Division of Natural Sciences

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 21 Sep 2026 16:37:15 +0000

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant Rachel Sauer Mon, 09/21/2026 - 10:37

Hope Kerrigan

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� mathematician earns competitive grant to fund scholarships and mentoring for academically talented, low-income students pursuing STEM degrees

Rebecca Machen, an assistant teaching professor in the University of Colorado Boulder Department of Mathematics, has been awarded a grant from the highly competitive National Science Foundation (NSF) program for Scholarships in Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics (S-STEM).

Machen, principal investigator on the award alongside co-principal investigators Tamara Sumner and Evy McUmber, will receive $2 million between January 2027 to December 2032 for scholarships that aim to support students facing financial barriers to completing STEM degrees.

Rebecca Machen is assistant teaching professor in the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Department of Mathematics.

Twenty-four students will receive scholarships averaging approximately $12,500 annually for up to five years. This support will also give recipients access to peer mentoring, cohort building, academic coaching, professional development and internships.

The program builds on the investigators’ previous ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� experience. Machen served as director of STEM instruction in the Student Academic Success Center (SASC), which has supported low-income students since the 1970s. McUmber is a chemistry faculty member in SASC and brings extensive experience working directly with its students, while Sumner has led NSF-funded initiatives and helped strengthen and elevate the project as it developed. Together, the team is building on SASC's longstanding academic and community-support model while adding a level of sustained financial assistance and a network of campus partners that had not previously been integrated at this scale.

This project's overarching goal is to increase STEM degree completion among high-achieving undergraduates with financial need, ensuring the number of STEM graduates can keep up with the ever-advancing demand in developing technologies. The project will be formally evaluated by an outside party using matched-comparison analyses of retention, time-to-degree and job or graduate-school placement, contributing to the broader knowledge base on what tangibly helps low-income students succeed in STEM.

"Financial need continues to be a significant barrier to accessing and completing higher education," Machen said. As fields like artificial intelligence, quantum science, robotics and biotechnology continue to grow, she wants talented students from all economic backgrounds to have the chance not just to earn degrees in these areas but to see themselves represented in the careers shaping the future. "This program gives students the financial, academic and professional support they need to pursue those opportunities," she added.

The National Science Foundation's S-STEM program specializes in increasing the number of academically talented, low-income students with demonstrated financial need who earn degrees in STEM fields. The program also aims to improve the education of future STEM workers and generate knowledge about the academic success, retention, transfer, graduation and career pathways of low-income students. This year, NSF is funding numerous S-STEM projects nationwide, including ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��'s, as part of its Track 2 cohort.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about mathematics? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� mathematician earns competitive grant to fund scholarships and mentoring for academically talented, low-income students pursuing STEM degrees.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Jeswin Thomas/Unsplash

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs

Rachel Sauer — Fri, 18 Sep 2026 19:19:38 +0000

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs Rachel Sauer Fri, 09/18/2026 - 13:19

Kaio Kish

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researchers develop a tool that can model phytoplankton biomass extremes in the ocean in ways that conventional satellites often can’t

Phytoplankton, the tiny, single-celled organisms that live in oceans, are more important than some realize. They are the base of the marine food web and help countless other species in the oceans thrive and survive.

Satellite technology and its continuous advancements have given the world a better understanding of the oceans and the life within them, specifically phytoplankton. But gaps still remain in what satellites can show about the activity of phytoplankton.

Unfortunately, phytoplankton and the oceans they call home are suffering, says Nicole Lovenduski, a University of Colorado Boulder professor of atmospheric and oceanic sciences (ATOC) and director of the Institute of Arctic and Alpine Research (INSTAAR). “You can think of (phytoplankton) as the grasses of the terrestrial biosphere,” she says. “They’re the things that build the foundation that everything else eats.”

In a recently published study conducted in partnership between ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� and the National Center for Atmospheric Research (NCAR), Lovenduski and her research colleagues found that despite what can be seen through satellite imagery, a lot of phytoplankton is obscured—often by clouds or low sunlight.

A mixed phytoplankton community. (Image: Stephanie Anderson/University of Rhode Island/NASA)

The researchers set out to discover what the observational limitations were in detecting phytoplankton biomass extremes in the oceans, building a satellite emulator that mimics the same blind spots a real satellite would encounter: sea ice, clouds, low sun angles. This allowed them to compare what the model predicted to what the satellite actually saw, ultimately revealing the gaps between the two. By combining interdisciplinary expertise, they were able to find the holes in detecting these phytoplankton biomass extremes.

"Statistically, by definition, there have to be extremes in everything—you think about a normal distribution (referencing phytoplankton bloom events), the extremes are on the tail of that bell curve, so mathematically they must exist,” Lovenduski explains. “And I found maybe four papers on this, and that was it. Why isn’t anyone writing about this?... And then I had the a-ha moment: It's because no one can see them in the satellite data."

As Lovenduski explains, extremes are important for the ecosystem: “If there's a huge phytoplankton bloom, that's going to have ramifications for the whole ocean ecosystem in that region. Similarly, if blooms fail to occur, that's going to be devastating for the ecosystem.”

These high extremes refer to a higher-than-normal concentration of phytoplankton in one specific region or area. On the other hand, if a bloom is supposed to happen and it doesn’t—a low extreme—marine life in that region that rely on phytoplankton for their diet can be severely affected, which in turn causes a ripple effect across other species in the ocean.

Combining clouds, ocean and ice

To study these issues, Lovenduski worked with ATOC PhD graduates Genevieve Clow and Samuel Mogen, an INSTAAR postdoctoral scholar, as well as ATOC Professor Jennifer Kay and Michael Levy and Keith Lindsay of the NCAR Climate and Global Dynamics Laboratory. The researchers aimed to find a better way to visualize these mysterious single-celled organisms that do so much for our marine ecosystem.

To solve the problem of limited visualization of phytoplankton, the team built what they call a satellite emulator within an Earth system model—a tool that allows them to “see” the modeled ocean the same way a satellite does.

"It is an approach that they've used in atmospheric science before to simulate satellite observations of clouds, and we apply that approach to a completely different thing, which is the pigment chlorophyll in the ocean,” Lovenduski says. “Our ability to detect that from space turns out to be a really important limit on our ability to detect extremes.”

Chlorophyll, a green pigment that phytoplankton and plants use to absorb sunlight, plays a similar role in phytoplankton as it does in plants. It is why large phytoplankton clusters and algae appear green. Chlorophyll helps phytoplankton turn sunlight, water and carbon dioxide into energy while releasing oxygen.

However, because of the limitations caused by cloud coverage blocking satellite imaging of chlorophyll, Kay emphasizes that using field samples as well as satellite imagery is vital to a model: “You can learn so much from the assets that we have in space, and sometimes those assets, while providing an incomplete picture of things, can also provide the space-time perspective that's super important for understanding this change in variability.”

Kay also mentions that a combination of field sampling and the use of satellites are critical to understanding what's going on in the oceans, noting how her group often partners with Boulder-based NCAR scientists to validate Earth system models with data.

As a key part of the research, Clow developed a tool that ran model simulations on a computer. Clow flew a virtual satellite inside the model, sampling the modeled ocean similar to how a real satellite would see the ocean.

Conventional atmospheric satellites wait for reflected light to bounce off the ocean and come back up but, Lovenduski notes, so “if there's a cloud in the way and if the sun angle is really low, there's not enough radiation to come back to the satellite, so we made sure that we included that effect in the model. And if there's sea ice growing on the surface of the ocean, (the satellite) can't see the chlorophyll underneath, but the model still predicts what the chlorophyll is.”

