Something to Chew On

This episode brings another timely discussion about the challenges caused by the current worldwide pandemic. Dr. Caterina Scoglio, Paslay chair professor in the Mike Wiegers Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Kansas State University, explains the use of modeling in predicting the spread of epidemics. Dr. Scoligo specializes in developing theoretical models for the spread of disease. By using a generalized epidemic model framework software for the simulation of spreading, she apples models developed by her team to human and animal infectious diseases. Scoglio has developed models for the movement of ebola in Africa and protein corona formation in nanoparticles, which has been validated by experimental data. She has also developed network architectures and protocols for secure communication in smart grids.

Transcript:

How the Analysis of Big Data Joined with Biological and Social Scientific Research Helps in Understanding a Pandemic Spread, with Dr. Caterina Scoglio, Professor in Electrical and Computer Engineering

Now, in my experience, the predictions are very hard. So predictions for what I think are only valid in short term. So maybe it is possible to predict how many cases will be New York tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. But I cannot I think is very hard to say how many deaths will be in total during the epidemic right now. So I think those are whatever, making the comparison about the different scenarios that is the best use of the model.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello, everybody, and welcome back to something to chew on. Managing life within a worldwide epidemic that necessitates both isolation and outreach provides an underlying platform to focus on what we can do in the moment to help. Today's guest, Dr. Caterina Scoglio, Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering at Kansas State University, has been instrumental in developing big data based methods to understand how to help in the moment. An interdisciplinary approach to her work has provided Dr. ScaleIO with the ability through modeling systems to tackle questions of disease outbreak by developing new tools to provide a risk assessment before infection happens and guidance in implementing preventative measures. Dr. Scoglio's research focuses on developing network based technology and tools in several fields. She conducts research in network theory problems and develop solutions to real world problems in the fields of computer networks and infectious diseases modeling. She has developed theoretical models, and has applied models and tools developed by her team to human and animal infectious diseases. today's podcast is again being recorded through zoom. Jon, Scott Courtney, our guest, Dr. Caterina Scoglio, and I are all practicing social distancing. As we converse through the phone on our computer connections, the current challenges with COVID-19 in the US and around the world are on the upswing, and we're facing ordeals that many of us never considered possible here. However, there are those that have considered this possibility and focus a good portion of their life's work on just this type of situation. Here in Manhattan, Kansas, the National bio and agro defense facility is nearing completion. This facility will focus on protecting the national food system against threats of potential impact of serious animal diseases. Additionally, K State is home to the Biosecurity Research Institute where comprehensive infectious disease research and teaching on threats to plant animal and human health is carried out. Research in the fundamental science of infectious outbreaks is critical but understanding the social science side of how people manage these situations, and the way in which these activities promote the spread of infection is equally critical. K State does have the ability to marry the social aspects with big data analysis and identify potential for the spread of these diseases. Today, I would like to welcome Dr. Caterina Scoglio, to the podcast. Catarina, your training is in electronic engineering, which on the face of it to me seems a long way from research carried out and Biosecurity Research Institute or other science based activities.

Yes, that is true. That is true. As a matter of fact, many people are surprised by my research topic. There is a reason for that. My work research work when I joined K State in 2005, was on computer networks. And one of the biggest challenges in computer networks was in is still malware propagation. So the fact that there are some viruses that can spread and knock down all our computers. And so I started working and studying that problem. And I understood that the methods that were used in epidemiology were also used for studying computer networks. And so from that, and understanding that K State had a strong emphasis on infectious diseases, I decided in 2007, to start working on the spreading of viruses, among people and animals.

Wow, that's very interesting. As we get started in the discussion and get into more detail on this, I think that there are going to be a lot of questions that all three of us have for you. Could we step back just a little bit and maybe get a little background on you who you are, what your history is, what brought you to, to the kind of work that you're enjoying doing?

Yes. So I was born in Italy. And I studied and worked my first period of my life in Italy in a National Research Center. And in 2000, my husband had the opportunity of moving to us because he was working for IBM, Italy. And he got the job from IBM, US. So we moved to Atlanta. And at that time, my research work was on computer networks. And so I worked for five years at Georgia Tech, Georgia Institute of Technology. After those five years, I applied to many places. And I got the five interviews among those, I like K State the best, and I moved to Manhattan, Kansas.

Wonderful.

So in your work, you're using the same ideas that you've applied to malware propagation that you're applying to biological virus propagation. Is that correct?

So is just the spreading process. Obviously, the details are completely different. As a matter of fact, I'm not an epidemiologist, I'm not a biologist, and my work is always multidisciplinary. So I need the guidance of biologists, virologists, people that are experts on the specific pathogen. But then the modeling approach has one kind of unique unifying theme that is related to how to simulate stochastic processes of spreading.

So how would then say any immunologist or of our virologist, or an epidemiologist? How would they take the results that you have and add their own particular value? To them? I assume that they're most useful in the context of the larger field of science?

Yes. So we receive the input in the modeling phase, the initial phase is the modeling, how do we model this process? What can we use as the infection rate, the number the how aggressive is this disease? How quickly can people recover? So we get from them a lot of preliminary informations, then we do our simulations. And then we provide them with results normally in different scenarios. So if we do these, for example, then this will happen.

So Catarina could use say whether these models are for application to be used, sort of to deliver information to policymakers to help in their decision making, are you developing new models and doing more theoretical work.

So we are doing work in both directions, for example, we are trying to improve all the time, the models, there are some assumptions for the models that are not supported by empirical evidence. So we try to modify the model in order to be following that empirical evidence. On the other side, we also try the models in different scenarios. So we can tell, for example, what is useful, what is not what to do, for example, and this is something that has been discussed a lot what to reduce our knot, which is the reproductive ratio to a number less than one that will guarantee that an epidemic will die out.

So some of the modeling work that you're doing, it doesn't just input the R naught or zero number, but actually helps determine that?

So, for example, a very recent work we have done for a COVID-19 in in China, because we had the data and we were trying to couple the policies done at a given point in China by the Chinese government, with Viega with the data that we were seeing and saying that there are different strategies that can replicate, replicate the behavior, and for example, If you just do social distancing, but you don't use the masks, for example, you reduce the number of cases, but maybe you don't go to or not less than one.

Or if you include connect, you've got up to four days of asymptomatic infectivity. That changes as well.

Exactly the type of different scenarios.

So there's been if you for the people who sort of follow someone who's been out there and look at some models, right, there are these things. We're talking about this separately, right? There's compartmental models, right? Where we've got the susceptible and the infectious and the recovered people, and you treat them as all different groups, right? And then you look at the transmission rate between them. Right? So is this you doing them additional modeling to then determine the figures that go into that? Or is this all sort of one big package, you know, you're working within a model to figure out what happens? And then you're including more variables or more factors, right, besides just sort of some simple assumption about, you know, a standard transmission rate from one area to another?

Yes, yes. So try to include the more and more information, the more data we can in the model more accurate model is going to be. And one specific viewpoint of our modeling is kind of based on understanding the contact network impact on spreading. And the concept is simple, is that in a spreading scenario, not every person has the same role. It depends on the connections, the movement of each person. So if you think about a network of nodes, and links, there are people that have a lot of links. So those are the so called the Super spreads. And it's very important to understand the role and what happens with their, their role in the epidemic. So vaccinating them, or at least educating them is extremely important.

Cool. And so when you mentioned node sort of this is going back to where you came from, right? That this doesn't work analysis type of thing, where you treat each person as a, as a node with different connections between them, right, and human connections, are I take it sort of individual contact of some sort or proximity. Spreading.

Yes, exactly.

Interesting.

And so what kind of other factors are in there that you get from data, you know, the social sciences in terms of how people actually interact and behave sort of how varied are these nodes you were looking in? I mean, I'm curious, just in general, what kinds of things you have to say here, but you were just looking from data in China, you were saying and I'm curious about sort of, you know, what, what other factors you bring in there in terms of in terms of these networks, right, and sort of how to model them and sort of how complex it and how that like translates to other areas?

Yes, exactly. So I think one important experience we had a few years ago was an NSF project. We received, we were awarded in order to study the shape of these networks in rural regions. And so we went to test the and survey people in Clay Center and Channel, so two towns in Kansas. And we had the interesting results, say that is called Magneto. Era regions are very different from the contact nets of urban areas of states. And we got a very interesting result due to that.

Interesting.

Before COVID-19 came crashing through the door, what kind of were you looking at other specific diseases or other different pathogens?

Yeah, so we will get influenza because was the time when we had the h1n1 outbreak that at that time was a big deal. Now we see that it's nothing compared with this one. Yes, but it was an important thing. So we went there, and we asked them about their contact or their movement, their willingness to follow the directions of radio, TV and governmental agencies. And the end, we got interesting results that I can share with you if you are interested. Yes, so what we saw that, obviously, rural regions, the contacts are much less so people have fewer contacts, but there are very strong ties among people. And what we saw is that 49% of the respondents said that they would still visit at least one or two households outside their home, even there, even if there was a serious effect. Make in the net that we told them to remain at home? I think this is still valid.

Absolutely, you can see that happening. This question may be something that you've already discussed. But there were two models in papers that I was reading through. There are two models, one of them is SIS, and one of them is FAIS. Can you explain a little bit about what those two are? And how they differ from one another? How one may be more appropriate in one situation? And another?

Yes, yes. This is a very interesting question. So one topic that was at the center of the attention a few years ago was how to model the behavior of response of people, because the model the classic models, for example, SIS, or SIR, do not include anything of that. So people become susceptible then become infectious. And at the end, if they receive immunity, they are recovered. So they are outside of the game. But in the case of some for example, sexually transmitted diseases, they recover and they are again susceptible. So that is the difference between si s or SI are at the end, if you are immune or not. However, they don't consider any anything about the response of people. And for this reason, what we did was to include another compartment, which was the compartment of the susceptible but alert person. So a person is still susceptible, but takes some preventive measures to reduce the infectious the risk of becoming infected. And so it is more than we saw how the epidemic threshold moves, somehow given a contact network. And so that is a way to quantify the benefit of alertness.

Where I've seen more and more posts, just in the last few days of people lifting or organizations listing things that you might expect susceptible, but alert individuals to do and specifically saying don't do these things, even if it is your family, don't go visit them. They're no different than anyone else, etc, etc, etc. So I think it's really the first time I've seen this since we started worrying about it so much.

Yeah, so this is a way to model that behavior.

So I don't want to have us dig down too much into the different models. But I find all this kind of stuff. Fascinating. And I'm curious sort of. So you introduce this other compartment. And that's one way of sort of thinking about how to make models more realistic, right? Sort of not all susceptible people are the same, right? There's a difference. And now, but this model, I take it sort of from the two compartment model, right? So it's got the individuals, does it treat all the individuals in the compartments the same? Or do you do modeling different kinds of alertness or alertness, the spatial to like variations and alertness across regions? Or time? Or could you say more about this?

Yes, so our models are network models. So they all the nodes that are susceptible, they are not in the same condition, their risk to become infected, that depends on their position in the network. So our model is an individual based model. Some other the most classic models consider an aggregate of homogeneous susceptible people then homogeneously distributed, in fact, that and so on. So one characteristic of our network of our approach is that is individual base. So each node is in a different position, because of its the role played in the net.

Interesting, too. So and this also indicates one of the reasons somebody like you is involved in doing this modeling, right? Because that is much more complex analysis, right? Because you're treating each person as an individual. And, and you have many, many, many connections, sort of, you know, between the model, whereas the, it's much simpler to do much simple models, right? I can do some back of the envelope kind of calculations looking at information I've got, but that's nothing. And then, you know, an epidemiologist might be able to, you know, do some basic stuff. And then their computational epidemiologists who sort of do more work, could you say, so, and then you've got the more and more complex model gets, the more you really have to be thinking about how you're doing the computing work. So I wonder if you could say something about the range of that complexity and the way the different kinds of ways from simple to complex, you can think about modeling the real world question, you know, that we're dealing with now with COVID. And like, what that whole range looks like.

And I think that includes the jump between data and big data and walking into that realm of how you handle big data.

Right, exactly. So, the more this there is all these range of increasing complexity model starting from the homogeneous differential equations based models, where you have three differential equations system with an equation, and you can easily medically solve them up to what are called agent based simulations. So the agent based simulations are very complexes, very expensive, where you simulate with an agent, which is a simple piece of code each individual. So you need to input the schedule of each individual. And then in that type of teammate simulations, you can have all the details about the community. And you can input in those models, the behavior that you want to represent the to the detail of the single individual's obviously, these are huge simulations and require big computers, high performance computers in order to be to be run. But it's also true that these two complex models require also a lot of data. In order to be meaningful, you need to know really what people are going to do. And so sometimes we do not have that level of data, the more the big data source is available, the more those agent based simulations can be realized.

In what form do you get your data, for example, from China?

Oh, so we got that from the publicly available data. That is they were I think text files published daily. For each location, I believe the something very interesting at this point will be for those people who can obtain the movement tracing of people. So if we have all the data, either through cell phones, or either through other sources, stapler, this kind of internet data of how people move, that will be very, very useful and very interesting.

Now, so one of the projects that you worked on in the past was on Ebola and the movement of that outbreak. Can you talk a little bit about that research?

