created in response to the prize Sylvia Earle earned in 2009 at “TED PRIZE WISH” (watch the talk here). In that talk, Dr. Earle encourages the use of all possible media (movies, expeditions, internet, new submarines) in a campaign to inspire public awareness and support for a worldwide network of marine protected areas. If these “Hope Spots” are wide enough, it could be possible to save and restore the planet's blue heart! Today, Mission Blue is a coalition of over 100 groups, from multinational corporations to groups of scientists, concerned with matters of ocean conservation. Mission Blue's website brings an interesting but scary statistic: only 2% of the World’s ocean is protected, hence the importance of this kind of effort.

Font: https://www.ted.com/participate/ted-prize/prize-winning-wishes/mission-blue

The second reason to fall in love with this film is the main character, Sylvia Earle, a woman that turned 80 in August 2015, who actively keeps studying, exploring, diving, and defending the ocean (learn more https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sylvia_Earle). Sylvia completed high school at the age of 16, undergrad at 19 and her masters at 20. During her Doctorate, this rhythm slowed down, due to marriage and kids, but soon Sylvia returned to her frantic pace. In 1964, when her kids where only 2 and 4 she traveled for 6 weeks on an expedition in the Indian Ocean. According to Sylvia, she didn't know she'd be the only woman on board, for she was invited as the only botanist, not only woman. A reporter approached her in Mombassa, Kenya, from where the ship would depart, and Sylvia remembered being interested in talking about her work, but the reporter only wanted to know about what being on the ocean with so many men would be like. After all, the article was called “Sylvia sails away with 70 men, but she expects no problems.”

Despite everything appearing well, Sylvia implies in some interviews that her scientific expeditions may have lead to the end of her first marriage. This is a recurring difficulty faced in the scientific world; it is common to have campaigns where the scientists are away for weeks, sometimes months, without any communication with family. In 1966 Sylvia finished her Doctorate, and in 1968 she traveled 30m deep in the waters of the Bahamas in a submersible, 4 months pregnant with her 3rd child and in her second marriage.

In 1969 she signed up to participate in the project Tektite, where scientists lived weeks in a laboratory placed under the sea, at 15m depth. Despite her 1000+ hours of diving experience and her excellent written proposal, she was not allowed to live together with men underwater in Tektike I. The following year however, she was invited to lead the Tektite II project, with a women-only team. The success of this team was an important milestone for women in research, and it set a precedent for future aquatic and space expeditions to include women in their teams.

Picture: Bates Littlehales.
Font: http://images.nationalgeographic.com/wpf/media-live/photos/000/450/cache/sylvia-earle-habitat-window_45011_600x450.jpg

After her experience as a mermaid, Sylvia became a popular face in the media and her career took off (we'd say, all other qualities aside, she also has a lovely face). In 1979 Sylvia walked on the ocean floor at depths never before touched by any other human. This was done using what is called a JIM SUIT, and was used at a depth of almost 400m. This adventure resulted in the book “Exploring the Deep Frontier.”

Image: Dr. Sylvia Earle in Deep Rover Submarine. Font: http://ww2.kqed.org/quest/wp-content/uploads/sites/39/2012/05/Sylvia-Earle-in-a-Deep-Rover_horiz.jpg

In the 80's, together with the engineer Graham Hawkes, she started a company to create submersible vehicles, like Deep Rover. This partnership ultimately led to her third marriage, one where the offspring were the submarines created by them. One of her daughters currently works with her in her company.

When asked if she had problems reconciling family and career, Sylvia says yes, many, and that she tried to rearrange her life, having a laboratory and a library at home. For women that dream about following a scientific career, Sylvia advises “Try, you'll never know how it would be if you don't try.”

Font: http://mission-blue.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/IMG_1065.jpg

Other than the documentary itself, we recommend this short video: http://voices.nationalgeographic.org/2013/06/14/in-her-words-sylvia-earle-on-women-in-science/?source=newsbundlearticles

Attention before boarding!

by Catarina Marcolin

Image by Caia Colla

Hello to all again. It has been some time since I last wrote for this blog, even longer since I've boarded a ship, but many memories came to me after the World Ocean Day. Most memories are good, but some, not so much.

In posts published on this blog, you might have read about the adventures of working at sea, diving to the bottom of the ocean, or traveling the world in foreign ships. But working on an oceanographic vessel is not always a fantastic experience, especially if you are a woman.

It is important to be mindful that, when on a ship, one is also confined, surrounded by the ocean. Often, there is no access to a telephone, no internet, no way of visiting friends or family, and no way of going home whenever you want. In at least the last five oceanographic cruises I have participated in, I met only one female crewmember - she was a nurse on a supply ship which assisted oil platforms. On oceanographic ships, don't expect to see crew-women. In the scientific crew, yes, it is easier to find women, even when there's clear preference for men, because many tasks involve body strength. There's a need to carry boxes, nets, flasks, and other heavy equipment. But that’s not all! To be successful, the science crewmembers need strong skills in leadership, taking initiative, communication, management, and dealing with equipment. The work is very challenging, but against the common sense, I met women that are far better than a lot of guys in crew.