A phytoplankton bloom off the coast of Iceland. (Image: NASA)

By being able to account for these discrepancies in the model, Clow says that the main takeaway from this research is that “our observations of phytoplankton are limited, and that we need to combine observations and models in order to gain a complete picture of what's happening with phytoplankton in the ocean."

One of the most significant findings in this research included the fact that globally, satellites can only detect about 10% of daily low extremes and 19% of daily high extremes. Kay explains that clouds “obscure what you can view in the ocean. It's hard to penetrate into it, and from space you're not going to get that kind of information.”

Clow’s idea for an Earth system model study arose from that issue: “Satellites can only see the surface of the ocean, but in some regions, phytoplankton tend to grow much deeper, and so what satellites can see at the surface isn't representative of what's happening throughout the water column,” Clow explains, adding that this is the main issue with being able to visualize the amount of phytoplankton in a given area.

The stressed oceans

Despite the technical advances represented in the model, the researchers express concerns about the state and health of Earth’s oceans.

“There are so many environmental stressors that are hitting the ocean all at once, so it's getting warmer, and that is in turn is causing the ocean to lose oxygen with time,” Lovenduski says. “That also is making it more difficult for nutrients that are below the surface to get up to the surface and fuel this biological productivity that's so important for the marine food web.

“In addition, the ocean is taking up carbon dioxide from the atmosphere, which is great for mitigating global warming but actually causing the ocean to become acidic. So, the ecosystems of the ocean are experiencing simultaneous difficult stressors all at once. It doesn't paint a very nice picture."

Phytoplankton observability matters as a sign of what’s happening in our climate, the researchers say. Kay points out that fisheries and other marine-based industries rely on knowledge of extreme events happening in the world. “If we have a heat wave in the atmosphere, we’re kind of miserable,” she says. “So, it can affect life in the ocean as well.”

Kay notes that though Colorado is far from the ocean, residents here still experience similar effects: “I think we can start to expect warmer days and more heat waves and more demand on water resources. I think we all felt that pretty acutely in Colorado this past winter, having 80-degree days in March when we're supposed to have the peak snowpack.”

“Make the model look like reality”

The recently published paper is an important step in continuing research. Clow is beginning a post-doctoral research position at the Scripps Institute of Oceanography, where she’ll model the impact of fish on the carbon cycle.

Lovenduski’s group is applying the “make the model look like reality” idea to a fleet of ocean floats that “live forever, they don't ever run out of battery like the real world floats, but they also can do a profile every four hours instead of every 10 days.”

This, she says, will allow the team to, “improve the frequency of sampling, and then we can look at what an ideal float configuration in the real world looks like for the thing that you're interested in sampling.”

Kay is working with a newly launched satellite, called EarthCARE, to better understand the water cycle and how the energy budget and resources will be affected by measuring precipitation near the surface.

The researchers note that the experience of developing a tool to model the detectability of phytoplankton biomass extremes in the ocean, as especially the interdisciplinary approach to this work, is informing their further research.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about atmospheric and oceanic sciences? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researchers develop a tool that can model phytoplankton biomass extremes in the ocean in ways that conventional satellites often can’t.

Traditional

White

Top image: A green phytoplankton bloom in the Gulf of Finland. (Photo: NASA)

Students sending a text for help

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 17 Sep 2026 22:09:51 +0000

Students sending a text for help Rachel Sauer Thu, 09/17/2026 - 16:09

Tiffany Plate

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Assistant Professor Tamar Kodish is leveraging modern technology to break down barriers to mental health resources at community colleges

Mental health is a significant topic of concern on many college campuses these days. Recent estimates suggest that approximately one in three students at four-year colleges and universities experience mental health issues such as anxiety and depression.

At community colleges, however, that number could be as high as one in two students.

“Community college students tend to face a lot more contextual stressors,” says Tamar Kodish, assistant professor in the University of Colorado Boulder Department of Psychology and Neuroscience. “There are much higher rates of food insecurity and houselessness. And they are significantly more likely to come from lower socioeconomic backgrounds, or to be racial and ethnic minorities.”

Psychology and neuroscience Assistant Professor Tamar Kodish used a human-centered approach to design a text messaging strategy to encourage students to use free mental health resources. (Photo courtesy Tamar Kodish)

Through prior research, Kodish became interested in exploring different strategies to encourage community college students to access available mental health resources on campus. She began asking, “What can we do to try to improve engagement in mental health services for people who might be at risk of not getting care that they need?”

That question led to a research study, recently published in the journal JMIR Formative Research, examining how the right text messages, sent to students at the right time, could be key to ensuring valuable mental health resources reach the students who may need it most.

Taking a STAND for mental health

Kodish, who received her PhD in clinical psychology from UCLA, received funding for the pilot project through UCLA’s STAND ALACRITY Center, a research center under the UCLA Depression Grand Challenge (DGC). The Center’s aim is to improve the mental health care available to community college students through a new model called STAND. Center researchers are studying how to improve/optimize STAND through a research program at East Los Angeles College.

STAND—which is short for Screening and Treatment for Anxiety and Depression—is an adaptable, scalable system of care that includes screening, treatment and ongoing monitoring of mood and symptoms of depression and anxiety.

Students who choose to engage with STAND first answer different questions about their mental health through an online assessment; based on their responses, they’re triaged into one of three levels of treatment.

Students who have mild symptoms of depression and anxiety are given a self-guided, online wellness program, while those with moderate symptoms receive a digital mental health program, including peer-to-peer coaching support from certified STAND coaches.

Students with severe symptoms are eligible to get clinical therapy—sometimes with psychiatric support—that’s delivered remotely. DGC researchers are testing new approaches to allocating treatment by creating a data-driven algorithm that accounts not only for symptom severity but also for other social and structural factors, like food and housing security.

An example of a text message Kodish’s team developed—alongside community college students—to help identify the barriers and stigmas around receiving mental health care. Students would then receive tailored responses based on their selection. (Illustration courtesy of Tamar Kodish)

Research has shown that the STAND approach works. In a 2023 study, more than 500 UCLA students who engaged with one of the three levels of care showed measurable improvement in depression and anxiety scores.

Encouraging uptake, increasing engagement

Those 500 students, however, were just a portion of the 3,500-plus students who initially took the online screening.

“We found that only 14% of students who were eligible for STAND services actually got started with treatment, so we were losing tons of people along the way,” says Kodish. That led her and her colleagues to explore new ways of keeping people from falling off the continuum of care.

Kodish was also interested in seeing how this engagement might differ at a community college, since the previous study, like many others, was only conducted at a four-year university. "We don't know nearly as much about community college students,” says Kodish. “They're a super underrepresented, and super diverse, group.”

So Kodish headed to East Los Angeles College (ELAC)—where the STAND at ELAC program had been underway since 2022—armed with a new idea for reaching students where they are. “I got really interested in text messaging as a potential approach based on what I had seen in the literature, and from what I knew from talking to college students.”

She began by inviting students on campus to focus groups and asked open-ended questions about what they saw as barriers to engaging with the STAND resources. The goal was to find ways to communicate with students who either dropped off in the middle of taking the STAND screening or completed the screening but didn’t engage with the resources that were delivered to them.

A blueprint for eye-catching texts

“Overall, students were really enthusiastic about using text messaging,” says Kodish. “They felt like it was feasible, it was easy, it was convenient and it would fit into their lives.”