Yes, we were in that research. Also, there, we were supported by NSF to establish the efficiency and the efficacy of contact tracing, because at the beginning of an epidemic, contact tracing is very effective. So you can really try to detect a person, and if it is effect that isolate immediately and trace, or people that were in contact with that person. And so we were analyzing the conditions of for how fast we need the to detect, and in fact, that person, and how fast we need to follow up with a contact tracing. And the result was that the earlier you do all these steps, the better it is. So at the end, I think and it's true also for unfortunately, we haven't done a good job a for COVID-19. But early mitigation is the most effective policy, because you can see I think, our cylinder control, you can kind of follow be earlier than the epidemic not try to follow up. I think one of these, in these meetings, one of the White House doctors were saying we are kind of trying to follow up with the disease, we should anticipate we should be earlier than then following up.

So right now with COVID-19, we're in a situation where testing is much more limited than what epidemiologists want. Certainly, it's been pretty hard to do the contact tracing and because information comes back and not enough time sometimes and and at this point, we're pretty far spread out. Right, are there lessons we can draw from some of the modeling about sort of where somebody might be trying to still do that. So there are some areas where you're way beyond contact tracing, right, sort of just so endemic in the community that seems that there's probably no point, you know, but sort of at the edge of some outbreaks, you might be able to still stop and and catch it and stop it in that community. Are there lessons from modeling to sort of say where predict here's where you should put your contract tracing efforts? And then here's where you should be doing sort of other mitigation type efforts?

Yes, I think this is a very good point. So a contact tracing is going to be valid where the epidemic is still not in the community in a broad way. So some of the rural communities, I think, are in this condition, not only because they are the beginning of the epidemic, but also because the contact nature is kind of structured. So you have a few contacts, or at least many, much less contacting.

Yeah, right, the public transit in a big city or something like that, right?

Exactly the public transportation, but you have also, so you have a few of these contacts, you have some locations that are very critical, because many communities will have just a few location where they go for shopping or for the pharmacy, where people can get infected, but also they can both tested and educate. And maybe masks can be distributed. So those are, I think, a feasible strategies that if there are resources could be implemented effectively. And they should be also giving giving results.

Yeah, really interesting. Truly, I hate to ask this, but is there any indication that this is going to be happening with COVID-19?

In many places, politician, I think our governor has been very active. So I think if she can get some of those tests or masks, maybe that could be a good, a good news, because maybe not a lot of those tests will be enough to do a good job in some rural communities.

One of the studies that I also noted you working on there was a mention of development of models of protein, Corona formation, nanoparticles. What's that one about?

So that was a project we did a few years ago when Jim revere started a very interesting and exciting Institute for computational medicine. And so that was a completely different topic about is the following when you use nanoparticles, for example, to deliver some medicine or something in the body of a person, while those nanoparticles that you can imagine like being some spheres go through the blood, some proteins will attach on top of them, making what is called a Corona. So in this case, a corona of a protein around a nanoparticle. And then ending in which proportion different type of proteins will attach on top of the nanoparticles was our research topic.

I think, obviously, the corona word caught my attention as I was reading through that. So different finishes in the modeling that you're working on interest, the same.

You are right, because now we call the Coronavirus is because you have an internal part, which is done by RNA, I believe. And then you have all these proteins on top of that round of the sphere to do the corona. So it's similar.

So one of the things that's interesting about this, was this a network analysis tool for that?

No, it was no, it was just based on these different proportion of proteins that were attaching on top of was, if I can tell is a seal the study of a dynamic process, because the amount of protein change with time and you need to study how that happened. But it was not a network based model.

Interesting. We've also model cattle movement, is that right? Yes. Could you say something about that?

Yes, yes, because another topic of our research is for cattle diseases. And so we have been using similar models for for cattle and for cattle in southwest Kansas, we have been also developing synthetic data for cattle movement, because currently, there is no not a mandatory requirement for the industry, the cattle industry to provide the movement of their cattle that will be very useful in the case of an epidemic because obviously, you want to know where infected animals go and how to understand which farms are infected from those movements. And so what we did was to create a base on some data we had some Synthetic movement of cattle that people can use freely because they are synthetic. They are not the true cattle movement, but they are just simulated.

That's interesting. The podcast that we most recently published was with Dr. Megan Niederwerder, in the veterinary medicine school. I don't know if you're familiar with her at all, one of the things that she talked quite a bit about was the movement of contaminated feed, and places that it goes and how difficult it is to manage understanding the feed coming into the country or where those pigs are where the feed is worldwide. And it sounds to me like what you were talking about just now would fit right into that kind of a study in figuring out how you manage something like that. Yes, that is similar, or any of the, you know, just stepping back to the Ebola work that you had done. Are those modeling systems in use today? Are those things being used in any part of the world looking at things that are happening? Are they on the shelf now to be pulled off when the sign of something maybe starting.

A similar model, and we participated to that was used last year when the Democratic Republic of Congo had a an Ebola outbreak that was risking to be kinda to thread into Uganda. Since we had the collaborators in Uganda, we visited Uganda, we did some work there with our model. And our model was used by the health officials in Uganda to understand that the risk of each of their counties of getting Ebola, so four kinds of risk assessment, and we published the paper, we had also a good intuition a good result on which city county was going to be the most at risk, because there a few cases appeared, actually. And we published that result before those cases appeared.

So, if you were to be working on what's happening here today, how would you approach that question? So we've got an outbreak here, and I somebody comes to Katherine and says, Could you please help us modeling? What's going on here? How would you approach that problem?

Yes, if using my expertise, the first thing I will do is to try to create a base on data, the contact network of the community. And so understanding how people move and how they get income, and then from that, I will start building the network base models, considering which compartments I need to include. So for this case, I would definitely include the susceptible, but expose the because we have the expose the compartment where you don't show signs, and then I would include the two types of infectious people infectious, symptomatic, and infectious as symptomatic. And so any exposed people can transition to one of these two, and then I will let them transition into either recovered or hospitalized, and from hospitalized either recovered or that and with this model, I will try to do simulations, trying to change something that could for example, represent social distancing, and how to do that by changing the network. So normally, I have 15 contacts, my graduate students, but now I don't. So I have now only two contacts, my daughter and my husband. And so adapting the contact network can give us a different results. And that is one way but I can also reduce the infectious rate. Because I put mask, I wash my hands. So my beater, the probability of becoming infected is a smaller number. So things like that.

One of the things that we haven't quite said, but you mentioned in the beginning talking about using these models for decision making, I think that's people, when we look at sort of models and predictions that come out a model that's very different views, maybe about how out in the public, there are different views about sort of what these things mean. And so I think sometimes when people hear predictions from model, they think that this is, you know, well it's a prediction about what's going to happen. And they are they're their models that make predictions, but you just raised there one of the most important things, I think, come out of models, and this is at least the way I think about it so curious about what you say, right, which is that they're to help us make decisions, right? And in particular, for something like this. Like what kinds of things can we do that are going to make the most difference? And so what you learn from a model, that what you would learn from something like this would be All right, what should we be putting our energies into? Right? Sort of, you know, how much is social distancing going to make a difference? And how much is washing our hands gonna make a difference and let people get the infections like some people were talking about for COVID-19 at one point, like, let people get infected, you know, and raise up herd immunity, but then treat them better or you know, whatever. But then you look at sort of, you look at all the different options, and then you look to sort of see, well, how many people are going to be in the hospitalized bin? If we did that? And oh, well, that won't work, right? Because we don't have enough beds or something. And so then you look at different kinds of entry points for interventions. So I mean, that's at least the way I think about the usefulness of models. Is that how you think about what the modeling that you do should be used for there are other aspects to it, too?

I agree under percent is very models have a big responsibility there was a few days ago, and an article in The New York Times. So I think we have these two possibilities for using model. One is for forecasts, and one is for decision making, looking at different scenarios, and deciding the mitigation strategy. Now, in my experience, the predictions are very hard. So predictions for what I think are only valid in short term. So maybe it is possible to predict how many cases will be New York tomorrow and the day after tomorrow. But I cannot I think is very hard to say how many deaths will be in total, during the epidemic right now. So I think those are whatever, making the comparison about the different scenarios, that is the best use of the model.

As you said, it's a hard thing, right? Because it's sort of I mean, we need to forecast to this is this one of these things that I find complicated and interesting is that interventions take time and effort and money, and they have other effects, obviously, right? So we're looking at effects on the economy of the blocking down social distancing. And so you have to, you have to look at the forecasts from different different scenarios and take them seriously, right, because how many deaths might we prevent? If we did this? How many things might we prevent if we did something different? So you have to take pieces of the forecasting seriously of sort of but then as you say, the forecast overall is a different thing. Right? So because the forecast overall is so highly dependent on all these other variables, and through all the different actions that we take, and so many other things that we can predict, right, that it becomes hard, but we do still use the forecasting part in small pieces.

Yes, exactly. Exactly. As a comparison, especially in a competitive way.

Fascinating and absolutely timely to what we've, what we're looking at today. It's interesting to get a better understanding of how those models are developed. And just listening to what's on the news every every night, understanding what those workers are doing and putting those models together and understanding a little bit more about what their limitations are as well. Well, this has been a great discussion. Caterina, I very much appreciate your time and willingness to come on for a chat. Hopefully, we can do a follow up one of these days, hopefully, so.

Thank you. I mean, for making what could have been an arcane topic. very understandable and very interesting.

Yeah, absolutely. Thank you.

Thanks so much for talking with us.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

This episode of Something to Chew On brings us a timely discussion, the current world-wide Coronavirus challenges the topics discussed with Dr. Megan Neiderwerder are not only timely, but instructional on helping us to understand what a virus is and how they impact the world around us. Megan's teachings cover viral diseases in swine, equine, avian, bovine and canine species. Dr. Megan Niederwerder, Assistant Professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine here at K-State research investigates control strategies for endemic and foreign animal diseases of swine.

Transcript:

Welcome to the New Normal - What are Viruses and How do they Impact the Animal and Human World with Dr. Megan Niederwerder, Assistant Professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine here at K-State

Most people have been exposed to a Coronavirus. Of course, it's coronaviruses in general are probably the second leading cause of colds in humans, but it's a different Coronavirus. It's different than the one that's currently circulating and so we don't have that underlying immunity to the one that causes the common cold.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello, everybody and welcome back to Something to Chew On. There are times when we take stock of our lives, try to better understand where we fit in the natural world, and to find ways where nature manages to provide us with some answers. today's podcast brings us a timely discussion with Dr. Megan Niederwerder, Assistant Professor in the College of Veterinary Medicine here at Kansas State University, with the current worldwide Coronavirus challenges. The topics discussed with Dr. Megan Niederwerder is not only timely, but instructional on helping us to understand what a virus is, and how they impact the world around us. Megan's teachings cover viral diseases in swine, equine, avian, bovine and canine species. Her research investigates control strategies for endemic and foreign animal diseases of swine. She is internationally recognized for her expertise in two primary areas of research, including the role of the gut microbiome on outcomes following viral respiratory infections, and the risk and mitigation of foreign animal disease introduction and transmission through feed and feed ingredients. today's podcast is being recorded in a manner that I certainly never anticipated. Jon, Scott, Megan and I are all in different locations. Courtney is recording via zoom at her home due to the spread of the Coronavirus. Our new normal is to stay connected in an unconnected environment. We've talked frequently about recording podcasts with someone that was off site. But I always figured that Jon and Scott would be in the same room with me chatting with someone else remotely. The time that we're in today is quite different, and the Coronavirus spreads and keep social distancing as part of the new normal. We are each in our own space and hoping for science to help bring a return to a healthy world. With that, I would like to welcome all and specifically welcome Megan to the podcast. The podcast is in this series is focused on the food system at Kansas State University. And certainly animals are a critical part of that system. This is actually the 20th recording in this series. And I was surprised to look back at the list and realize that this is the first podcast that we've done on animal related research between the College of Veterinary Medicine, the College of Agriculture, and the Department of Animal Science and Grain Science and Industry. There's a substantial amount of work being done in this area, whether it's through animal health, or food and feed and just a whole whole bunch of other areas that we touch on in the area of animal health. So, Megan, I've got a ton of questions for you as we go through this. I doubt that we'll get to all of them. But what I'd like to start off with is getting to know a bit about you and understanding how you got interested in this area. And then we can see where the discussion takes us. So Megan, could you tell us a little bit about yourself?

Sure. Well, thanks to everyone for the opportunity and invitation to speak with you and thank you for your work on the global food systems. I think it's really important and like he said, important to talk about animal health and animal diseases as part of the efforts for global food systems. So my name is Megan Neiderwerter and I am a veterinarian. I actually went to Kansas State or veterinary school I've been a veterinarian for about 10 years now. And as part of my veterinary practice, I worked with dogs and cat zoo animals as well as pigs. And when I decided to come back and pursue a career in academic research, it was really based on my desire to provide information or to research questions with regards to population health and livestock. And I've always had an interest in infectious diseases and the ability to ask questions. How do things work? How can we improve animal health? And the opportunities that research affords in an academic setting is to really understand how we can improve animal health at a population level. And even in my case, it's my research is focused on swine health. How do we improve the health of pigs around the world?

How long have you been on the faculty?

I've been on faculty now for almost five years at the College of Veterinary Medicine in the diagnostic medicine pathobiology department.

Great. Can you tell us a little bit about what your research is on swine health?