I was once stopped from boarding a boat that was poised for my doctoral research, under the “argument” that there were no suitable facilities on the boat for a woman.

If you think that this isn’t a big deal, and that this male to female imbalance in passengers on ships is normal, maybe you can imagine some level of vulnerability that women may be subjected to in such an environment. I have always been aboard research cruises with large groups of researchers and wonderful ship crews. I have always been treated with respect. Unfortunately, this level of respect is not always found in day-to-day research cruises.

To illustrate this vulnerability, I interviewed two biologists that told me about very inadequate situations they've been through while aboard a boat off of the Brazilian coast. In this post I'll tell the story of one of them; she decided to stay anonymous, so I'll refer to her as M.

CWN: Have you ever been excluded from an expedition so a man could go in your place?

M: That has never happened to me, although there is a preference in our laboratory for men to go, under the argument that there is a need to carry heavy objects on board.

CWN: How many times have you worked on a boat, and in how many of those trips did you feel uncomfortable or find yourself in inconvenient situations that made you feel insecure?

M: I have been on four cruises. Two of them put me in very uncomfortable situations, and I felt insecure in one of them.

CWN: Could you share a story about an uncomfortable situation you've been through?

M: I was on a ship twice, consulting in an environmental monitoring study. One of the crewmembers that worked on the deck made constant jokes about my accent. But he had issues with other members of the staff too.

The second situation, the one that made me feel insecure, happened on a ship that I rather not say the name of or the institution it's related to. I never thought I would go through that experience on a vessel connected with such a respectable institution. I had heard rumors about expeditions from the past, and I confess, I was a little worried about this experience, but I never thought that what happened, could have.

Some of the crewman had very inappropriate behavior. Everyday we would share the dining room with them. Before we had the chance to finish our meals, some of them (that had a high position in the boat's hierarchy) would play music videos of half-naked women (funk, axé, pagode) that always had images of men and women in insinuating situations, alluding to sexual acts, and very loud. Aside from that, every day there was drinking, and the crew would exhaustively offer us alcoholic beverages, especially to women, with the clear intention of trying to get us intoxicated. They would try to exalt their merits all the time, as an attempt of conquest. I would leave the room when those activities started, and some men would come after me asking why I wouldn't join them, insisting, and harassing me.

This didn't bother only the women, several of our male colleagues were also bothered, but they never spoke up. This situation kept growing, leading up to my next story. It is important to say that this was not everyone's behavior. While we were harassed by some, other crewmen treated us respectfully.

On one particular day, there was a get-together with a barbecue, and drinking started early in the morning. One of the crewmen drank so much he threatened to jump off of the boat, which caused a lot of confusion and trouble. During dinner, one of our male colleagues was eating while one of the falling-over drunk crewmen, spilled beer on the table. After a useless effort to clean it, he threw a dirty napkin on our colleague's plate, which really upset our colleague, as the action was interpreted as a racist move.

Facing all of that mess, I could not even have dinner that day because of all the embarrassment. I went to the pantry to get a piece of fruit and stopped for a while to talk to one of the crewmen about the situation. Then, another drunk crewman came over and started asking questions about one of my female colleagues. I tried to leave, but he kept stopping me and asking me to bring my friend. The other crewman that I was talking to defended me, so I could get out. I realized there were a lot of crewmembers feeling a sense of indignation, because their professional class could not tolerate this kind of behavior. What left me feeling more insecure was the fact that we could never talk to the captain of the ship; we could never see him and he never answered our calls or our contact attempts.

Luckily for us, one of the crewmen took our case to the captain, who took some action, we don't know what, but we didn't see the crewman that caused most of the trouble again. We were called to a meeting with the chief mate that finally listened to our claims and had a meeting with the “troublemakers,” forbidding the use of alcohol, the insulting videos, and the behaviors that caused us discomfort. The captain asked the harasser to publicly apologize to me and my colleague (about the dinner event), but nothing else happened to the other harassers.

During that expedition, something broke on the ship, so it was not possible to collect all of our research samples. The ship lost its speed and couldn't sail properly. The ship didn't land where it should have, taking us straight to the final destination, and the reason for that was not disclosed to us researchers. It took seven days to get to the final spot, all while we didn't know what was happening.

This same ship and crew were available to us again to finish the work that was not concluded. I was again in that expedition, and thankfully, we didn't have any other embarrassing situations arise.

However, there was a stressful and worrying situation. We were dragging a bongo net, which was supposed to go down to 200 m. We realized that was taking too little time. We found out that the person responsible for operating the hoist received orders from a superior crewmen to release less rope than needed so the work would be finished faster, which compromised our sampling and data quality.

CWN: Why do you think the crewmember responsible for the operations tried to sabotage your work? Do you think it was ignorance or a deliberate attempt to “get revenge”?

M: I have no idea. We didn't get an explanation. We don't know if it was revenge, if it was disrespect for us being women (the chief of the expedition was a woman), if it was laziness, impatience to get back home, disrespect for the work environment… Anyway, whatever the motive was, it is very lamentable for all it represents, and it is a waste of public money!