After the focus groups, she asked a subset of those students—19 in all—to help design the messages themselves. “They definitely wanted something that was multimedia,” says Kodish. “They said, ‘They can't be too long, they can't be too spammy, and they need to have imagery and videos to draw you in and differentiate them from other random messages.’”

Kodish’s team took their directives, drafted the look and content of the messages and then returned them to the students for further input before incorporating them into the STAND protocol.

While the current study doesn’t explore how to keep students engaged once they’re in treatment, Kodish says she believes this initial “uptake” phase of the process is still vitally important. “If you don't get people's foot in the door, then sustainment doesn't even matter,” she says.

Personally, Kodish hopes as many students as possible at least take the online screening offered by the program. “They’re getting really valuable information,” says Kodish. “Even if they have mild symptoms or no symptoms, they're getting some information about their mental health status that they might not otherwise have.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about psychology and neuroscience? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Assistant Professor Tamar Kodish is leveraging modern technology to break down barriers to mental health resources at community colleges.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Eugene Chystiakov/Unsplash

Visualizing the brain with 3D-printed models

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 15 Sep 2026 15:59:07 +0000

Visualizing the brain with 3D-printed models Rachel Sauer Tue, 09/15/2026 - 09:59

Blake Puscher

3D-printed model brains are more accessible and ethical than conventional alternatives, says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Jennifer Stratford

When studying anatomy, students often use models, which recreate the structure of an organ or other part of the body in a form that is easy to study.

Although donor bodies are generally considered the gold standard in higher education because they are the only resource that allows students to directly study real anatomy, the number of donor bodies is limited, making them difficult to access, especially in low- and middle-income countries.

Models are somewhat more accessible, but if they are anatomically accurate, similar challenges apply, because they must be based on real donor anatomy to provide educational value. Accurate models are also expensive. However, if educators could 3D print their own models, cost would be less of a barrier, says Jennifer Stratford, a University of Colorado Boulder teaching professor of psychology and neuroscience.

Jennifer Stratford is a ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� teaching professor of psychology and neuroscience.

In a recent analysis conducted with colleagues in the CU Anschutz Modern Human Anatomy Program as well as other institutions, Stratford details the learning benefits of 3D printing brain models.

Why brain models?

Neuroanatomy, or the anatomy of the brain and other parts of the nervous system, is a challenging yet important area of study, according to Stratford. Clinical specialties like neurology, psychiatry, anesthesiology, radiology, physiotherapy and more rely in part on knowledge of the brain to correctly diagnose and treat patients. However, Stratford explains, “the human brain is much more difficult to understand than other organs.

“If I showed you a model heart, you could make some educated guesses about how the heart works,” she continues. On the other hand, “if I give you a model of a brain, and I asked you how you think it works just by looking at it, it is almost impossible to guess. That makes learning neuroanatomy tricky,” Stratford adds, and it makes resources that can help students learn particularly valuable.

“I think a lot of people do not realize all the effort, expense and ethical considerations that go into a human brain model,” Stratford says. “It can cost hundreds—if not thousands—of dollars to buy that model from a company.” Additionally, “a lot of original brain models were created without asking for permission,” whether from cadavers that a lab had access to or from bodies that were donated without specific consent to make models based on the brain.

While brain models are more accessible than donor brains, they can still be difficult to obtain, especially in large enough numbers for a whole class of students. 3D printing addresses this by giving educators the option to produce anatomical models themselves at a reduced cost, either using brain scans they take themselves or data from open-access repositories like the CU Modern Human Anatomy Hub, which was created by the research team behind the paper. Putting scan data online comes with additional ethical considerations, but the authors provide ways of managing these, such as data anonymization, and online resources make it possible for people all over the world to create their own models.

“What 3D models help us do is to give students, other educators and the public the opportunity to hold some of these specimens in their hands,” Stratford says.

Collecting and processing data

Stratford and her co-authors describe a five-step process that educators can follow to create and use a 3D model, beginning with selecting or acquiring a model of the brain. These models are ready to use, but if an educator wants a custom model, it can be created from patient data or a physical, donated specimen.

A revised Bloom's taxonomy applied to 3D prints of neuroanatomy, explaining learning objectives at each step of the taxonomy. (Infographic courtesy the paper authors)

Patient data includes CT and MRI scans of the brain or other nervous-system structures. A 3D object can be extracted from this data using a process called segmentation.

“All the patient data, at least that we use, is digitally created with a computer, but it does not have all the brain structures picked out,” Stratford says. “It is not very clean, so one of the goals of extraction is to clean up the 3D rendering of the brain, both making it more crisp, but also highlighting different areas.”

This process also can be described as “removing artifacts.” In this context, artifacts are errors introduced by the way information is captured, such as a lens flare in a photograph.

Additionally, the different regions of the brain are not easily distinguishable from raw data, so highlighting some of them can make the final product a better teaching tool. According to Stratford, while some programs can segment data automatically, they are still new and error prone, so most people currently do segmentation by hand, and it can be one of the more labor-intensive parts of the rendering process.

Physical specimens can also be turned into 3D models using scanning technology, including commercial 3D scanners or even digital cameras or smartphones. Scanners make models by measuring the distance between the scanner and the surface of the object, while cameras algorithmically combine a series of photos in a process called photogrammetry. Scanning also introduces some artifacts, so digital editing is necessary either way, and it is considered the second step in the process.

Thirdly, Stratford and her co-authors recommend licensing the model with a Creative Commons license and making it open access online. Creative Commons is a nonprofit organization that has developed free copyright licenses designed to help content owners reserve some rights while waiving others. In this case, a Creative Commons license would allow the owner or owners to retain control over how their work is used while making it free to access. According to open access principles, research literature and especially medical resources should be free so that healthcare providers are not prevented from taking advantage of potentially vital information by paywalls or other such barriers.

An example of 3D brain prints by printing level. (Infographic courtesy of the paper authors)

Printing and using models

The fourth step is to actually 3D print the model. This requires converting data collected in the first step into instructions the printer can use, which is done by software applications called “slicers,” referencing how most 3D printers create physical objects by laying down material in layers or “slices” of the object.

“That’s what we do in 3D printing in general,” Stratford says, “not just for brains. It is like you are printing multiple sheets every time, and each sheet is made of little bumps in different places, and then you push those together to make a 3D rendering.”

This step can vary significantly in terms of cost and complexity depending on the model of printer and type of materials used. To reflect this, Stratford and her colleagues split the printing process into three difficulty levels ranging from beginner to advanced. According to Stratford, while the beginner level is cheapest and requires only a basic 3D printer, it limits the product to a single color.

“They are really cheap and easy to make, so those are the type I typically use when I do outreach. If somebody drops something, I am not worried if they get damaged, and I am not looking for a ton of detail there.

“From there, you can get more sophisticated. Different 3D printer models that are more expensive can print, for instance, in two colors,” she continues, allowing different parts of the brain to be color-coded. “For instance, you could highlight what is called the spinothalamic tract. That is one of the classic pathways in the brain, but anatomically, it is hard to pick out on its own.”

Multiple colors help with this by creating contrast. The most expensive 3D printers allow for the use of more than two colors.

“One of the things we used to 3D print” at Anschutz, Stratford says, “was taste buds from your tongue. In your taste buds, there are lots of different cell types, and so we could make each cell type a different color and then have that printed in the 3D model. It was really cool to see how that looked.”