Sure. So there's I have really two main areas of research and both, again, focused on viral diseases and swine. One of the areas that I focus my research on is looking at the utilization of the gut microbiome to improve pig health in the face of respiratory disease. So when we think about pigs after they are weaned pigs are typically weaned about three weeks of age from their mothers. And they have a high incidence and high susceptibility to respiratory disease at that time. So we typically call that poor sign respiratory disease complex, because these respiratory diseases often have a viral component, a bacterial component, and often are due to environmental stressors as well. And so some of the respiratory diseases that are currently challenging pigs throughout the world, have been around for many decades. And so that means, you know, we're at a place where we want to look at alternative approaches for how do we improve the health of these pigs in the face of respiratory disease with alternative strategies. And so the focus of my work has been how do we utilize the DEP microbes, and the beneficial bacteria in the gut, to actually improve or enhance animal health in the face of the respiratory challenge environment. So, again, focused on the main virus that I have done is Porcine Reproductive and Respiratory Disease syndrome. It's really considered the most costly disease of swine production in the United States currently. And my work is really focused again on those gut microbes, and how do we improve disease. And the second area of research that I have is looking at foreign animal diseases, and the risk of foreign animal disease entry into the United States through feed and feed ingredients. And so that work has been focused on the fact that we import millions of feed ingredients, millions of kilograms of feed ingredients from all over the world that then are used to feed and provide nutrition for our pigs in the US. And so with the, with the introduction of porcine epidemic, diarrhea virus, we started to recognize that feed ingredients may be a potential route for transboundary, animal disease bred. And so my research is really focused on understanding the risk of other foreign animal diseases, such as African swine fever virus, and V.

Cool. I was interested. So I was going to ask just about the first set of things. So how is it that the gut microbiome for pigs actually affects their health? Does it prevent them from getting things? Are you talking about recovery time? Like, what's the relationship there? And it's curious, because that's not something we totally normally think of. Right? So this is a gut and you're talking about respiratory disease, right?

Yes, yes. It's not an inherent thought, to think about our diet, and the microbes in our gut affecting our health outside of the debt. It's more inherent to think about how those beneficial microbes may help resolve diarrheal disease. But in fact, they really play a role in systemic immunity throughout the whole body. And so what we think happens is that the gut is that really the largest immune organ in our bodies. And so the way that those gut microbes then communicate with the mucosal immune system in the lining of the gut, impacts how the immunity respond to the immune cells respond to pathogens and other areas of the body such as the lungs. So when we think about some of those beneficial microbes, not only stimulate the immune system, but they also communicate with the immune system in different areas of the body, through metabolic products of those microbes. And so we think there's a couple of different ways Oftentimes these, the exact mechanism by which these gut microbes impact disease outside of the gut, is not fully elucidated. But what we see is that pigs respond better to a respiratory challenge. So let's say they have fewer lung lesions, are they gain weight normally, or they replicate the virus to lower levels. So it almost creates a more resilient or resistant pig when they are exposed to these pathogens.

That's fascinating. I'm fortunate to be blissfully ignorant on most of this area, is that confined is that that phenomenon confined to monogastric? Or does it extrapolate to ruminants?

Well, we could assume that it extrapolates to ruminants, but they're really, this is really a new area of research. So a lot of the research that's been done has been done in my phone of respiratory disease. There's a great study with pneumococcal pneumonia, and a few other respiratory disease pathogens, where they will see that the presence of endogenous microbes or fecal microbial transplantation, or maybe those mice that did not receive antimicrobials, and have more diverse microbes actually respond in a better or more robust way when they're infected with respiratory pathogens. And so a lot of this research is fairly new. But you know, when people ask about what impacts the microbiome or what the microbiome impacts outside of the gut, it's sort of easy to go well, probably most things, we're just learning, and we're just at the cusp of learning exactly what those are.

Thanks. Yeah. Thank you new world of science here. And for all that, right. Are there particular strains, you said something about the diversity of the gut microbiome is important? Or what kinds of things in particular are you looking at? Right? So there are particular microbes? You're investigating? Are you your own work? Are you looking at the diversity? Tell us a little bit more about like, what's what's going on there?

Sure. Yeah. So that one of the most interesting things about some of these respiratory diseases in mice models, but also in pigs, is that a fairly common and consistent finding is that the more diverse the microbes are in the gut, the better the animal responds to respiratory disease challenge. So and that's been shown and some of the work that I've done with pig both, let's say, if the microbiome is more diverse prior to challenge, almost like there could be a prophylactic or preventative measure with regards to the microbiome on subsequent challenge, which is somewhat exciting, because it gives you the idea that microbiome modulation may be able to prevent or at least put a pig in a better place to respond to disease prophylacticly, but some of the microbes that we found that specifically seem to be beneficial, we found that a non pathogenic E coli seems to be beneficial in the pig gut, we found that increased in Ruminococcus seems to be beneficial when it's detected in the gut, and then also fecal microbial transplantation. So we've used fecal microbial transplants from older aged fowl that had high histories of health and, and great litter characteristics, took the feces from that those cells transplanted into younger pigs, and actually showed that fecal microbial transplant can provide benefits with regards to respiratory disease, when given prior to challenge.

Wow, that's, fascinating. Absolutely fascinating. And in the things that we're looking at, I hesitate even making this jump at this point in time. But the things that we're looking at going on in the world today with with Coronavirus and these viruses that are in humans, what are the chances that the kinds of things you're looking at now in swine and in animals is the same as what you're going to be seeing in humans is in helping to manage some of these things?

Yeah, I think some of the similar parallels that we've seen is when we talk about foreign animal disease such as porcine epidemic diarrhea virus, when that was introduced into the US swine herd in 2013, within eight weeks of its first identification in a pig herd, it had been detected in almost all of the major swine producing states. And the reason that is is because we have approximately 1 million pigs on the road every day being transported between different farms and everything is fast paced, pigs are moving, we see this you know, even within the country, let alone global distribution. Reach See that, you know, the movement of people and animals happens very quickly. And so we've seen that with the Coronavirus as well, and that the global movement of people makes it difficult to contain these viruses once they're introduced. The other sort of interesting parallels when we talk about African swine fever virus. The USDA released, I think, two years two weeks ago, that if African swine fever virus is introduced into the United States, which, of course, we're doing everything to prevent that, there will be a 72 hour standstill where no pigs will be moved. And so again, if you think about that, in parallel to what we're all currently doing, which is trying to stay in our homes and not be exposed to other humans, there are some similarities. And that just goes back to how these infectious diseases can be spread because of how rapidly humans and animals are moving throughout the world.

So even in cases, almost as though humans are a secondary vector, moving the pigs around

Well, so pig production in the US is fairly specialized. So when you think about the different age groups of pigs, there are certain farms that specialize in pregnant fouls or guilt, and farrowing. So that they have young piglets that they nursed. And then those piglets may be moved to a nursery facility where they live for several weeks prior to going to a grow finish facility. And then those pigs baby moved once they're ready to go to market. And so this has increased the efficiency by which we can produce pork in the US because of these specialized operations. But it also means that pigs are frequently moved, you know, during production?

Sure, do you have? Do you have an opinion on that trade off, right, between the efficiency and the basically the security of the food system there to an outside pathogen to a foreign pathogen?

Yeah, I think that you know, is the movement of pigs can sort of unveil the vulnerability of a pathogen being moved, but I think the the focus of course, one is prevention of any pathogen entering the second is rapid identification of pathogens, if they do become introduced, so that if a pathogen is introduced, there are protocols and procedures in place to stop pig movement. So that again, the pathogen can be contained, and eradicated as quickly as possible. So, you know, I think as these diseases are introduced, similarly, when I talk about P dv, it changes people's mindset, and again, can help us learn about the best way to prevent the spread of any virus or bacteria. If it's introduced.

we sort of moved off in one direction and you'd started to talk a bit about I think it was feed materials or feed ingredients. Yeah, animals as a source. What, what ingredients are the are we particularly concerned with?

Sure. So some of the research that we've done has looked at what's the stability of foreign animal diseases in feed and feed ingredients? Can viruses be transmitted through the natural consumption of plant based feed? And then how do we mitigate the risk of those viruses in feed? And so the first part of this research was really to understand if we inoculate feed ingredients, and subject those feed ingredients to temperature and humidity conditions that stimulate transoceanic shipment? Because is what we're concerned about, if feed ingredients are being imported, from China, or from other areas of the world that have different diseases or foreign animal diseases, could the virus survive? And would it be stable. And so we've looked at various ingredients such as soybean, organic soybean meal, conventional soybean meal, pork, sausage casings, and pet foods. And what we found is that it looks like soybean meal supports the stability of viruses such as African swine fever virus, classical swine fever virus and the rabies virus. And so it looks like there are certain ingredients and I think it has to do with the protein content of these feed ingredients, or the moisture content. But there are certain characteristics of individual feed ingredients that promote stability of these viruses. And of course, those are what were concerning high risk ingredients for import.

That's truly something that a lot of people wouldn't even think of, you know, when we think classically of viruses, we think that they need some kind of some kind of host to survive unless they're unless they're very, very dried down. low water activity. And yes, this really opens the window on something that needs to get to be figured out at least approaches to controlling it.

Yeah, and I think that goes back to understanding sort of the global distribution of many commodities. And that includes feed ingredients for our livestock here in the US. So certain feed ingredients that we put into the feed, some of which we do not manufacture in the US, we can only get from China. But there are other feed ingredients that we could locally sourced, that, of course, would reduce the risk with regards to introduction of viruses onto the farm. Right.

Interesting to the comment of only being able to source materials internationally is very true. And in human food consumption, as well. I recall some instances in the past where there were challenges in buying from certain areas, and we realized in the, in the food industry overall, that some of those were the only places you could buy those particular ingredients. And just the idea that those viruses can, can survive on some of these things. Is, is a little scary. And it's as John said, it's going to be something that we really need to better understand the how and why and how to control.

Yeah, I think we've operated with a lot of assumptions that were untested. And that the time was, I guess, the time now has come to really test those and get solutions.

Can we can we take this back probably as much for our listeners as anything to the to the basics of, quote A virus is Can you can you talk a little bit about what a virus is, and what makes it what makes it so special? What makes it different from other organisms in the characteristics that it imparts here?

Sure. So, a virus, one of the biggest differentials from other organisms that have virus recording, is that to replicate a virus requires a host cell. And so when we talk about replication of virus, let's say in a pig, for a pig virus, it requires the pig to actually replicate the virus particles so that there is more virus. There's a good, there's a, there's a important point there when we talk about contamination, because the virus is not replicating when there's no host cells. But if it's a highly stable virus, that's when we can see the virus essentially being maintained as infectious. There's a couple of different characteristics about viruses that I think are important to always think about. One is that viruses can either be made of the genetic material can be either RNA or DNA. And it can be single stranded or double stranded. And then another characteristic of viruses that we typically talk about is it viruses can either be envelope, or have a lipid membrane, or they can be non envelope. And so just general characteristics of viruses. If we talk about a non enveloped viruses, virus is typically much more stable in the environment. It's less sensitive to disinfectants. And then when we talk about an envelope virus, typically those viruses are more sensitive to disinfectants and less stable in the environment. And the other factor that we think about is when we talk about DNA versus RNA viruses, RNA viruses typically have higher mutation rates, because they have less proofreading when they replicate themselves. And so when we talk about RNA viruses, such as influenza, and of course, we know how much influenza changes every year. This is one of the reasons we have to get a new vaccine each flu season. When we compare that to, let's say, a DNA virus, DNA viruses are typically much more stable, less mutations. So there are certain things about different viruses. One of the characteristics of African swine fever virus is that it is a very large virus. So some viruses are, you know, maybe 10,000 faces, you know, we talk about African swine fever virus, it's much larger, much more complex. And when it has much more complexity with regards to the genome, that means it produces more proteins. And that's when we see challenges with regards to vaccine production. So one of the biggest challenges right now with African swine fever that I'm sure you've seen in the news is that there is no currently commercial vaccine that we can use to protect our pigs. Right, right.

In essence, the viruses takeover they hijack the host cells, enzyme and other systems to make more of themselves. And that's yeah, I think that right, so what are the envelopes made of? Those are those polymeric sugars or I would have expected them to be more resistant to cleaning solutions, for example.

Yeah, that was my thought as you were describing this.

Yeah, when we think about the envelope, it's mostly lipids, and then has proteins on it. Viruses typically use proteins on the surface glycoproteins on the surface, to actually bind to the host cell receptor, enter into the host cell and then replicate. But when it has that envelope, it often has those lipids that make it more susceptible. When we talk about non envelope, it's proteins that are surrounding the genetic information. And so it's more stable.

I'm just gonna say that one of the reasons so it's particularly effective is that like really just an on the envelope viruses attaching to the lipids and the protein, or as they were just so there's so as effective and non envelope viruses?

Well it depends on the virus, of course, but in general, a lot of the characteristics, of course, when we talk about hand washing, and the importance of handwashing, a lot of it is the mechanical, you know, cleaning of the hands, but of course, it depends. It depends on the different viruses. But yes, in general, these, these soaps are fairly effective against a broad range of viruses. But it again, sort of depends on the virus. Some viruses are very hardy and very difficult to eliminate from the environment.

So this is random. But here's a question. Are viruses alive? In your opinion? I mean, because they're, they're their own little strand, they can't replicate on their own right? When I was a kid, I was taught one of the things of one of the properties of life is that, you know, replication right? I know at the time, people disputed whether viruses are alive, right, because they can't replicate themselves, they you the host, do you have it?

