future ICRS ideas
emueller at mote.org
Wed Nov 8 10:54:23 EST 2000
Although some of you may be tiring of the discussion regarding the future
direction of the ICRS, I think this discussion is essential to help guide
the format of future meetings. In past "lives", I have attended much
larger meetings in several other scientific areas - biomedical, chemical
and engineering. None of these large meetings adopted an innovative
format - they merely ran many concurrent sessions. But I think that coral
reef scientists are generally different from attendees in those meetings
in that we have very diverse interests under the umbrella of "reef
science". Indeed we must in order to understand these complex systems. So
the old format works for some areas of science because research directions
are often highly focused and only a few sessions are of interest to a
given scientist (this is, of course, a generalization with many
Many good ideas have been circulated and there are more to come. Here are
1) Because we all have something to learn from each other, I think we need
a meeting format that maximizes synthesis, demonstrating consensus
where present and vigorous discussion of controversial and emerging
issues.With this in mind, here are some format ideas (similar to some
already suggested but I lost the relevant email references in my over
zealous expunging of the inbox!).
a) Invited plenaries in perhaps 12-20 key sub-fields (i.e. geologic
processes, reef fish ecology, coral physiology, etc., etc.) with
specific instructions to the speakers to discuss areas of consensus
and controversy. 45 minute talk with at least 45 minutes for
discussion. There must be multiple microphones and judicious
oversight by a moderator to maximize audience participation.
Students and others that may not wish to comment will have the
opportunity to hear diverse opinions. Suggest two sessions in AM and
2-3 in the afternoon. Such a format requires a large hall but
reduces the need for many medium-sized rooms in addition, perhaps
reducing conference cost.
b) Another way that consensus and controversy can be presented would
be via panel discussions with audience participation. Similar
topical and time format as above.
c) Poster presentations would be essential unlimited so that anyone may
present their results. A large room would be required and two
sessions would likely be necessary (but posters should be up at
least 2 days).
2) In addition to the plenaries and (perhaps) transcripts of the ensuing
discussions, all poster authors would be invited to submit a
manuscript. I do not agree that all should be published but limitation
should be based on peer-review and not financial or arbitrary page
3) The idea of electronic publishing is excellent for the many reasons
that others have cited. The final abstracts and manuscripts should be
distributed via CD but searchable Web publishing of abstracts would be
particularly valuable prior to the meeting.
4) Finally, I would like to encourage participation in regional meetings.
Hopefully, these can be kept manageable in size and give more authors,
particularly students, opportunities for oral presentations.
Erich Mueller, Ph.D., Director Phone: (305) 745-2729
Mote Marine Laboratory FAX: (305) 745-2730
Center for Tropical Research Email: emueller at mote.org
24244 Overseas Highway (US 1)
Summerland Key, FL 33042
Center Website-> http://www.mote.org/~emueller/CTRHome.phtml
Mote Marine Laboratory Website-> http://www.mote.org
Remarks are personal opinion and do not reflect institutional
policy unless so indicated.
More information about the Coral-list-old