Besides different colors, printers can use different filaments (the materials the models are made from), some of which are easier to work with than others. A beginner print may use bioplastic (PLA) filament, which is less expensive and does not have a strong odor, but models made from PLA can be brittle. Advanced printing may involve multiple materials or higher-quality materials like resin. However, both require more expensive printers, and liquid resin releases toxic fumes, so personal protective equipment is needed when working with it.

Finally, once the model has been printed, it can be used for education.

“One of the things they are really useful for,” Stratford explains, “is when you want to teach the overall structure of the brain. That is called gross neuroanatomy. Being able to give individual groups of students their own models can be helpful. Because traditional models are so expensive, most classrooms cannot afford to have more than maybe two or three.”

Because 3D-printed models are cheaper, the ratio of models to students can be better. “For instance, in my class of about 45, we had 15 models to work with, so even though people had to triple up, it is much better than having only one or two models for people to look through.

“Another aspect is, you are generating models based on real brains, whereas if you buy an anatomical model from a company, that is more like a cartoon of the brain. So, what is nice is that you can show a student what your brain actually looks like. Students really do identify with that. I will ask students, ‘What is the biggest thing that sticks out in your mind from this semester?’ And many of them will say it is the 3D models, because it seems so personal.”

For example, models can show what different neurological diseases and types of brain damage look like as well as how they differ from each other.

“It addresses so many different needs. It is better from a teaching perspective, the ethics are better compared to past options, and it is just more widely available,” Stratford says. “Growing up and as a young person, I did not have a lot of access to these things, just because they were so expensive. So, I am really excited about the opportunities this provides to people.”

James P. Lister, Andrew Cale, Zach D. Stetter, Jamie E. Cronin, Steven R. Summers, Paul G. McMenamin and Maureen E. Stabio are co-authors of this paper.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about psychology and neuroscience? Show your support.

3D-printed model brains are more accessible and ethical than conventional alternatives, says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Jennifer Stratford.

Traditional

White

Michael A. Kelberman named a Simons Foundation Fellows-to-Faculty Award recipient

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 03 Sep 2026 20:42:54 +0000

Michael A. Kelberman named a Simons Foundation Fellows-to-Faculty Award recipient Rachel Sauer Thu, 09/03/2026 - 14:42

Hope Kerrigan

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� postdoctoral researcher receives a grant supporting his work on the intersection between social bonds and brain aging

Michael A. Kelberman, a postdoctoral fellow in Zoe Donaldson’s lab in the University of Colorado Boulder Department of Molecular, Cellular and Developmental Biology, has been named a 2026 Simons Foundation Fellows-to-Faculty Award recipient—one of five awardees supported through the Simons Collaboration on Plasticity and the Aging Brain (SCPAB) this year. The award comes with a three-year, $600,000 faculty research grant.

Michael A. Kelberman, a postdoctoral fellow in Zoe Donaldson’s lab in the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology, has been named a 2026 Simons Foundation Fellows-to-Faculty Award recipient.

Prior to his postdoctoral work at the University of Colorado Boulder, Kelberman received his Bachelor of Science in biochemistry and molecular biology from the University of Massachusetts Amherst and earned his doctorate in Neuroscience from Emory University. While a graduate student in David Weinshenker’s lab at Emory, Kelberman used electrophysiology, optogenetic-fMRI and behavioral assays in rodents to uncover how noradrenergic locus coeruleus function is disrupted by dementia-related pathology.

Kelberman joined Donaldson’s lab in October 2023, which uses monogamous prairie voles to understand how disease affects the neural and genetic basis of social bonds. In the Donaldson lab, Kelberman developed a niche, studying the overlap between dementia and social bonds.

The SCPAB Fellows-to-Faculty program represents a natural extension of his research interests, where he will use prairie voles to study how pair bonds and their supporting neural systems evolve over the lifespan and influence cognition.

“I am honored to have been selected as one of this year’s recipients of the Simons Foundation SCPAB Fellows-to-Faculty award,” he says. “I look forward to continuing and expanding my work on how our closest social relationships contribute to healthy aging, with the goal of developing socially informed interventions that prolong health in the face of challenges brought about by aging.”

The Simons Foundation’s Autism & Neuroscience Research Initiative (SFARI) specializes in advancing the basic sciences of autism spectrum disorders. This year, the foundation is funding 10 recipients through SFARI and five through SCPAB to support early-career scientists as they transition from postdoctoral research into an independent, tenure-track faculty position.

Kelly Martin, executive vice president of SFARI, expressed enthusiasm about welcoming this accomplished cohort of scientists into the Simons community: “Their diverse expertise, including clinical insights and computational approaches, reflects the increasingly interdisciplinary nature of basic science, and we look forward to seeing all that they accomplish.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about molecular, cellular and developmental biology? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� postdoctoral researcher receives a grant supporting his work on the intersection between social bonds and brain aging.

Traditional

White

Climate crisis behind bars is heating up

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 01 Sep 2026 20:13:23 +0000

Climate crisis behind bars is heating up Rachel Sauer Tue, 09/01/2026 - 14:13

Bradley Worrell

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� sociologist David Ciplet explains why climate change and incarceration are deeply connected

Listen to this story
We are piloting AI audio versions of our stories to expand access to our content. Tell us what you think!

As climate change intensifies, discussions about vulnerability often focus on coastal communities, agricultural regions or low-income neighborhoods. Much less attention is paid to the 1.2 million people incarcerated in U.S. prisons—many of whom face extreme heat, flooding, wildfire and other climate-related hazards with little ability to protect themselves.

For David Ciplet, a sociologist in the University of Colorado Boulder Department of Environmental Studies whose research focuses on climate change and inequality, that oversight represents a significant gap in both climate research and public policy. His recent paper in Environmental Politics examines U.S. incarceration in a changing climate, focusing on prisons as places where environmental vulnerability and social marginalization overlap.

As Ciplet sees it, climate-related threats such as extreme heat, flooding, hurricanes and wildfires can be especially dangerous for incarcerated individuals because they have very little control over their environment. They cannot choose where they live, leave an overheated building or escape a facility threatened by natural disaster, he notes.

David Ciplet is a sociologist in the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Department of Environmental Studies whose research focuses on climate change and inequality.

At the same time, Ciplet says people who are incarcerated are increasingly being called upon to fight wildfires and respond to other climate-related disasters, but often they don’t receive training and protection comparable to professionals, or fair compensation for their work.

“How we treat those who are most vulnerable says something about our society and priorities,” he says.

From studying climate equity to prison conditions

Ciplet did not begin his career studying prisons.

His earlier research focused on making climate policy more equitable. That included work with the Just Transition Collaborative at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��, which aimed to ensure that local governments’ climate policies not only prioritized addressing the environmental impacts of climate change but also didn’t contribute to rising costs or other adverse effects for low-income residents and other vulnerable communities.

As he explored questions about vulnerability and environmental justice, Ciplet says he began hearing about dangerous conditions inside Texas prisons during periods of extreme heat. Many of those facilities lack air conditioning despite increasingly extreme summers, which can result in incarcerated people enduring prolonged exposure to temperatures that can pose serious health risks, he adds.

That struck Ciplet as an obvious blind spot.

“My research has always focused on people who experience the greatest harms,” he explains. “Prisons are not the only place where that occurs, but they are one of the most severe.”

Because incarcerated individuals have no agency over where they live or control over the temperature in those facilities, Ciplet argues, it makes prisons impossible to ignore when considering who is most vulnerable to climate change.