That's sort of like the day one virology question for the students. So if you consider it if you consider alive or not alive, it's interesting, because when you actually talk about it, in, you know, when we talk about diagnostics, and what we think about with viruses, we more use the terminology infectious, versus non infectious, so weak, because one of the biggest diagnostics, one of the most widely used diagnostic tests to detect viruses is PCR polymerase chain reaction. But that test looks for viral genetic material. So it would look for the DNA or the RNA associated with the virus. But if you have a positive PCR test, it doesn't necessarily mean that the virus is infectious. So those are sort of the terminology when we think about infectious viruses, we think about can that virus if it was exposed to a susceptible cell, would it be able to gain entry into the cell and replicate and be infectious to that cell? So really, those are sort of the terminology at least in diagnostics that we think about, but the whole is the virus alive or not alive, I think people have different opinions, I suppose on that, which, which maybe makes it again, a good academic question for the students.

So here's just a random question. And in terms of terminology for disabling a virus, what, what's most often used to sort of kill wood, right?

Yeah, we usually say inactivation of the virus. So that because what could happen is, let's say, and we've done a lot of these experiments in feed, and let's say we expose the feed to heat treatment, or some sort of chemical, that inactivate the virus. If we take that seed and test it on PCR, it may still have viral genome. But if we tested on cells, it wouldn't be able to infect the cell. Maybe that's because lipid envelope has been disrupted. Maybe that's because the glyco proteins now can't find the host cell. There could be some different factors. But what we would talk about that is inactivation of a virus.

One of the areas of study that you had listed there is control strategies for endemic and foreign animal diseases. Can you speak to what some of those control strategies are or things maybe that you're researching?

Sure. So when we think about in general diseases in livestock, we first of course, we would like to eradicate or eliminate the disease from a herd. So we think About Coronavirus, you know, ideal scenario is that we would eliminate that from a herd. But then if you can't eliminate it, or if the herd is endemic for that disease, then you start thinking about can we use a vaccine strategy to improve the response of pigs to the virus? Which there are some vaccines available for the heard? And then sort of third is, Are there alternative strategies to actually improve the response of the pig to the virus when it's exposed? And so some of the strategies that have been looked at in that area is, are there certain genetic properties or genetic aspects of the pig that actually improve its ability to respond to viruses? Are there microbiome characteristics of the pig that improve its ability to respond to viruses? And so the focus of my work in that area goes back to that microbiome? Can we sort of set up the pigs gut health to help the pig respond to any pathogen? You know, it's really the goal. But you know, one of the largest sort of economic losses in pig production is the respiratory disease susceptibility of those young pigs three to five weeks of age, right after weaning. So we think about how do we improve gut health to improve respiratory health? And even as sort of a supplement to all of the other activities that are going on? How do we reduce the stress of the pig so that it can respond better to infection? How do we improve the nutrition of the pig so it can grow? Normally, even under disease challenge? So kind of think about some of those things? With regards to foreign animal disease? We really think about how would the virus be introduced into our country? And how do we mitigate that risk. So some of the big aspects of foreign animal diseases, particularly with African swine fever that we consider his contaminated pork products, we know that the virus survives for long periods in pork. And so that can be a risk factor for infection in pigs. And then, of course, we've talked about feed and feed ingredients, being a risk factor and understanding how we mitigate that risk for disease introduction.

So when you say pork, does that mean that humans are vector transferring the diseases back back to five pigs in the US possibly, or how? From pork?

So yeah, so importantly, African swine fever virus, humans are not susceptible to that virus. And pork is still safe to consume, even if pigs are infected. So that's an important point to highlight when we talk about pork products, and what we've seen in other areas of the world, is that oftentimes, people, you know, may bring sausage in with them through the airport, and not think about the risks that they are bringing in potentially contaminated pork products into the US. It's illegal. And you know, there have been illegal confiscations with regards to finding the pork products that should not be brought into the United States. And one of the big aspects with regards to foreign animal diseases is educating the public so that they understand that bringing in products from other countries into the US can be a huge risk factor for our animals here, as well as are our crops here.

Fascinating, why and explain the explain the impact on crops, for you just saying if they brought some other crop carrying disease into the US.

Right so, crop carrying disease. So when you talk about products, you have an apple or a banana, or any meat products? You know, the biggest reason for that is that there are certain agricultural diseases pests that we do not have in the United States that we want to maintain our crops are animals free from and so when people bring in agricultural products illegally from other countries, the risk is that those commodities of products could potentially have diseases that we do not have here. Sure.

So one of the kinds of fundamental differences in approach between scientists who wanted to go around the world finding new varieties of various and sundry crops versus people who wanted to keep them out by inspection. And actually the son of one of the first presidents of Kansas State was one of the folks that was critical in going around the world and bringing in new, new varieties of, of agricultural products.

And shipping them over.

Yeah, I think there's definitely a balance between, you know, learning from different agricultural products that could be beneficial, and then making sure that those agricultural products don't contain microbial pathogens that, yeah, impact the rest of the crop so.

Do we find that the contaminated materials are more frequently sourced in and maybe developing parts of the world? Are there differences in different areas around the world that cause specific problems in products that are moved into the United States? Or is this just kind of is different in different areas around the world, and you just have to be careful, regardless of where you're shipping from?

Yeah, I think you have to be careful regardless, because what we've seen oftentimes is that maybe a product is manufactured in one country, and maybe it's processed in another country. And then maybe it's shipped to a secondary, you know, a secondary country before. So there's all these steps. And again, that goes back to efficiency of the global trade that has been established over years to make these products available to people all over the world. But there's risks with regards to determining where the product came from. And if there was any risk upon its manufacturing or processing, that puts it at risk for contamination of the diseases that are in that country. We know, for instance, that there are crops that are grains and crops that are dried on the roadways in China. And those roadways are of course, shared with trucks and vehicles that could be transporting pigs. And so when you think about that, and the potential for those crops to become contaminated, because of the sort of risky agricultural practices with regards to drying on the roadways, you can imagine how those feed ingredients may become contaminated in the environment, and then could potentially maintain the virus during shipment. So it sort of depends on the ingredient. But it depends on where it's coming from to.

Sure. That makes total sense. Yeah. I've seen that in India.

Well, could ask a question back to gut microbiome. Are there any standard practices that you'd recommend if farmers to be putting into place to to improve the health of their herds? Or is there are there particular kinds of things that you would have to do like the fecal transplants? So other standard things that we do that actually that hurt our swine herds? Are there particular? Yeah, that would make it really easy to improve their gut microbiome so or is this something that would be actually kind of complicated to do or require new techniques?

Well, we're really still learning about how something like fecal microbial transplantation or microbiome modulation could be implemented in a broad scale and swine herds. But one of the biggest challenges with regards to fecal transplants, even on the human side when we talk about so in human fecal microbial transplants are most often used for recurrent Clostridium difficile infections that have been already treated with antimicrobials. And so this is somebody who's been treated with antibiotics probably multiple times and then gets the fecal transplant. And oftentimes, it has a fairly high success rate. When we talk about that in humans, and even in pigs and some of the work that I've done, we don't have sort of the foundational knowledge to say, let's take feces from 10 pigs or 10 humans, and based on the microbial characterization within that equal transplant, I can pick out the ideal donor, we don't really have that information. So when you think about is going to be your donor. For fecal transplants, oftentimes you go off of phenotype. So let's say the pig grew really well. The pig has had a great health history. The pig doesn't have certain pathogens circulating. It's very similar in humans, you know, you talk to the donors to say have you had any you know, history of diarrhea Have you had, you know, these infectious diseases we need to screen you for but sort of so you're sort of looking at the the phenotype of the person as opposed to, or the pig, as opposed to the genetic characterization or the microbial characterization of the actual transplant. And I think once we get there, then we'll be able to really sort of implement this more on a broad scale where we go, these are the characteristics of feet transplant, that really provide benefits under these circumstances, or in our, you know, modern day pig production.

That's fascinating.

Getting up in front of you. Exciting time. So what's the Chinese proverb for the Chinese curse? You should you should live in interesting times.

Yeah, well, in that, what were you gonna say there, Scott?

Oh, I was gonna ask more about the, the gut microbiome, but you know, I've got another question that's been floating around in the back of my head. And Megan, I was wondering if you could say something about what makes a virus like easily transferable? Right. So one of the things with the novel Coronavirus, right. So this came from a reservoir. And my understanding is that the think of the reservoir was bad, right? And that it was living in, that's then transferred through some other animal and then finally got to humans, right. And so there's something about these kinds of viruses that once they leave that, that reservoir where the animal reservoir where they were hanging out for a while, maybe without actually hurting that population, but they transfer to humans, and they're particularly problematic for us is a bad one, right now. What makes what makes a virus like, first of all, easily transferable like that, and what about that kind of thing makes it dangerous in a way that if some of the viruses that you're studying in swine are, you know, there's no risk of transfer, or infecting humans in a way that's going to hurt us?

Yeah, I think one of the important sort of components to what's going on with the Coronavirus is that, as you said, the way that it was the humans were exposed to it was this very close interaction between humans and wildlife, where we're seeing that maybe a virus that has been around in the wildlife population for decades, and has never caused the problem to that wildlife species or to humans, because of the the lack of close interaction, when a human is then exposed to that virus can become infected. And I think one of the important things about viruses is that they have this high ability to mutate into change. So of course, most people have been exposed to a Coronavirus. Of course, it's coronaviruses in general, are probably the second leading cause of colds in humans. But it's a different Coronavirus. It's different than the one that's currently circulating. And so we don't have that underlying immunity to the one that causes the common cold. And so one of the things that can make viruses transmissible is, of course, that oftentimes viruses are transmitted through the oral nasal route. If you think about respiratory diseases, those are ones that can make you cough can make you sneeze, that can create these aerosols that, again, oftentimes can contain large amounts of virus, if a person is in the acute phase of infection. The other thing about viruses is that even though they require cells to replicate, some of them can survive in the environment for an extended period. And again, that goes back to, you know, DNA versus RNA and versus non envelope. But when we think about touching, handle doors and touching our phones, and we want to be sure that, you know, we're taking the precautions to not only wash our hands, but think about the types of materials that our hands touched throughout the day, and make sure that we have those clean. So those are a couple of the characteristics with regards to viruses.

And those are there. I was just gonna say so is there anything particular about the type of virus or what it is that makes that makes it particularly harmful to humans? Right, sort of like so why is it that the viruses that you're studying that are caused a lot of disease in pigs strikes or don't happen to cause diseases in humans? Is it just kind of, you know, luck, or is there some particular characteristic about them that makes them not dangerous to humans, but something like the novel Coronavirus, right? Transferable and it's gonna infect us and make us sick.

Yeah, they're, they're typically the way that the virus is determined, you know, determines what host to that is susceptible is based on the proteins on the surface of the virus. So those proteins only recognize certain host cells. And then also on the host side, the host has to have the correct receptor, or it's often a protein, again on the host cell. So those interactions are what allow the virus to actually take it, you know, have the receptor bind to the, or the protein bind to the host cell receptor, and enter into the cell and cause infection. But viruses have a wide range of how they cause disease. When you think about a virus like HIV, people have HIV as lifelong infections, because that virus actually integrates itself into the host genome. Whereas you think about other viruses. And the infection is fairly short, maybe it's three to five days. And that's the only time period when you are shedding the virus, and then your immune system clears the virus. Some viruses cause chronic infections, some are very acute, some cause that like African swine fever, in pigs, causes extremely high mortality. So we see almost 100% mortality, whereas other viruses have mortality rates less than 1%. So really depends on the virus and the mechanisms by which that virus has evolved to cause disease. And also sort of this variation that we can see with regards to the length of time that the virus may infect the host. And, again, host susceptibility has a lot to do with the actual cells of the host, and then the proteins on the virus.

Interesting. That's very interesting. What I was going to ask we were going to be putting on a workshop global food systems is going to be putting on a workshop on microbiome in another month or two, and hopefully, it'll be face to face that if we're still in the situation we're in right now, we may, we may try and take it to a virtual level. But on the microbiome as I was putting the ideas together on this, and Megan, thank you for your help. And in working with me on it. There. There are a whole lot of different areas working on microbiome. And I wonder in my mind, how those things how those areas overlap, or if they do not overlap, what are the similarities and differences between, say, soil microbiome and what you're working on with swine gut or things that are being worked on in I know, in poultry gut? Or is that a fair question to ask you? I mean, it may be that the study areas are different enough?

No, I think I think it's an interesting, it's a good comment to have about the microbiome space. Because when we think about the research, really, it's been over the last decade that we've seen this expansion in microbiome work. And really, the vast majority, I mean, every year, the number of microbiome publications increases on both the human side, and let's say, the swine side, you know, there's probably over 50,000 Publications now on the human side. But the vast majority of those have been in the last three to five years. And even on the swine side, we talk about maybe 1000 publications on the swine side. So it's this, it's this new area of study that is very complex. And when we think about the microbial communities, in soil, or in our guts, or in the guts of pigs, or poultry, and we think about all the interactions of those microbes, it's very complicated. It's very difficult to replicate, let's say outside of the host, because you think about the immune cells of the host impact the microbial replication in the gut. And then the microbes within the gut interact and metabolic products impact what other microbes may do or make, may produce. So I think there's a couple of challenges with microbiome research that is probably fairly consistent in any microbiome research, one of which is replicating what happens in the natural environment in a laboratory setting, but also, how you actually analyze the microbiome. There's many different areas. You can use meta genomics, you can use whole genome sequencing, you can use 16 s ribosomal sequencing. One thing which is based on bacteria, you can use microarrays to look at populations of microbes, you can look at transcriptome, so maybe what the microbes produce? What, what does what's sort of the response between the host and the microbes. So I think it's such an exciting space, because we have so much to learn, and there's so many different areas. And really, if you look and see, you know, an aspect of the microbiome again, more than likely, it probably has an impact on some sort of disease in the host or in the, you know, in maintaining a healthy crop in the soil. And so I think it's really exciting. But again, it's important for people to sort of wrap their head around the complexity of, of how we research the microbiome true.