It is also very important to consider the loss of valuable scientific information, caused by irresponsible and unreliable work from the ship crew. This is especially true for the current state of our country, where obtaining resources for field collections in ocean research has been increasingly difficult.

In the end, all stories I hear and share show clearly that while on a ship, being it for scientific research or parallel consulting, there is prejudice coming from the male crew towards women. Women are still thought of as the “fragile sex.” This inappropriateness makes life on board even more challenging when the day-to-day work already demands physical strength and adaptations to the labor done in an environment ruled by the movement of the marine currents. 

For plankton, size matters

By Catarina R. Marcolin

Today, I want to discuss a subject that has fascinated me since I started my PhD. We are often asked “What is you PhD about?” and the general reaction of grad students is simply to avoid the subject or to just reproduce the title (some long and complicated name that nearly nobody, let alone ourselves sometimes, is able to understand). Or we simply say that it is too hard to explain with simple words. Notice how this sounds like we think too much of ourselves: we are very smart and outsiders will never be able to understand what took us so long to embrace.

Well, that is exactly the kind of attitude that the grad student should avoid. This blog is designed to be a place where academia may connect with society. I had a beloved professor that used to say that every grad student should be able to explain his/her project to his/her grandmother, and only once we accomplish that, would we finally be confortable with the theory behind our research. So, I’ll try to do exactly that, a little late I confess since I have already finished my PhD. I’ll explain in a simple – but not simplistic – way the work I developed during my PhD.

I am interested in plankton, more specifically, the zooplankton! No, I’m not referring to SpongeBob’s villain, but they are nonetheless, interesting creatures worth knowing a bit more about. Zooplankton are tiny aquatic critters, usually invisible to the naked eye. They are traditionally described as organisms that travel with the currents because they don’t have enough “strength” to swim against it, due to their small size. But that does not mean they are lazy guys. On the contrary, many of them are able to vertically migrate large distances through the water column, sometimes hundreds of meters, on a daily basis.

Watch video in: http://laps.io.usp.br/index.php/en/projects/81-english/laps/projects/97-samba

Example of food chain.
Source: http://lifeadrift.info/

Zooplankton are very important in marine food webs, and they are also fundamental to other important processes in the oceans (we can discuss that in another post). These organisms feed on phytoplankton (the photosynthetic plankton that are to the oceans, what the trees are to the Amazon Forest) and are eaten by fish, which are ultimately eaten by larger fish, marine mammals including whales, and even us humans. So you can imagine that if there are few plankton in the area, there will also be less fish and other organisms in higher trophic levels. This includes a limited supply of fish for us, which means less sushi, and I love Japanese food!

If zooplankton are so important in mediating the transfer of biomass and energy from primary producers (phytoplankton) to higher trophic levels (fish, birds, whales, man) then we must understand these feeding relationships very deeply, don’t you agree? Well, one of the golden rules in the ocean is that organisms always (or almost always) feed on organisms that are smaller than themselves. That is why size matters when zooplankton choose the dinner menu. Many researchers have studied the flow of biomass and energy through the trophic levels. For example, it has been calculated how much of a “dinner” is actually absorbed by a zooplankton and how much is left to the fish, birds and whales that feed on the same guy. This information can potentially explain a lot of things about the oceans.

But how? Well, if you measure the size of organisms, calculate their weights, and plot this information in a graph, such as the one in this page, you will notice that there is always more biomass accumulated in the small organisms than in the bigger ones. By accumulated biomass I mean the biomass of all organisms in that particular size range. What does that mean? It means that to satisfy the hunger of one big guy, it is necessary to have a whole bunch of small guys. You must remember there is energy loss in every “meal” because total nutrition is never absorbed with everything that we, or any other organisms, eat.

Based on these facts, the biomass size spectra theory was developed. This theory relates the shape of the biomass distribution through size classes (and also the mathematical indices associated with it) with properties of the ecosystems. Personally, I think it is absolutely amazing how a simple mathematical index can be used to determine the energy transfer efficiency in an ecosystem, taking into account productivity, predator-prey interactions, and the number of trophic links in the oceans.

My PhD was based on this theory with a scary name (spectra tends to conjure images of ghosts, no?), but the theory is not as complex as it seems. To get my data, I collected zooplankton samples with a simple net (as seen in the photo) aboard several cruises. When back in the lab, all I had to do was to scan my samples with a waterproof scanner (the ZooScan), and very useful software automatically classified, counted, and measured the size of each organism. I also learned how to program in R and Matlab to analyze the enormous amount of data for me, because life is short and I have other hobbies in addition to science to dedicate myself to, such as this blog!

The results I found for the coast of Ubatuba, Sao Paulo and Abrolhos Bank revealed that the mathematical indices associated with the biomass size spectra theory can be used to detect differences in the zooplankton community caused by seasons and local features (water column stratification, depth, proximity of the coast). That means these indices are useful for monitoring oceanic ecosystems because they are easily calculated – granted you have technology to help – and there is no need to identify species, which is usually a time-consuming task when we are talking about plankton.

If you are interested in the subject, my PhD dissertation is available at this link:

http://www.teses.usp.br/teses/disponiveis/21/21134/tde-12052014-173357/pt-br.php.