A population largely hidden from public view

One reason the issue receives so little attention, Ciplet believes, is that most Americans never see prison conditions firsthand. Correctional facilities operate largely out of public view.

As a result, Ciplet says assumptions about prison life often differ significantly from what incarcerated individuals experience. That invisibility shapes public understanding—and ultimately public policy, he says.

Ciplet emphasizes that the American public should be concerned about climate conditions in prisons because incarcerated people are human beings deserving of basic dignity.

“I think it’s also important to point out that many (people in prisons) are incarcerated for nonviolent offenses and some were convicted under circumstances that are contested,” he says. “More broadly, there are all kinds of inequalities within our criminal legal system that disproportionately affect people who become incarcerated and how people are treated once they are in the system.

“Even if someone believes incarceration is appropriate in some cases, subjecting people to unbearable or dangerous conditions is not going to improve society, so it makes little sense.”

At the same time, Ciplet says there is the practical aspect of caring about prison conditions.

“Most people who go to prison will eventually return to their communities,” he says. “We should create dignified conditions that support successful reintegration, rather than exposing people to extreme physical and mental distress during confinement. Access to a healthy environment is a basic human right.”

Climate risks are growing

Climate-related threats to incarcerated individuals are not hypothetical, Ciplet says.

“Most people who go to prison will eventually return to their communities,” says ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher David Ciplet. “We should create dignified conditions that support successful reintegration, rather than exposing people to extreme physical and mental distress during confinement. Access to a healthy environment is a basic human right.”

He points to rising temperatures in Colorado prisons as one example. He notes that the average temperature in Colorado has already risen by about 2.5 degrees Fahrenheit since the 1980s and is projected to increase by an additional 2.5 to 5 degrees by 2050.

“A few degrees may not sound dramatic, but if someone is already confined to a cell that reaches 95 or 100 degrees, those additional degrees matter,” Ciplet says. “We’re also seeing more extreme heat days and heat waves lasting for longer periods of time. The experience of enduring a single hot day is very different from enduring a week of extreme temperatures.”

Heat is only one concern.

“Beyond heat, incarcerated people are vulnerable to floods, hurricanes, wildfires and other natural disasters. Because incarcerated individuals cannot leave those dangerous conditions, climate impacts can be particularly severe for them,” Ciplet says.

He adds that climate change magnifies the vulnerabilities already built into the prison system.

The complicated role of prison labor

Ciplet sees a certain irony in that incarcerated people are often not only victims of climate-related conditions but are also part of the response, as many states rely on prison labor during emergencies.

Incarcerated workers may clear debris after storms, assist with disaster recovery or serve on fire crews battling destructive wildfires. While supporters of those efforts might point to benefits such as work experience and valuable job training, Ciplet argues it should also spur deeper questions about prison work conditions.

“In many states, incarcerated people play important roles in disaster responses, including firefighting. Yet they often are not given the same equipment and training as people who are not incarcerated and typically they are not fairly compensated for their work,” he says. “If incarcerated people are playing a major role in protecting us from natural hazards associated with climate change, we should be providing them with training and protective equipment and fair wages, as well as career pathways when they come out of prison.”

Typically, once individuals who are incarcerated complete their sentences, they face barriers that prevent them from pursuing careers in firefighting despite the valuable experience they gained while incarcerated, Ciplet says.

Meanwhile, Ciplet has reservations about correctional facilities making use of prison labor to manufacture solar panels, wind turbines or other carbon-reducing technologies. While tasking people in prisons with manufacturing “green” technologies sounds like a positive development, Ciplet says there is an underlying concern.

“Any system that becomes dependent upon prison labor can create incentives to maintain or expand incarceration,” he says. “I think we should be moving in the opposite direction.”

It’s that same concern, he says, that gives him pause when distressed communities sometimes seek to host a correctional facility as an economic development project.

“Rural communities—especially those that may have lost major industries, such as coal mining—absolutely need strong economic opportunities. The question is: What kind of development best serves those communities over the long term?” Ciplet asks. “I think we should be investing in forms of economic development that create healthy, sustainable opportunities without depending on or expanding prison populations.”

If more people knew how harmful some of the conditions in prisons are related to climate impacts, I do think people would care. I think most people believe basic human rights should be protected.”

Imagining something different

Although much of his research focuses on examining systemic problems, Ciplet also looks for examples that challenge assumptions about what prisons can become once they are shut down.

For example, he notes that some communities have proposed converting former prisons into affordable housing, community centers or facilities serving unhoused residents. Others have explored using former prisons for renewable energy projects. Ciplet points to proposals of transforming New York City’s Rikers Island correctional facility into a site for a renewable energy project.

Such projects remain uncommon, Ciplet acknowledges. Still, he says they suggest that communities are not limited to choosing between maintaining prisons and building new ones, as other possibilities exist if policymakers are willing to consider them.

For his part, Ciplet’s goals extend beyond publishing academic papers. Through the Climate and Incarceration Research Collective, which he directs, he and his colleagues are partnering with formerly incarcerated individuals in Colorado to better understand how extreme heat and cold affect health during incarceration and what policy changes could reduce those risks.

Ciplet says that work reflects a broader philosophy that research should not just describe inequality but help to address it. He says he believes climate policy can unintentionally reinforce existing injustices if decision-makers fail to consider who bears the costs. At the same time, thoughtful policy can improve environmental outcomes while advancing fairness, he says.

Asked if he is optimistic about whether society is moving toward a more equitable and sustainable future, Ciplet offers a mixed assessment.

“We are seeing policy rollbacks related to climate action, including expanded drilling and mining and reductions in support for clean-energy initiatives. At the same time, there has been a return in some areas to criminal legal priorities focused more on punishment than prevention and restorative justice,” he says.

Still, Ciplet says he remains positive.

“”I’m always hopeful,” he says. “National politics make large-scale change challenging in the near term, but there is considerable potential at state and local levels. Also, major shifts can happen unexpectedly, and public opinion can change rapidly. I am particularly encouraged by younger generations, who consistently demonstrate a strong commitment to addressing climate change.”

In the near term, Ciplet says he believes the lack of public awareness regarding extreme climate conditions incarcerated people face remains one of the biggest challenges in terms of addressing the issue.

“If more people knew how harmful some of the conditions in prisons are related to climate impacts, I do think people would care,” he says. “I think most people believe basic human rights should be protected.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about environmental studies? Show your support.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� sociologist David Ciplet explains why climate change and incarceration are deeply connected.

Traditional

White

Top photo: Pexels

What does a scientist look like?

Rachel Sauer — Thu, 20 Aug 2026 23:05:47 +0000

What does a scientist look like? Rachel Sauer Thu, 08/20/2026 - 17:05

Cody DeBos

In STEM, the stereotypes go beyond gender, asserts PhD candidate Sheba Aikawa

Ask a kindergartner to draw a scientist, and there’s a good chance a male figure will appear below the tip of a crayon. Decades of research have documented this tendency. Its persistence despite strong efforts to increase diversity in STEM fields points to something stubbornly embedded in the way society imagines who belongs in science.

Sheba Aikawa, a sixth-year social psychology PhD candidate in the University of Colorado Boulder Department of Psychology and Neuroscience, wanted to push the established literature further.

“We wanted to understand whether adding race would change how people perceive who ‘fits’ the scientist stereotype,” she says.

Sheba Aikawa is a sixth-year social psychology PhD candidate in the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Department of Psychology and Neuroscience.