Another term I've heard used in that reference, the microbial ecology of the gut, is that correct?

Yes

Okay, good. Yes, Maureen.

Well, I was just gonna say, with what little life I've probably read and understood enough on the microbiome to be really dangerous in the area. But what I have read has absolutely fascinated me. And it seems, from my limited understanding that it's got the potential of changing the way we look at health in many ways, the way we are looking and understanding what's going on in our systems and how to manage and control healthful activities helpful. Is that a fair? Is that a fair assumption? On my part?

Absolutely, I think one of the most sort of fascinating and exciting things that I think about is, you know, in the future, are we going to be inoculating our young babies, and, you know, on my side, the young pigs with microbes that we know will improve the health of that person, or that animals throughout their lifetime, that's really exciting. Because you go, wow, we can if we learn about these microbes, what they do, and then on on the human side, or on the pig side, understand what diseases they're going to be susceptible to later on in life, and give them those microbes that are going to help them be resistant, or less susceptible to those diseases. That's a whole nother avenue to think about how we can prophylactically or preventatively provide health to people, or HIV or pigs. You know, prior to early on in life, I think it's really, really fascinating and exciting. And we think about, we are what we eat, you know, we haven't really talked about the diet. But you know, the other fascinating thing about the gut is that, you know, everything we eat in talks the microbes, so when we talk about learning about the connection between nutrition and microbes, and overall health and neurologic conditions that may even come in, later on in life. It's really, like you said, I think fascinating and exciting. I think, you know, it'll be very, very cool to see where we're at even, you know, five to 10 years from now in this in the microbiome world?

Absolutely. Absolutely.

You know, what, what comes to mind with what you just stated was just some reading I did while that's been it's been a while ago, but on, on childbirth, and on the difference in the potential of the child with a vaginal birth, as opposed to a cesarean section and the number of microbes that that child was introduced to, during that process. And just thinking about all of those kinds of things, is, as I said, fascinating, I mean, it just it, it makes your mind kind of swim on all of the areas that those microorganisms are going to be touching and relating to how, how well we are in the long run.

Well, in nature, there's at least one example in nature for that. qualities are born without if they were if they were, there's a transfer of microbiome from the mother to the baby that allows them to eat and digest the eucalyptus, eucalyptus trees, which they wouldn't be able to do otherwise. So there are examples in nature of what we're trying to do.

Is there a feed of us swine, then studied in terms of the effects on the microbiome and their health right there? How much do we know about like, what the diversity are the type of feed that pigs get affects? affects their gut affects their health?

Yeah, so a lot of the focus of course in the nutrition side is what components of the pigs diet do we need to make the pig gain and have they to gain as much weight and as quickly as possible and maintain maintaining health? I think an area there As we should sort of bridge the gap is, as we understand the best nutritional outcomes with regards to grow. Also thinking about are those the best nutritional aspects is that pig is in certain health challenged conditions. And so oftentimes we do these, the research studies in, in herds that are fairly healthy, that maybe don't have a disease challenge. And then when we get into a disease challenge situation, we understand that pigs, not only eat differently, of course of a pig is not feeling well, they may not eat as much, but they're also able to they also metabolize, and take nutrients from the, from the feed in different ways based on their health challenge. And so I think that's another sort of exciting area where we can maybe bridge the gap in different disease settings, what sort of nutritional aspects of the seeds should we shift to, again, set the pig up for the best possible health outcome?

And does diversity of feed correspond to diversity of microbiome?

I don't know off the top of my head. I don't know if we know that if we think about you mean, like, if a pig was that different threats throughout its lifetime, increase the diversity of the microbes? Right. Yeah, I think that's an interesting point, because you think about the feed at source, of course, in most high ball security operations is highly standardized, and right and changes as the pig ages. And so most pigs are not fed, you know, different diets, or, you know, a wide range of different diet that you think about maybe in developing world, when people hold pigs in their backyard. We talk about backyard operations. So we talked about this with regards to disease, oftentimes, those families may feed the pigs scraps from their meals. And so of course, I don't know if there's been a good study looking at, you know, if a pig is exposed to a wide range of foods throughout its life, what happens to the microbes? But my assumption would be yes, that the diversity would influence.

Because a lot of the work to this point has been more directed phenotypically, you're trying to change some

entire animal characteristic and improve it or keep it the same, as opposed to going at the genotypic level.

I think this has been a great conversation. very timely. I've learned a lot. It's been great. I've ever seen plastic work.

Yeah. Thank you for the discussion. It's been I've really enjoyed talking with you all. And hopefully we can all meet face to face soon and yeah, thanks for thanks again for the opportunity.

Well, we'll look forward to the face to face and thank you all for coming online. And yes, I learned a ton here today.

Likewise, likewise. Thanks again.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

The production of food includes everything from large-scale growing and processing facilities to small backyard gardens. Our guest this episode, Dr. Jeremy Cowan discusses teaching future growers —and eaters— the importance of growing food with people in mind at every point in the production-consumption loop. As a land-grant institution K-State is challenged to teach, learn and research ways to feed the world. Local fresh produce has long been lacking in most diets and questions on the sustainability of current large farming practices is top of mind when considering our long-term ability to produce food. So where does the small farm fit in today's food production realm?

Transcript:

The Three-Legged Stool of Sustainability – The Intricacy of Teaching and Producing Healthy Food with Dr. Jeremy Cowan, Assistant Professor of Sustainable Food Production Systems at Kansas State University

We as a society are so focused on convenience when it comes to food that we tend to ignore nutrition and we see that in our health bills or medical bills and things like that. Obesity rates, cancer rates, people are not feeding themselves well because they don't take the time to feed themselves well.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello everybody and welcome back to Something to Chew On. In this episode, we will be discussing the complexity of teaching and producing healthy, affordable local food. Our featured guest, Dr. Jeremy Cowan, Assistant Professor of Sustainable Food Production Systems, focuses on regenerative agriculture and specialty food crops systems and explores the possible contributions of biodegradable plastics and permaculture, an agricultural system or method that integrates human activity with natural surroundings to create self-sustaining ecosystems. His work focuses on training future growers and eaters, the importance of growing food with people in mind at every point along the production consumption loop. As the land grant university we are challenged to teach, learn and research ways to feed the world. Food production can include everything from large scale growing, and processing of food products to small backyard gardens. Local fresh produce has long been lacking in most diets. And questions on the sustainability of current large farming practices is top of mind when considering our long term ability to produce food. Another major consideration of food production is one that we probably don't often consider, and that is the social implications of moving off the land. So where does the small farm fit in today's food production realm? Welcome to the podcast. Jeremy.

Thank you. Happy to be here.

Your area of expertise is in small farming, which I am sure as we get through this discussion is going to be explained in much more detail on what small farming actually means. In the past, we've done a lot of several podcasts with researchers on campus that have talked about very interesting research in soils, soil health, microbiology in various areas. And it seemed to me that a lot of that research is more geared towards large scale farming. Having listened to all of those and really thinking about what you do, though, I think there's probably a good potential for a lot of that information to have direct impact on what you're doing as well. So I would like to get into a little bit more of that, hopefully, as we talk through this. But initially, I'd like to step back and learn a bit more about you how you got interested in this. And what brought you to K State.

Oh, that's a story that could go way back. So a lot of them do it for me. So when I started my undergrad, I was polisci major, I was planning to go to law school and then be a staffer for some congressmen somewhere and get into politics. And that didn't work out for my family too well. And about a year from finishing that degree, my I was faced with a choice to change majors. And I had a really hard time with that. Because the I think the dominant social expectation is that you go to college to get a high paying job. And you know, the path that I had looked at taking would have been decent, or at least I thought it would have been decent in that regard. And all of the other ones that had any kind of interest to me would have sent me back a year or two in college. And so I sat back and had some reflective time and I thought to myself, well what do I enjoy, because you can still go to law school with any degree. And so I thought back to some of my pre adolescent years when I felt motivated to go start a garden in my parents backyard, and how much I enjoyed that process. And so I figured, I looked at I looked at the requirements of a horticulture degree, and it would have only sent me back one more semester from what I was currently Because I'd picked up a few courses that were related in community college. And so I went majored in horticulture, and I loved every minute of it. I thought that I never really realized that there could be that much joy in plants generally. And actually, at that time, I was more focused on landscape plants and not in the food world. And I enjoyed it and did so well in it at the time that I applied for grad school right off the bat. And I started a Ph. D program right outside right after my Bachelor's, and quickly ran out of money and decided not to go load up on student loans, I went and got a job. And I was working in landscaping for a while, and still had that desire to go to law school. And so I applied for law schools and went to law school and was doing a joint JD MBA. My goal wasn't at that point, it transitioned from politics to real estate. And this is a really long story, transition into real estate. And this was in the early 2000s. And I was finishing up my MBA in I finished in 2007. And if you recall, the real estate market in 2007, was about to take a giant crash. So I was in real estate, I was doing some consulting at the time, I was actually making really good money, and then all of a sudden the floor was dropped out from underneath everything. And I was struggling to make ends meat. Well, I had gotten married about the same time and my wife is working. And so I had some freedom and said to start my own landscape company. And at the same time, we found some property to hold all of the landscaping equipment that happened to be on an avocado farm avocado orchard. And we made ourselves a big garden. And I was just like, Oh, I remember how much I really liked this. And about that time, we started having children. And with that we were thinking about nutrition and lifestyle and things like that. And I thought to myself, you know, I'd probably do really well, in my mind anyways to focus more on sustainable food and healthy food. And from the growing standpoint, so I started looking to go back to school and finish the PhD. Learn what I could about sustainable farming, I decided I wanted to shift to vegetables. So I was looking specifically at sustainable vegetable production. And I called faculty all over the country. And everybody said, Sorry, we don't have money. And then I got a random call one day from professor at Washington State University saying how would you feel about working in plastics. And I was like, that doesn't sound very sustainable. Right. And so, but I knew that, you know, grad school was just the stepping stone to academia. And you're not necessarily stuck in the realm in which you go to grad school. And so I took on a project, looking at the use of biodegradable plastic mulch films for producing tomatoes in high tunnels. So that is how I that was my path.

As far as the small farming thing went, I guess to me, I don't know that my specific expertise is in small farming, as much as it is in vegetable production. I would say that if I had personal preferences, I'd probably lean towards small farming, especially when we start the conversation of sustainability. And especially when we contemplate the three legs of that sustainability stool. I think that in large scale farming, we see a lot of work in economic and environmental sustainability moving forward. But I think the social end of it is completely neglected. And so to me, it's really difficult to manage a program in sustainable agriculture without contemplating labor and community and things like that, that often are either shunned or overlooked entirely in more large scale agriculture, at least from my perspective.

So can you say more about the three legged stool of sustainability?

Sure. I, you know, and there's always this discussion about what does sustainability mean? And I think the general consensus question, yeah, well, I honestly don't think that there should be a single answer. I think that sustainability should be highly context dependent. But I think what, at least I've gathered as the consensus is, is that in order to be sustainable, it has to be economically viable, environmentally sound and socially responsible. And so for any enterprise, and in any field, it doesn't necessarily. It's not necessarily just within agriculture, that that's the case. So I like to keep my answer to that question intentionally vague because I think it should be because I think it's context dependent.

Interesting so you in reading through your bio. On the website you talked about the work you did with plastics and with what is biodegradable I mean you did a fair amount of work in that area obviously what what is that?

So biodegradable plastics are just what you would expect they're plastics.

Sounds like an oxymoron to me, right, right.

So, since the 1950s, polyethylene plastics been the go to mulch material and in generally plastic material and agriculture, specifically in mulches, polyethylene is very workable, it's very functional as a mulch. Biodegradable plastic films, substitutes that polyethylene with molecules that have the potential to break down completely into nothing but carbon dioxide, water and microbial biomass. Now in practice, we've had things on the market since the 80s, that have claimed to be biodegradable and early on, they were not actually biodegradable, but rather they were photo degradable, or Oxo degradable, meaning that they would weather to the point that they'd fragment and they might fragment to the point that you don't see them, but they don't actually go away. And so when you talk about microplastics, and nanoplastics, that's usually either you've got some sort of photo, or Oxo degradable, some sort of degradable plastic that doesn't get fully broken down through those microbial processes. So when you're talking about biodegradable, there's several different feedstocks that can be used to create a product that would that has the potential to break down fully. One of those complicating factors is the soil environment isn't necessarily ideal for the early stages of breakdown. So biodegradation is a two stage process. It starts with weathering, which you have heat, light water, and things like that will start to break down the molecules to the point that they they shrink up enough that increase the surface area, and once it hits some certain threshold, then the microbes can start going to work on it, but it has to break down enough for them to have access to the to the molecules to start consuming them to complete their own microbial processes. And so once it gets to that point, it tends to speed up and that's when the bio degradation actually happens.