The answer, it turns out, is that stereotypes of who “should” be a scientist and how scientists look aren’t limited to gender.

Who fits the mold?

Aikawa’s interest is in exploring ideas of identity, perception and belonging.

“Broadly, my research examines what factors promote welcoming spaces and how negative stereotypes may lead to hostile environments across healthcare, academia and workplace settings,” she says.

Working under Eva Pietri, an associate professor of psychology and neuroscience, Aikawa’s latest study builds on earlier work establishing that traits associated with scientists are more strongly linked to men than women.

Published in the journal Group Processes & Intergroup Relations and co-authored by graduate student Nadia Floyd and Bernadette Park, professor emerita of psychology and neuroscience, the study asks whether that pattern holds when race is added to the conversation.

“We focused on scientists specifically because we wanted to examine whether the gender bias identified in previous research would hold when considering race. But our findings also have broader implications for understanding STEM bias more generally,” Aikawa says.

Across four experiments involving more than 1,100 white and Black participants, the results were consistent.

What the data reveals

Participants were asked to estimate what percentage of Black men, Black women, white men and white women society views as possessing scientist traits. This includes both positive traits like being analytical or meticulous as well as negative ones like being robotic or unsociable.

Across every study and across both white and Black participant groups, white men were perceived as most likely to possess scientist traits. Aikawa wasn’t surprised by this, but what the data revealed next was more interesting.

“What we found was that Black men and Black women were viewed similarly on scientist-related traits,” Aikawa says. “This suggests that racial stereotypes may be a particularly important factor shaping perceptions of who is seen as belonging in science.”

The gender gap documented in prior research, with men outpacing women in perceived scientific fit, essentially disappeared among Black individuals. Along the same lines, scientific perception of both Black men and Black women was rated lower than white women.

“The finding that race mattered more than gender did not necessarily surprise me,” Aikawa says.

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� researcher Sheba Aikawa and her colleagues found that although there was no difference between white women and Black men and women on negative scientist traits, study participants rated white women as higher on positive scientist traits than Black men and Black women.

She points to multiple studies from her lab consistently supporting the idea that race plays a “powerful role in shaping perceptions across different contexts, including healthcare.”

“We know there are pervasive stereotypes that portray Black people as less competent, which could affect perceptions of both Black men and Black women,” Aikawa adds.

More than a number

The real-world implications of Aikawa and her team’s findings are huge. Stereotypes and perceptions about who looks like a scientist shape the decisions made by people in positions of power and determine who gets an opportunity to carry out important research or further their education.

“Even people who value diversity may unknowingly hold assumptions about who looks like a scientist or who seems naturally suited for STEM,” Aikawa says. “Awareness does not necessarily mean that people recognize how those beliefs influence their own judgments and behaviors.”

Those biases emerge early, even in children as young as five to six years old, and have persisted across generations. However, she sees signs of societal change moving in the right direction.

“We’re seeing more diverse representations of scientists in children’s media through characters like Doc McStuffins and Ada Twist, Scientist. Increasing visibility of diverse scientists helps broaden children’s understanding of who belongs in STEM.”

She also has a longer outlook.

“I’m optimistic that these perceptions of scientists can change. In fact, I would hope that if someone replicated our studies 100 years from now, they would find very different results.”

And though the findings might appear disheartening at first, Aikawa feels they could be empowering. The feeling of not fitting in, she argues, is not a verdict on a person's potential. By shifting the focus away from individual shortcomings and onto broader societal perceptions, she hopes minorities in STEM see that they do belong.

“The problem is not that Black women are less capable of being scientists; the problem is that society's image of a scientist has historically been narrow and exclusionary,” she says.

Who gets to be a scientist?

For any Black woman who has ever walked into a lab and felt like she didn't quite belong, Aikawa has a message to share.

“If you have ever felt like you don’t fit the stereotypical image of a scientist, that feeling is not simply a reflection of your abilities or potential,” she says. “If you've ever questioned whether you belong in STEM, our findings suggest that those feelings may stem from societal stereotypes rather than from a lack of talent, intelligence or potential.”

In many ways, expanding and redefining what a scientist looks like is exactly how these stereotypes change over time.”

On an individual level, Aikawa also reminds prospective Black scientists that they don’t have to fit society’s mold.

Addressing these stereotypes, though, requires more than individual awareness. Changing perceptions, both internally and societally, takes a collective effort.

Aikawa experienced this firsthand through the Boulder Black Blossoms program at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��. Led by Christina Alston, director of the Office of Graduate Access and Retention and faculty affiliate in the School of Education, the program creates a community for Black women in STEM and education graduate programs.

“What I appreciated about this program is that it did not just focus on individual resilience—it focused on creating belonging, connection and support within an academic environment. Those types of structural and community-level supports are critical for helping historically underrepresented groups thrive in STEM,” Aikawa says.

Ultimately, Aikawa sees the work of dismantling harmful stereotypes in STEM as an ongoing, collaborative effort. She says being aware of the stereotypes is an important first step. Increasing diversity in STEM fields and building supportive communities and mentorship networks is equally important.

Over time, she notes, these efforts compound to reshape society’s perspective on who gets to be a scientist.

“In many ways, expanding and redefining what a scientist looks like is exactly how these stereotypes change over time.”

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about psychology and neuroscience? Show your support.

In STEM, the stereotypes go beyond gender, asserts PhD candidate Sheba Aikawa.

Traditional

White

Top image: scientists Albert Einstein, Rebecca Lee Crumpler, George Washington Carver and Marie Curie

National monuments must be preserved in perpetuity

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 18 Aug 2026 00:47:26 +0000

National monuments must be preserved in perpetuity Rachel Sauer Mon, 08/17/2026 - 18:47

Jeff Mitton

Natural wonders that belong to all Americans should not be carved up or given away

The first humans to set foot in North America walked across the Bering Strait the last time glaciers were full. The glaciers held so much water that the sea level dropped 400 to 425 feet compared to today's levels, turning the Bering Strait to the Bering Land Bridge.

The bridge might have risen from the sea as early as 20,000 years ago, and it might have submerged as late as 11,000 years ago. Stone, bone and wooden implements can be dated to estimate when sites were occupied, such as the Lindenmeier site (14,000 years ago) in Larimer County or the Mahaffy Cache near Gregory Canyon in Boulder (13,000 years ago).

��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� Professor Emeritus Jeff Mitton in a giant alcove in Utah's Neon Canyon known as the Golden Cathedral. It has a large opening in its ceiling that becomes a waterfall after a rain. (Photo: Jeff Mitton)

The first white man to set foot in North America was Leif Erikson, a Norseman who established a colony in Newfoundland around 1,000 CE. It was abandoned 10 years later. A Spanish colony was established in St. Augustine, Florida, in 1565, and an English settlement was founded in Jamestown, Virginia, in 1607. The Pilgrims landed at Plymouth Rock in Massachusetts in 1620.

My reason for this abbreviated history is to remind people of the uncontested history of America. When the Pilgrims stepped ashore 461 years ago, the continent had already been occupied for 14,000 years by numerous (between 2 to 7 million) and diverse people organized into hundreds of Indigenous tribes. Claims that America is and has always been a white, Christian country have no basis in fact.

In the short time since the earliest European settlements, many shameful things have been done to Indigenous peoples—massacres, forced marches, confinement to reservations, children disappearing from government schools, the list is tragically long.

Two wonderful things happened recently. In September 1996, President Bill Clinton set aside 1.7 million acres in Utah as the Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument. In December 2016, President Barack Obama set aside 1.35 million acres as the Bears Ears National Monument, also in Utah. Indigenous tribes were jubilant, for they considered these areas to be their sacred ancestral lands.

But in addition, six regional tribal entities were given advisory roles in stewardship and protectional of cultural resources for the Grand Staircase, and five regional tribal entities were given similar roles for Bears Ears. Sacred lands were protected and Indigenous tribal entities would share responsibilities for both management of the national monuments and protection of the sites and remaining artifacts, pictographs and petroglyphs.

In December 2017, President Donald Trump cut the sizes of the monuments by 85%. In October 2021, President Joe Biden re-established the monuments to their original sizes. In July 2026, President Trump hacked the national monuments a second time, by 90%.

President Trump justified his cuts to the national monuments as providing greater opportunities for energy extraction, or more precisely, mining and drilling. He also noted that this would increase the area open to cavorting about and ripping up the landscape with four-wheel drive and all-terrain vehicles and dirt bikes.

President Trump rewards the incredibly rich CEOs of mining and drilling companies while neglecting the interests of Indigenous Americans and the people who treasure wildlife and spectacular landscapes. People seeking to minimize President Trump's slashes of the monuments might point out that no one has been forbidden to go to the places, they are just being declared "multi-use."

That sounds good, but it is vacuous. Have you ever tried to share your intended camping sites or hiking trails with a mine or a cluster of drilling rigs? Can you imagine camping beside razor wire, roaring pumps and brilliant lights? Once again, broken promises from Washington dash the hopes of Indigenous tribes.

But it is not just the Indigenous who are crushed. While the elected politicians in Utah favored Trump's gift to the rich, 70% of the people in Utah wanted the monuments to remain as they were established. Americans are proud of their national parks, and they believe that they were set aside for future generations, in perpetuity. They believe the same for national monuments—I know I did.

National parks and monuments are superb places to see plants, animals and stunning landscapes as they were naturally. They belong to all the people, and one billionaire should not have the right to gift them so that they can be used for profit.

A pot abandoned in Bears Ears National Monument around 1280 CE, when people migrated southward to escape a severe and prolonged drought. (Photo: Jeff Mitton)

Bears Ears National Monument and Grand Staircase-Escalante National Monument have scenery that rivals scenery of most national parks. I have camped in Bears Ears seven times and Grand Staircase eight times, and each adventure is a treasured memory. I took a six-hour hike and climb in Bears Ears to see a pot that was abandoned in 1280 CE, when the area was abandoned due to a lingering drought. It is believed that the pot has not been moved since that time.

In the Grand Staircase, I took a hike (twice!) on slick rock into the Escalante Canyon and up into Neon Canyon to see a giant alcove known as the Golden Cathedral. It has a large opening in its ceiling that becomes a waterfall after a rain. During a dry spell, climbers lower themselves by rope through the opening.

I have no faith, so do not consider these monuments sacred, but I have the conviction that these monuments, as they were initially drawn, are so grand and unique that they must be preserved in perpetuity. It would be a national shame, a travesty, just as it would be to let Glacier, or Rocky Mountain, or Yosemite national parks to be carved up into mining claims.

The way out of this tragedy is not apparent to me. But I feel strongly that one man should not have the right to give away what should belong to all, forever. I believe that a national vote on the future of these treasures would set them aside in perpetuity.

Jeff Mitton is a professor emeritus in the Department of Ecology and Evolutionary Biology at the University of Colorado Boulder. His column, "Natural Selections," is also printed in the Boulder Daily Camera.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about ecology and evolutionary biology? Show your support.

Natural wonders that belong to all Americans should not be carved up or given away.

Traditional

White

Top photo: The Citadel, with cliff dwellings (not visible) that were easily defended when enemies came to the Bears Ears. (Photo: Jeff Mitton)

Rebecca Safran wins American Ornithological Society Elliott Coues Award

Rachel Sauer — Tue, 18 Aug 2026 00:15:35 +0000

Rebecca Safran wins American Ornithological Society Elliott Coues Award Rachel Sauer Mon, 08/17/2026 - 18:15

The ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� ecology and evolutionary biology professor is recognized for her research on barn swallows and other avian groups, which has taken her across the world

Rebecca Safran, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the University of Colorado Boulder, has been awarded the Elliott Coues Award by the American Ornithological Society (AOS). The AOS is the world’s largest international ornithological society focused on the scientific study and conservation of birds.

The Elliott Coues Award recognizes outstanding and innovative contributions to ornithological research with no limitation to geographic area, sub-disciplines of ornithology or the time during which the work was done. The award, which consists of a medal and an honorarium, is named in honor of Elliott Coues, a pioneering ornithologist of the western United States and a founding member of the American Ornithologists Union (now AOS).

Rebecca Safran, a professor of ecology and evolutionary biology at the ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ��, has been awarded the Elliott Coues Award by the American Ornithological Society.

“I am honored by this recognition of the research we do in our lab group at the University of Colorado Boulder,” Safran said. “My first-ever scientific meeting was an AOS conference. I attend these meetings with students as often as I can for the best research updates on bird studies from around the world. There is always something new and exciting to learn. I am humbled to receive this award; past awardees are my academic heroes and have inspired much of the work many of us do today.”

In recognizing Safran, the AOS noted that she and her research group have traveled across the world to study barn swallows (Hirundo rustica) and have conducted comparative analyses on other avian groups as part of efforts to study the evolution and maintenance of population differentiation using ecological, genomics and behavioral studies.

Safran and her team established their research lab at the University of Colorado in 2008, where Safran's teaching is focused on speciation and science communication. She is the founding co-director of Inside the Greenhouse, which has a mission to find creative ways to communicate the science of climate change.

In naming Safran as an Elliott Coues Award winner, the AOS said she is passionate about the evolution and conservation of wild bird populations, interdisciplinary collaboration, art-science connections, issues related to belonging in STEM, natural history and providing learning opportunities for students at all stages of their education.

Safran is an AOS elective member (2011) and an elected board member of Environment for the Americas and the Colorado Environmental Film Festival. She is an elected fellow of the AOS (2016), the Animal Behavior Society (2024) and the American Association for the Advancement of Science (2026).

Safran previously received AOS travel grants in 1999 and 2003 and an AOU research grant in 2001. This support was key for Safran’s research and conference participation during graduate school. Safran noted she is grateful for the support the AOS now provides to members of her team for their research and conference attendance.

Safran said her work is not possible without the collaboration of students and colleagues and through funding by several entities including the AOS and National Science Foundation. Wherever she goes (and sometimes to the dismay of others walking with her), she is always on the lookout for H. rustica and their mud cup nests.

Safran earned her PhD at Cornell University, followed by a postdoctoral fellowship at Princeton University.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about ecology and evolutionary biology? Show your support.

The ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� ecology and evolutionary biology professor is recognized for her research on barn swallows and other avian groups, which has taken her across the world.

Traditional

White

Research shows flowering plants formed rainforests 10 million years earlier than previously thought

Rachel Sauer — Mon, 17 Aug 2026 15:40:38 +0000

Research shows flowering plants formed rainforests 10 million years earlier than previously thought Rachel Sauer Mon, 08/17/2026 - 09:40

Rachel Sauer

CU Museum curator adjoint Gary Upchurch and colleagues find evidence in ‘botanical Pompeii’ that forests of tropical flowering plants thrived millions of years before dinosaurs’ extinction

In the Jose Creek Formation of south-central New Mexico near the town of Truth or Consequences is what researchers call a “botanical Pompeii.”