Does this have to happen in fallow ground? Or can it be? Is it process that works in ground that's actually in production?

I mean, the short answer is it can be either I think that in production, it's probably more effective at the breakdown insofar as so one of the studies that I did, we looked at post tillage degradation, right. And I used the word degradation intentionally because we weren't measuring bio degradation. So we didn't have the capacity in the field in my lab to measure carbon dioxide evolution in the soil and things like that and actually measure the bio degradation. So what we did was, we planted a broccoli crop on plastic, we used two different biodegradable films and then a nonwoven fabric, which is kind of like a landscape fabric. And at the end of the broccoli season, so during the season we we followed the or we measured the amount of visual degradation. So our surrogate for that was how much soil is visible in what was originally mulched. So you'd get pinholes and then pinholes would open the cracks. And so we'd measure that pre tillage. Then when we tilled it down, we'd go and get a golf cup cutter. So it was about four inches in diameter and six inches deep. And we'd pull soil cores and then spend a lot of time sifting out plastic fragments from the soil cores. And we did that every couple of months for the next for 13 months post tillage. And during that time, we had two other tillage events. So there were at least three tillage events. We had the one where we tilled it down, and then we had to in prepping the beds for the next season. And so when I say that in production, it's probably more active. It's because there's more mechanical processes that work on breaking things down small enough for the microbes to actually attack it. And so in that study we had the nonwoven fabric was made out of poly lactic acid. I don't know if you remember the I Yep. PLM the SunChips bags, compostable and obnoxiously loud. Those are PLA and PLA is fully has the potential to completely biodegrade. But the limitation is that it will only biodegrade at higher temperatures, like what you would find a municipal compost, so over 150 degrees Fahrenheit, and you're never gonna see that in the soil unless you're solarizing and you have the right environment for it. And so it didn't degrade at all. I shouldn't say that it broke into smaller fragments, but we were still able to capture 100% of what we expected to capture based on what we were sampling. We had another product and once you get into commercial products, we start talking about trade secrets and proprietary blends. So we don't know exactly what everything we have our suspicions. But a product that's on the market called Bio agri that product. Over the 13 months post tillage we were, we were only able to find about 65% of it after the 13 months. So you know, from that we extrapolate that 35% breakdown and in about a year. And then we had another experimental product that was made out of a class of compounds called polyhydroxyalkanoates, or PHA's. And those that went after 13 months, we weren't able to find. Now it also performed least well in the field because it broke down faster. Part of that had to do with the manufacturing process that when it came off the line, it was folded in half. And so that crease where it was folded, broke down really quickly. But it also was an experimental product. And so as an experimental product, it may have been manufactured such that it was gonna break down faster anyways, but it was still, you know, proof of concept we weren't able, and we were sifting down to a millimeter square. So we weren't able to find anything bigger than a millimeter square when we were doing our sifting. So..

In a land grant environment, which this is, producers could expect, or would anticipate being able to go out and reach into the extension communication system to get the information, for example, to go to this sort of make this sort of change. Does that exist in this part of the world, I would presume it would exist in the vegetable growing parts of the world. And those though, California central valleys, but…

Yeah, so I think that the relevance is probably fairly low. For the traditional Kansas crop mix, you know, where you're on a heavy grain rotation, you're not getting a whole lot of plastic out in the field anyways. So it may not have high relevance for the folks here, unless you're talking about some of the smaller farmers that then would be growing vegetables or fruits and use plastics as part of their as part of their general routine. You know, the advent of the Internet, and it doesn't matter where it was produced, you can now access information on all of that stuff. So, you know, the project that my doctoral work was funded on, and then another subsequent project that was related to that. Were all USDA SERI funded and, you know, between Washington State University and University of Tennessee and also worked a little bit with Texas A&M.

Did you in fact?

Yeah. And so we published several papers on it. We published several factsheets and we had established a website biodegradable mulches, or biodegradable mulch.org. I'm not sure if that still gets back to the system now that the grants gone up, I don't know if UT still maintaining it that I haven't looked lately. But there's a lot of papers that were compiled there. If anybody wanted to look for more information on biodegradable plastics.

So what do you think the prospects for these are and and both in terms of large scale production and then the small farmers?

That's a great question, because So I recently reviewed an economics factsheet on biodegradable mulches where they had done basically the, you know, the economic analysis for where the breakevens on plastic switching from regular polyethylene to biodegradable plastics. And so with traditional plastics, you have to remove the plastics from the field. I mean, some people will till them in and then they're just a mess forever. But in general, you've got to spend the labor to go and cut the mulch, pull the mulch, take the all the mulch to the dump and then pay for dump fees. Because while plastic mulch is potentially recyclable, the access to facilities is relatively low in the US and then having a lot of soil and plant debris on the mulch tends to increase weights and recyclers don't like to clean them. So unless you're going to clean them, which then is another massive labor expense, then recycling is not an option for most growers.

So what brought you to K State?

What brought me to K State, the job description. That's another story in and of itself, but so this job description was specifically geared towards sustainable quote unquote, sustainable agriculture focused on small scale farming regenerative agricultural practices. The word permaculture was used in there and and it was teaching and it was running the student farm and it was everything that I wanted when I went through grad school and was starting to look for jobs and wasn't available when I first graduated. So you know, Kansas was a big question. Mark for us. I've never even driven through Kansas, let alone for any period of time before my interview. So yeah. It's been an interesting transition because of that. So a lifelong west coast, resident and native and coming to the Midwest, there's been some real positive things and then some real negative things ie chiggers.

True, totally understandable what, what is permaculture?

Permaculture is so it's a system of design that's intended to mimic natural systems. So Permaculture is coined from combining permanent and agriculture. The idea stemmed from a Tasmanian scientist back in the 1970s, he was influenced by several writers from the early 20th century, late 19th century, with the idea being that if we mimic natural systems, the systems themselves would become more sustainable. So if we provide more of the ecosystem services that a natural ecosystem would provide, say, a forest ecosystem, then assuming we can capture the yields that are necessary if we're in a more natural state, or at least designed the system so that it performs more of the ecosystem functions of a natural system, that the system would be more resilient and not have some of the potential issues that large scale monocultures would inherently have.

Interesting. Do you work at all? Net? Well, from any perspective, do you work at all with the Land Institute in Salina? Have you had an overlap there?

I have had some interaction with the Land Institute, we've talked about trying to acquire some of their current is a product for a research project that we're doing. We were looking for brands specifically, and they don't have brand for from Kernza available. And one thing I found is that and I don't know if this is a me thing, or a Midwest thing or a Kansas thing, but I've had very hard time finding funding for the work that I'm doing. So where my specialty is vegetables and vegetables isn't a very prominent class of agricultural products in the Midwest, I've found that it's a little bit more difficult to get funding for research. And as a result, things have been a little bit slow on the taking off. I got a good startup package. And so I've been bootstrapping a lot of work that we've been doing, but that'll only go so far.

And that is the realist of research.

One of the reasons that we were looking at the Kernza brand was that I have an interest in integrating crop production. And so one thing that we're looking at, we have a project that's very permaculture related, where we're looking at integrating mushrooms into a vegetable system or fruit system, strawberries, I guess, were one of the crops we're looking at using. Well, that got us asking some other questions about mushrooms. And so if we were to look at different substrates as far as the protein source in the substrate, is there an impact on yields or quality of the mushrooms later on? So we were going to look at comparing different brands sources. So rice, wheat and oat bran are very commonly used in bag mushroom production. You know, if we looked at quinoa Bran or Kernza, Bran or buckwheat Bran do these things have, is there a difference in the protein profiles that would come through in the subsequent mushroom crop? And so we went looked for these different brand sources. And the closest thing we could find for quinoa brand would have been out of the Netherlands and buckwheat brand. I think we were looking at Korea or something like that. And, you know, Kernza brand doesn't exist unless you make it and I don't know, in talking to the land instituted in sound like the quantity of Kernza could have been available to us in any kind of a short order given that we needed 50 pounds of brand.

No, no, yeah, yeah, you would have needed 400 pounds of Kernza.

Yeah, so we're gonna start off with just doing the rice out and wheat and look at the protein profile of the subsequent mushroom crop and see if there's any big difference. So we'll look at the three different brand sources. We're getting the brand analyzed right now as far as nitrogen and micronutrients and then we'll we're also going to do different levels of protein or nitrogen as our analog for protein. Just to see how that affects the mushroom crop in the bags.

Do you see mushrooms is a solid cropping potential in this area for small producers?

Um, well, it's it. It definitely has potential insofar as mushrooms can produce be produced in a garage in closets in a high tunnel, right? The mushrooms. I mean, they feed on dead things, and you can put dead things anywhere. I mean, that's maybe a little overly bland or not bland, but Koi. But the reality is, is if you have a carbon source and you have a nitrogen source, then you can basically grow mushrooms. I mean, there's, there's more to it. But I've seen mushrooms grown on logs in woodlot. Now woodland is a little bit less prevalent in Kansas. But I've also seen it grown under shade cloth. So what we're doing out of the student farm, our project that I mentioned, that's permaculture related, we have a project that we've started that using Hugo culture as a system for we're looking at season extension using who culture and I guess I should step back Hugo culture is German for mound culture, Hill culture, and it's basically creating large wind road mounds that then could be used to grow crops on. Currently, there is nothing in the literature about Hugo culture, it's all popular press, anecdotal stuff. And so you know, as far as research goes, it's wide open, it's also impossible to get funding for because there's nothing to say, here's what somebody else did. And let's build on that. So what we're going to do is we're going to look at shady side versus sunny side, whether or not you know, the shady side will extend a cool season crop later into the summer for us. Whether the sunny side can help us get in earlier get out earlier with successional planting. But then we thought, you know, we've got these mounds, we're going to irrigate them for the vegetable crop or the fruit crop if we put strawberries on them. And because that moisture will be maintained in the soil, what if we laid down some mushroom logs at the base and at the top of this and to see if we could produce a mushroom crop at the same time with it, we were thinking with little extra effort. Now drilling mushroom logs is no small feat, especially when you're drilling about 1000 feet of them.

I'm aware of a local farmer that has mushroom logs. Talking mushrooms.

Yeah, so 1000 not a small differences took us about five or six months to get through it. I mean, not full time, obviously. Nope. It was no small feat. My grad student I think wants to kick me.

So won't when they start producing mushrooms. Right.

So that system I think might have some potential. We'll see the you know, we were approaching it from a more commercial aspect as far as what the potential benefits could be. One because I thought that would be more fundable if we're looking at season extension for commercial crops. You know, the flip side of that is if I was to bring an economist into it, the amount of labor involved in building these mounds has been surprisingly large. But you know, if you've got a lot of extra wood material that you're say trimming out of an orchard or trimming out of a riparian area or cleaning up a roadside, if you have access to a lot of woody material, Google culture might be a more environmentally sound method of disposing of the that wood and burning it. Right, having all that carbon dioxide float off into the atmosphere instead, you can bury it. Yeah, sequester it for a much longer period of time.

That's, that's fascinating. He really is really,

Can you say more about the student farm?

Sure. So the student farm currently comprises about eight acres of what is the Guyer Forestry Research Center that's part of K State. It's located at the Tuttle Creek State Park. It's not part of the park, but you have to access it from the park and the Guyer Research Center is about 60 acres and it has a lot of long term forestry research happening there. So in 2008, my predecessor Rhonda Yong ki was able to carve out about three acres of that and started the student farm where we have a student farm club here that's housed in the Horticulture Department and the students and other interested students and sometimes faculty through their courses will bring students out to work on the farm to teach on the farm and the farm had sat fallow, so to speak for about two years between the last time it was actively managed and once I was able to get it managed, again, maybe a year and a half. But we hired a full time farm manager last January and this last year, we produced 8000 pounds of produce for Derby and Kramer dining halls. Wow. He's sports grill at the Union. And then the little grill out on Dyer. Oh, sure. stuff. That's great because they couldn't get more local than us. No,

So we're literally right across the street from the little grill. So we're producing mostly vegetables right now. There had been an orchard that was planted a few years ago using money from the greenhouses. found here at K State, but because of lack of management, there was some deer, you got to be able to do that we had a lot of rubbing damage on trees, there's there's three trees that still have still put up green leaves, but it's just a matter of time before they go, they've been completely girdled by deer robbing. So at some point what my intent is to plant another orchard. In fact, with the permaculture theme, there's this idea of food forests, which is a multi level, or multi tiered polyculture system that focuses on food producing plants, but planted in a massive polyculture. And comparing the potential productivity of that system compared to a more traditional orchard system. And so we have the space now we were able to expand the farm from the three acres that it was originally, I guess I should say it's more seven acres. There's another about acre of the shop and the shared storage and dependencies. But that shared with the Guyer, folks, so yeah, we have plans. And this last summer, we piloted a small farm practicum out at the farm, we had eight students sign up and they took on a project for the summer and one students project was an aquaculture project, he started nine, we were able to get some IBC totes food grade IBC totes that he's installed and created a you know, we've got goldfish out there that that have survived the winter so far. And in fact, I just met with a professor of biology that's interested in doing some work on the emotions of those fish and stress and how that works. So I don't know if anything will come up that I you know, I think it would be fantastic to collaborate on something like that. And the system, that particular system was built so that it could be expanded we can we currently have one bed one fish tank, we could probably fit for more fish tanks and about nine or 10 more beds. So it's expandable, we have two high tunnels. So the Aqua cultures and one of the high tunnels we have another high tunnel that specifically for vegetable production. Interestingly, our soil test last year said that we had something like 400 pounds of nitrogen per acre in the soil there. So either somebody spilled something, yeah, I don't know what happened. But we've been gladly soaking that up with our vegetable crops. So we had some amazing eggplant and peppers in there last season, as well as tomatoes. And

Is there any potential of doing work with the cat's cupboard here? I know that they're just down the hall from wherever we're recording this?