There, preserved in volcanic ash, is fossil evidence that flowering plants became dominant in forests a lot earlier than previously thought—almost 10 million years earlier.

“There was a dogma that I helped create back in the ‘80s, which was that tropical-style rainforests, dominated by angiosperms (flowering plants), did not really get established until the Cenozoic (about 66 million years ago),” explains Gary Upchurch, CU Museum curator adjoint and former University of Colorado Boulder postdoctoral researcher. “There may have been some farther back in very isolated regions, but there is a big expansion of this type of vegetation in the early Cenozoic.

Gary Upchurch, CU Museum curator adjoint and former University of Colorado Boulder postdoctoral researcher, and his research colleagues found evidence that flowering plants formed rainforests 10 million years earlier than previously thought.

“So, I published papers on that back in the ‘80s, with the caveat that there may be some little bits here and there that are older.”

Over many years of research in the Jose Creek Formation, Upchurch and his colleagues discovered some of those “little bits”: diaspores, or the seeds and associated dispersal materials of flowering plants, dating back nearly 76 million years—almost 10 million years before an asteroid strike that led to the mass extinction of dinosaurs. They detail their findings in a paper recently published in the journal Science.

Previously, Upchurch explains, it was thought that flowering plants became dominant on the landscape only after this mass-extinction event, but the diaspores he and his colleagues unearthed in New Mexico say otherwise. They tell a story of angiosperms that developed large, fleshy fruits even before the rise of placental mammals and modern birds—which eat the fruit and help disperse the seeds—encouraged them to do so.

An anomaly in the geologic record

“Flowering plants themselves are an anomaly in the geologic record because all the major phyla of plants occur in a very narrow window of time, basically by the Late Devonian [382 to 359 million years ago] into the Carboniferous [359 to 299 million years ago],” Upchurch says. “The flowering plant lineage must have been around then, but we don't see anything that we would call flowering plants until the Cretaceous [145 to 66 million years ago].

“There are some tantalizing remains that go back further in time, but the oldest that everybody would agree on is about 140 million years old. Now, flowering plants started off as weedy plants, perhaps in forest understories, and their seeds were small and dispersed mostly without help, maybe a little wind. One of the debates has been, when did they become big? When did they become dominant on the landscape?”

As a postdoctoral paleobotany researcher at ��Ҵ�ý�ƽ�� and longtime professor at Texas State University, from which he retired in 2020, Upchurch contributed to longstanding ideas in paleobotany and paleoecology that flowering plants thrived after the dinosaurs.

Throughout his research career, though, he has encountered evidence challenging those ideas. One of his earlier papers detailed an angiosperm leaf assemblage with rainforest structure in the Mid-Cretaceous Dakota Formation of Kansas that’s about 100 million years old. And recent papers by different authors describe Campanian-age tropical rainforests in northern Mexico and North Africa.

He also repeatedly encountered bias in the fossil record having to do with the fact that “so many of our fossil deposits are from coastlines and carbonaceous deposits,” he says. “And when you look today in places like the southeastern U.S., the swamps tend to be dominated by conifers, even though more broadly flowering plants are the dominants.”

Upchurch says he began researching in the Jose Creek Formation almost by accident. During his postdoctoral studies, one of his focuses was end-Cretaceous extinction and coming up with evidence for mass mortality of vegetation in response to the asteroid impact, followed by recovery.

Around that time, noted geologist Greg Mack of New Mexico State University called Upchurch and said he had some fossils that he’d like somebody to look at.

“And whenever Greg Mack says that, you go, ‘Oh, my god, here’s my career,’” Upchurch says.

Seed and fruit fossils found in the Jose Creek Formation of south-central New Mexico. (Image: Cindy Looy and Jaemin Lee/UC Berkeley)

So, beginning in 1991, Upchurch and later members of his lab began studying a series of locations that turned out to be Late Campanian Age, about 76 to 72.1 million years ago, and that were far inland from the epicontinental seaway that traversed North America during the Cretaceous.

What they found was angiosperm dominance in at least some of the assemblages they studied, especially those that were developing not in swamps but in well-drained soils like those in the Jose Creek Formation.

Larger-than-expected fruit

To dig further into this dogma-busting evidence, Upchurch recruited students to join the research, one of whom was Dori Contreras, now director of paleontology and curator of paleobotany at the Perot Museum of Nature and Science in Dallas, Texas.

During her PhD studies at the University of California Berkeley, Contreras continued pursuing this research, working with her advisor, Cindy Looy. Analyzing the reproductive structures of the samples that Upchurch, Contreras and their research colleagues collected over the years, UC Berkeley PhD student Jaemin Lee found in the well-preserved specimens evidence of larger-than-expected fleshy fruit—about the size of a blueberry.

“One possible reason for this had to do with the fact that we were not dealing with fruits and seeds that got washed into the nearest pond,” Upchurch explains. “We were dealing with material that had basically been dropped from the parent plants into a volcanic ash bed that was preserving both the forest leaf litter and the diaspores. It’s a Pompeii type of situation.

“There’s a series of volcanic ash beds where we have radiometric dates as well as different types of fossil plant material—we have leaves, we have diaspores, we have exquisitely preserved petrified woods, both of conifers and angiosperms.”

Further, the diaspores they found suggest an ecological evolution toward humid and shady tropical forests rather than sunny, open environments and dispersal assistance by extinct mammals and birds, Upchurch says.

In ecology, he explains, organisms broadly reproduce via r-selection or K-selection. R-selection is all about numbers: disperse a huge number of small seeds and figure a tiny percentage will germinate and become established. K-selected species, on the other hand, have bigger diaspores and the focus is on survival and establishment because conditions might not be ideal—say, the shade of a tropical forest floor.

Upchurch notes that while previously held ideas about angiosperms weren’t wrong—they did, in fact, abundantly flourish after the asteroid hit Earth—they were incomplete.

“As a scientist and a researcher, sometimes there have been moments I wasn’t expecting, these rare golden finds,” he says. “But the most important thing I’ve done is simply observe.”

Jaemin Lee, Dori L. Contreras, James G. Saulsbury and Cindy V. Looy contributed to this research.

Did you enjoy this article? Subscribe to our newsletter. Passionate about the CU Museum? Show your support.

CU Museum curator adjoint Gary Upchurch and colleagues find evidence in ‘botanical Pompeii’ that forests of tropical flowering plants thrived millions of years before dinosaurs’ extinction.

Traditional

White

Top illustration: An artistic rendering of the forest understory in the late Cretaceous based on fossils from the Jose Creek Formation in New Mexico. (Illustration: Brian Engh/LivingRelicProductions.com)

Division of Natural Sciences

Rebecca Machen awarded $2 million National Science Foundation grant

Related Articles

Scientists get a clearer picture of phytoplankton sustaining ocean food webs

Related Articles

Students sending a text for help

Related Articles

Visualizing the brain with 3D-printed models

Related Articles

Michael A. Kelberman named a Simons Foundation Fellows-to-Faculty Award recipient

Related Articles

Climate crisis behind bars is heating up

Related Articles

What does a scientist look like?

Related Articles

National monuments must be preserved in perpetuity

Related Articles

Rebecca Safran wins American Ornithological Society Elliott Coues Award

Related Articles

Research shows flowering plants formed rainforests 10 million years earlier than previously thought

Related Articles