Yep. I don't. I don't know if we've already started. But I know that we've had conversations with cats cupboard about providing some fresh produce there. My farm manager so Regan Hale is our new farm manager here. And she's been doing a great job of reaching out to folks. And I know she's had conversations with cats cupboards. I don't know the status.

I know there's some limitations with what they can handle in there. I think it's all just dry and shelf stable at this point in time, which is not what you're doing. No, no, no. But the the idea of being able to help the the hungry students on campus, which is it's an issue, I mean, availability of food to students here is an issue with thinking that there's a good potential link there. But it's interesting to know that you're already supplying those vegetables to student housing and the food services there. That's great.

So what do you say to the students who are working on the farm there? And then I'm curious in what, their interest in path is and is related to another thing that I want to vote for you to talk about a little bit more and the role of small farms right, in general, right. So there's, there's lots of different small farm things, some of them, you know, as a business as a livelihood, some of its just the backyard thing, you know, and some of its like, small is relative to right. So there are some very large small farms, right. So could you just say something about, like, what, what your interests are and what, what kinds of things you want to sort of see happen?

So the first part of your question was, what are the students? Yes, and I should probably pull them at some point. And I do and I teach class, you know, what are your interests and I'd say that the vast majority are there because it's a major requirement for horticulture production majors that they take either fruit or vegetable production. I would say that there's a small proportion of our horticulture students that actually want to get into fruits or vegetables, some sort of food producing horticultural crop or cropping system. And so for those students, they tend to be our regulars out at the farm. I guess my vision for the student farm has been since I got here and what I interviewed on was the idea of creating the premier small to mid scale diversified food training center like farming training center in the Midwest, and, you know, that's kind of a very narrow definition. But at the same time, it's something that doesn't really exist. You know, there are some farms that do training, mostly private, and mostly in the city environment. So over in Kansas City and St. Louis, I've seen some operations that are doing farm training like that. And our extension offices do quite a bit of it as well, especially in the urban counties in Kansas. So for me, I'd love to be able to get people out there for workshops. And, you know, we've been talking about trying to establish a harvest festival, some sort of conference slash just celebration out at the at the farm at the end of the seasons. Great idea. That's a great idea. Yeah. But with, we could definitely use more help as far as people goes, and getting that done, the students seem really excited about it. But at the same time, they tend to be busier than what would be required of having the students help us organize that and Reagan's focused a lot on creating a plan and executing that plan for growing produce out there and marketing that produce and whatnot. But it is, it's on our agenda. In fact, we've been, as we've been developing the idea, what we've come to is, is that we have to grow pumpkin so that we can have a pumpkin chucking at this event, and we need to grow enough tomatoes that we can have a dunk of Professor like a dunk tank, but with tomatoes in the tank instead of water.

Dunk a dean would be even better actually.

Right. That would be fantastic. That was the sucker. They've all said it's got to be me. So I mean, that's been the limitation is just manpower right now for getting that off the ground and some funding. But, you know, we have big plans for the farm. We've already the Save farm or the Save organization service members. They've had their bees out there for years, they've been out there helping the students with, you know, field prep and doing some of the work as far as you know, tractor work when there wasn't somebody who knew how to use the tractor, they'd have somebody out there that would happily go till for us. They've done a beekeeping last summer. Last summer when we had our small farm practicum. They did a beekeeping workshop for the students. And so it's been a somewhat fruitful relationship there. And I hope that that continues, and we've been working with the Kansas permaculture Institute. And this summer we're planning to offer a permaculture design certification course. We've still been going back and forth as to whether or not we want to offer it for credit, because the timing would be such that it would have to go through Go Global Campus, and there's a lot of costs involved in putting on that and saddling students with a higher costs of Global Campus fees plus the cost of putting on the course plus the cost of tuition. It's just been something that we've been struggling with as to whether or not that's feasible for students without, you know, saddling them with more debt. In doing that, so, but we are putting on the course. So the last two weeks, last week and a half before the fall semester this year, out of the student farm we'll be putting on that course. And that information can be found at the KPIs website, which is Kansaspermaculture.org.

Are these sorts of approaches amenable to cooperative sorts of undertakings? Could you have a group of owners of land that yeah, the southern Kansas had an egg Co Op at one time. There have been other sorts of coops I just wondered if this particular type of farming had any. So I think they just are disadvantaged.

Cooperative efforts in the food system are highly I think they they're, they're underutilized and would be favorable to one approaching that sustain that leg of sustainability and social responsibility, right. I was previously the director of extension for Spokane County in Washington. And in Spokane County, we had started a food hub called link foods and link foods had started with 30 farmers or farms. And it started basically as a marketing cooperative for those farmers. So the big boon for farmers there was that Spokane, two major economic drivers currently is education and healthcare. So there's three universities in the Spokane area. There's also two major hospitals and several other medical centers in that area, and as institutional buyers, small farmers have a really hard time accessing those markets because of insurance requirements. So where some of these folks are requiring $5 million in liability insurance in order to purchase food. Most small farmers don't have carried So the Co Op, the big benefit for farmers aside from the marketing was that for $100 a year, they had a joint liability policy that would allow those farmers to access those institutional markets. And so for the first several years, Gonzaga University was the biggest buyer from the cooperative. And so we have the small farmers that would have never been able to sell to the big institutional buyers now able to sell into Gonzaga and Gonzaga was doing a great job. They had a local food initiative they were their goal was to provide 20% of their dining menu from the local area. And so they were highlighting farms in their menus at the restaurants on campus and in the dining halls on campus. They were buying a lot of local food. And that was great. It really got the co op off to a good start. The coops also selling into the school district, they're doing a food of the month or a vegetable of the month type of thing. They're selling into the hospitals now they started a CSA. So for all the farmers that you know, had all this produce, they posted on the website that were buyers would go and basically pick and choose what they wanted. But not everything would sell. And so for those things that wouldn't sell then everything was brought into the CSA and then the the co op was just offloading people's extras into the CSA, which, you know, at first, we had some farmers that were like, What do you mean, you're gonna do a CSA, you're gonna compete with my CSA, but the reality was, was that it was a great outlet for the majority of farmers to offload those things that they weren't selling. So it was a huge benefit to the farmers, it was a great benefit to the community. As far as just recognizing that we actually had agriculture really close to Spokane. Spokane is very at the very north edge of the Palouse region, which is massive grain growing region, probably the most productive grain growing region in the country, if not the world, as far as per acre yields go. But you know, the vast majority of that, that we all get shipped out to Japan. So you know, even though it's a massive agricultural region, nobody's eating local grains there, because it's all getting exported. There's a couple of producers now that have started to focus on that local grains. And in fact, part of the cooperative they started a malt house. And they're doing local malt, which of course, all of the micro breweries and home brewers they're just dying for. They just think it's the greatest thing ever. But they're using Palouse grown grains, in their malts and in their beers.

So you see small flickers of this things you're describing in this area? And I suspect it's probably population. If nothing else, what do you see the potential for those kinds of activities? Certainly, locally, but even in other areas around the state?

Yeah, so I definitely think population has something to do with it, as well as just ingrained culture. So Kansas is a is the wheat state, you know, and even if corn and soy are maybe passing, or maybe the reality is, it's a grain state, and that's, you know, staple crop, but not necessarily where people are looking at getting the variety and nutrition from their diet. And so I guess I shouldn't ignore beef, but

At your peril.

But then, where's the beef going? I mean, even the beef is going to be exported out of the state. And for the most part, so I think population is probably the key driver, you have to have enough population so that that subset of the population who really wants to have local foods is there. But again, the culture here in Kansas may not be quite as focused on local because we have such as, you know, global mindset when it comes to our agriculture, that who's thinking local, I think it's going to be a smaller proportion than states like Washington or California or coastal states on either coast. And so, you know, if you get closer to Kansas City in Wichita, you're starting to have that population.

It's just gonna ask if you're seeing that in, in the larger cities.

In fact, this weekend, I was just giving a couple of talks at the Wichita had a farmers market, entrepreneurship workshop and food producer entrepreneurship workshop. And I think a lot of that is evidence that we have that maybe not critical mass, but we have enough mass that we're approaching critical mass for creating those kinds of environments in those cities. I think Kansas City is probably farther along in which ties in to fashion have been surprised by that. Yeah, bigger cities and having more people both growing and eating and but I think there has to be that critical mass of people who want local food and then you have to have the growers who are willing to stick their necks out to either create a co op and a food hub or to just buck the system and flip for that institutional policy or wishing it to push the envelope.

I've seen certainly in Manhattan in This area there's there is a small population that supports that. And, it's a pretty strong group, but it is not large. Yeah, right. It's just

well, and I mean, to be economically viable, you need enough buyers, right? You're right, your production worthwhile. So there are farmers who farm out of what's the word? It's almost charity. You know how many of our small farmers are just doing it as a hobby, and they have off farm income to support it. And, you know, I, when I was, I was farming while I was in Spokane, and it was great on my taxes, because I'd get a little bit of a write off every year. But at the same time, we were eating really well. So.

So can you talk about more about the social aspects? I mean, so the, the prospects, you're just saying that the prospects for some of these initiatives and for small farming, and maybe some of the permaculture stuff depends on a population, people who are interested? How do you shift that? Should we shift this? Should we should you just be working for the people who are already interested? Would you like to see, you know, more of a shift in the population? How do you make these things happen?

It's a really tough question. You know, you could approach it from several different angles, you know, we as a society are so focused on convenience when it comes to food that we tend to ignore nutrition. And we see that in our health bills, or medical bills and things like that. Obesity rates, cancer rates, people are not feeding themselves well, because they don't take the time to feed themselves. Well, and how do you overcome that? I don't know. It's something that you either have to start in the home in young with young kids in school. But then, you know, is that where the money is? As far as education goes, is in nutrition education? Or is it in STEM? Should these things be the same? Maybe they should.

It's part of the same programs.

And then, you know, there's also the mindset and production side, especially in large scale production, you know, we have this, this call to save or feed the world. And when I think of that statement, and through the lens of sustainability, or social responsibility, and sustainability, you know, if your farm is going out of business, that person cannot feed their family. And if our goal is to feed the world, we I think we need to have the perspective that starts from home, you know, if we have farmers going out of business and having to go move to the city, because they're bankrupt, because they can't they, you know, their yield this year, fell off below that critical threshold of keeping them in business. You know, maybe we should give pause to the dominant mindset of, you know, get bigger get out, because that's not socially sustainable. That's why our rural communities are crumbling. Because we have farms that are getting so big, they're bigger than big cities. Yes. And is that sustainable? You know, I could play into some of the fears of certain classes of people and you know, you get to where the farms so big. What's the end result of that consolidation? The end result is one farm one farmer. And when that happens, who's that farmer? We talked to some conservatives out there, and they might be concerned about having the government run all the food production. But that's, that's the ultimate end of that policy of get bigger get out is that, you know, you have consolidation to the point that it's one farm, one farmer, and who is that? So that could be positive, that could be negative? I think most people would probably think of that as a fairly negative thing. And when you have, you know, farm sizes in the 10s of 1000s of acres. It's not. It's not conducive to community and social responsibility.

Right. Yeah. And so that's how I was just gonna say, so small farming, at least for you is partly about the community and support for the community and sort of having, yeah, and population centers where they're right, you know, more than one farmer around sort of.

Sure. Yeah. Well, on the flip side of that is, is, you know, there was a time where everybody was a farmer, and everybody helped their neighbor out. And that sounds quaint and delightful to somebody. I mean, I think it'd be great if there was some more of that, but at the same time, now, you're talking about economic viability and the ability of our society to advance technologically economically. And there's this conflict between, you know, communities that stay intact and neighbors who like each other and will help each other and being able to advance economically. And where do you, you know, where's the sweet spot between those and I don't have the answer to that. And I doubt anybody does, because it's so subjective and will vary from person to person. But what I can say is, is that You know, in the regime of consolidation that we were in, it's definitely not good for communities. And it's not good for the social sustainability of the system generally.

Yeah, that's it you, you take people out to towns that had had better days. And you hear them saying, Well, where did they all go? You know? Where are they now? And the answer is just almost every place, right? Everywhere but here.

But here, that's about a month ago, we did a podcast with a historian here on campus that did has done a lot of a lot of work on farming in the Southern Great Plains. And we got into a discussion about small towns in the state of Kansas, and just the 1000s of them that are just not there anymore, that have just disappeared. And they're continuing to disappear. Because as you said, you'd get these farms that are 10,000 acres plus, and where do your neighbors live? You don't have neighbors, and you are always your hospital.

Some people complain that their kids don't want to stay on the farm anymore. And so they have to sell because they don't have anybody to pass it on to or, you know, with that general thing, but you have to look at what's the cause of that if there's no community for the children to have friends and activities and things like that. So I mean, it becomes a chicken and egg question, do you preserve the community to keep the community or do you preserve the farm to keep the farm and those two things don't seem to go together anymore, you can't preserve the farm and the community at least in the dominant global paradigm of agriculture?

Well, at the very start, we talked a bit about some of the other research that was being done here on campus, and what positive impact that can have or just direct relationship it can have with the smaller farming operations. There's a lot of work being done also in Feed the Future Labs, which I'm sure you're aware of, and small farming globally, not just within the state of Kansas. And if I think I'm correct in that small farming basically is a growing enterprise worldwide.

Well, small farming has always been by the numbers the most numerous. As far as the numbers go, there have always been more small farms than big farms. That's just a function of their small farms. And they're easier to start. They're cheaper to start, right. And they're less capital intensive and all that. I do think that in the US, there's a growing interest in small farms, but at the same time, there's also a it's really hard to sell a local potato in any market that's grown on a small farm when you're competing against large farms and export, you know, imports from the northwest or wherever. And so I think there's this tension between the desire for producing and consuming local foods and the ability to afford local foods. You know, where you've got, a lot of these commodity crops are subsidized through crop insurance and things like that. It's not necessarily something that's accessible to small farms. And as a result, they're having to charge the full price of What food should cost, because they're actually paying for all of their that production puts and the production costs, versus the larger scale farms that are focused on one crop where there is an insurance policy to help them overcome yield deficiencies and things like that. And so it makes it really hard for small farms to compete, even for those people who might be more inclined to buy local. If they can't afford it, they can't afford it.

Well, when looking again, kind of stepping back to the, to the science to some of the research that's happening there. I think I remember one of the gentlemen working in the Feed the Future labs talking about. And I don't, I don't remember specifically what the measurement was, but introducing some of these higher technologies to small farmers, where you've got a small farmer in Africa capable of using his phone with an app. And, you know, a camera of some sort to actually do measurements. Do you see that kind of connection between some of these research activities and small farming practices? Or is there is there still a pretty big gap between newer technologies, and what's actually happening on the small farms?

Well, I, from what I have seen, I haven't seen much use of that kind of high technology. In fact, I wasn't even aware that there's an app on your phone that you can take pictures.

I may have totally misunderstood what he was saying.

I can totally see the applicability of that we're talking about there's drones that are used for that kind of a shooting and I've seen in Washington State I had a colleague in extension that had got a drone that he installed some of these cameras to be able to go out and do assessments of smaller fields. I think vegetable systems tend to be smaller in general than some of the than the grain systems. And so as a result, you know, 100 acre farm is a large vegetable farm, at least in some places, some places 100. Still small, but but that's accessible for using a drone, you can fly a drone over 100 acres in a couple of hours, and then have some data back really quickly. And there are farmers that I know they're doing that as far as the handheld device, I think if I was an urban farmer, and I had access to that, I'd love to be able to use that kind of technology, in order to save myself some money on fertility or, you know, maybe early detection for a disease or past that would be great. I think that that would be embraced. But at the same time, you know, I subscribed to a grower magazine called Growing for market. And I don't see that kind of technology being advertised in that kind of an outlet, which would be something that small scale farmers would read. And that's where they would find that. Yeah, that's one place. I mean, in Kansas, we do have some vegetable specialists in our extension, but not too many. And I don't know what they're putting out. But that would be the kind of thing that if it was there, I'd love to see them putting that kind of information in the hands of growers. But I'd be fascinated by it. I think it would be great if it was applicable at that scale.

Yeah, I forget how much that was aspirational or experimental still, or I don't think I think that particular project was Yeah, I don't think that one was yet describing something production.

But in the aspirational side of it, I mean, in my mind, I can see some of that kind of thing happening. I can perceive that that's possible.

To be able to go out and yeah, use your smartphone, snap a picture and know how much nitrogen you need to put on. Right. Yeah, that week. Yeah. That'd be amazing. You know, contour plot.

Spend great conversation Absolutely.

This has been spectacular.

Hopefully I got my foot in my mouth anyway. No, that's great. Yeah, my coming to vegetables might have been a little long.

No, not at all.

Do you have any follow up questions for us?

Oh, I hadn't even thought about that. I guess it'd be great to come up with collaborations with folks. I mean, we have the student farm and we have the ability to test some things on a smaller scale that may be applicable to small farms, but if it has applicability outside of that scale, as well, I mean, we're we just acquired some Emmer wheat some Ethiopian blue changed Emmer wheat with the idea of trying to do some intercropping work with it. Nice. I don't know if you're familiar with Masanobu Fukuoka is One Straw Revolution. It was one of those that inspired some of the back to the land and some of those kinds of movements in the 70s 60s. But he was a plant pathologist with the Japanese Government and left to go back to his family farm and over 40 years had developed a system of intercropping where rice dryland Rice was his primary crop. And he was intercropping, a winter grain as a cover for the winter. And he had root crops like radish and things like that. And then vegetable crops. And he had them all intercrop together. And he said it took him about 20 years to finally master it. But at that point, all he was doing was a little bit of sowing and a lot of reaping. And the system basically ran itself and he claims in the book that at that point 20 years into it that he was achieving greater per acre yields on his rice than the paddy systems were in conventional agriculture. So I was thinking to myself, you know, if we could come up with a system that worked in the Great Plains with, you know, rice probably isn't the best one to go with here. But you know, so I mean, we were going to look at the Emmer. I picked the Emer because Costco stopped carrying their Pharaoh wheat and we were really big fans of it, and I'd buy some of that wheat from the farm if we were able to get it.

So there are students who are interested in being out in the farm or you have room for a lot more.

So actually, we just got our small farm practicum approved for the catalog. It's now Hort 591 I do have a prerequisite in there that you've taken either fruit or vegetable production, but for non majors, we've been making exceptions to get them out there and try to utilize what skills they've been developing in their own programs to help the farm grow. So we had a marketing student out there last summer that helped us market our field day that we put on. So it'd be great if people were interested in wanting to work out on the farm. There's the Hort 591 that will be offered this summer. Next fall are our student farm club. They meet generally on Thursdays and they also get out to the farm most Saturdays to have more workdays this last Saturday. The previous week, I had tapped some maple trees. So they went out on Saturday and collected some water from the maple trees. And we're boiling that down. And we're all super amused to see how you can go from as one person put it, water that tasted like I was licking a tree to sweet, sweet sugary goodness. That's amazing. So we have work days out there on a regular basis on Saturdays.

And you have students that work on local farms as well. I'm aware. And yeah, in turn on some of the local farms and so that's Yeah, I think there. There's potential available around the area of tours that are interested.

And for other people are interested in permaculture small farming techniques in general, the kinds of things that you're working on and what where do they turn.

So extension is always a good place to turn, especially in the counties that have horde agents. The Kansas permaculture Institute's a great place to look for information on permaculture, especially education in permaculture. At some point, I'd like to put on the catalog, a permaculture course there's currently an intro to permaculture course on the catalog, but it's an ag ideas course that's delivered through North Carolina State. I think we've had four students taken the last five years so it hasn't been big. But I think if we were to get that established here on campus, I know University of Kansas has a permaculture design course they offer every semester and they've been getting 20 to 30 students per semester to take that so I think it would be a benefit to have. Great.

Well, thanks so much for being here. Yes, thanks a bunch.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

Governmental organizations, universities and the food industry carry out research relating to food-system challenges. These challenges can deal with agronomic, nutrition, engineering, safety and even sociological impacts on food systems worldwide. Today's guest, Jeanette Thurston, newly appointed director of the K-State Food Science Institute, has had an influence on many of those supporting organizations and now works with diverse interests in the area of food science at K-State. Jeanette brings a rich background in the science of food system-related research that has led to advances in areas as diverse as norovirus detection and water quality run off from small-scale dairies.

Jeanette specializes in water-related public health, waterborne and foodborne virology and protozoal parasites, and food safety. In this episode, Jeanette shares some of her work with university- and government-based research and discusses her goals as she embarks on the organization and future direction of the integrated work carried out at the Food Science Institute.

Transcript:

Bringing Diversity and Change to the Way we Look at Food Systems. A Discussion with Dr. Jeanette Thurston, Director, K-State Food Science Institute

Another requirement for a lot of these grants was including the social sciences, which is an incredibly valuable piece that we never thought of.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello everybody and welcome back. Governmental organizations, universities and the food industry at large carry out research relating to food system challenges. These challenges can deal with agronomic nutrition, engineering, safety and even sociological impacts of food systems worldwide. Today's guest, Dr. Jeanette Thurston, newly appointed director of the K State Food Science Institute, has had influence on many of those supporting organizations and now works with diverse interests in the area of Food Science here at K State. Jeanette brings a rich background in the science of food systems related research that has led to advances in areas as diverse as norovirus detection to water quality runoff from small scale dairies. Dr. Thurston specializes in water related public health, waterborne and foodborne virology and protozoa parasites, and food safety. In this podcast Jeanette shares some of her work with university and government based research and discusses her goals as she embarks on the organization and future direction of the integrated work carried out at K state's Food Science Institute. Good morning, Jeanette. Welcome to the podcast.

Thanks so much. It's great to be here.

There's clearly a lot of microbiological work being done at K State. And we've touched on a few of those in recent podcasts, particularly those areas that impact soil and soil health. Looking at your past work, and some of your experience, you have worked in these areas, but your work may have taken a little bit of a different twist. And you can explain that or tell me I'm wrong as we get into this podcast, but it seems that some of your focus was looking a little bit more possibly on contamination issues, instead of maybe soil health soil contamination or contamination of water. I would like to talk more about that as we move into it. And again, you can correct me on what I've taken a look at there. But what I'd like to start out with honestly is a bit of background on you who you are, where you came from, what got you interested in the kind of work you're doing today.

Oh, that'd be great. Thanks, Maureen. So actually, I was born in Illinois. We moved when I was very young to Tucson, Arizona. My dad decided want to be a cowboy. So we just all there. And you know, I think my love for science really began when I was very young. When in Tucson at that time there was it was a very small city there wasn't like right now Tucson, for example, has about 100 million, I mean, a million people in the city, but back then it was much, much smaller and where we lived was very rural. We lived in about five acres across Tucson in the Sonoran Desert. And if you've never been to Tucson, I highly recommend all everyone to get out there and take a look at it's absolutely beautiful. It's not what I think a lot of people think as tumbleweeds and nothingness. It's actually has a great deal of diversity, both floral and fauna. And so you know, I like to say that was kind of my living laboratory growing up is playing outside. I was a tomboy, I played outside from sunup to sundown, playing with corny toads and lizards and making it farms. And anyway, so, you know, thanks to my parents that they moved us out there and provided such a wonderful childhood. So that's where it began. And then, you know, I had some, I went off to the University of Arizona for my bachelor's degree, I had some actually I ended up having a child in the middle of that. So with Ashley coming along, I decided, You know what I need to find a career that's really going to support us. And so I went to a community college it was Pima Community College in Tucson, and that is where I met a professor who really ignited my passion for Microbiology. And so what I neglected to say is I went there because I thought I'm going to become a nurse, because it's two years easy out and get a job anywhere in the country. I can support us just fine because by the way, I was a single parent. And so She ignited this fire. And my parents saw that passion in me and said, You know what you love microbiology so much. You know, your family's really important. Your quality of life is really important. And let me tell you what Jeanette my dad said, Let me tell you what, Jeanette, you're going to spend as much if not more time in your job than you are at home. And it's so critically important that you love what you do. And so I headed back to the University of Arizona Long story short, I got my bachelor's there. In the course of that I met Dr. Charles Gerber, who a lot of people you can find him on the news was Dr. Germ. He does a lot of that work, but he's actually very well known in the water quality public health arena. And so I didn't, I did a internship in his lab, my very last semester of my bachelor's degree, and he came to me, sat me down, and he said, so we can do with the rest of your life, Jeanette, and of course, yeah, I've got a little girl. And I was like, I'm going to get a job and, you know, support us. And he said, You know, I think you need to stay for your master's degree. And so I did, and I worked on constructed wetlands, I looked at the fate and dissemination of waterborne pathogens in those systems. As I'm sure all of your all the folks who are listening in today know that Arizona doesn't have a whole heck of a lot of water. So constructed wetlands are a really nice way to have beautiful park like environments, especially in the northern part of the state. And so we looked at those systems for reducing pathogens so that we're taking wastewater and treating that waste like human wastewater and treating that in these constructive wetland. So that was my master's degree. And so once again, Dr. Gerber has looked at me and he said, I really can go out and get a degree gonna, what do you can do with the rest of your life? And I was like, Well, I'm gonna get a job. Like I told you last time we had this conversation and see how far they are. And he's really thinking I need to stay anyway. So I end up staying for my PhD as well. And so for my PhD I really honed in on understanding the disinfection efficacy of drinking water disinfectant. So chlorine and chlorine dioxide, ozone UV on viral pathogens, also did some surface water work looking at pathogens and surface waters that are used for fresh produce irrigation in Latin American countries. So anyway, so that's actually my story. I mean, it was thanks to a lot of important people along the way, you know, starting with my parents and the way we grew up. And again, my parents were outdoor folks, we went camping all the time. And so I just a love for the environment. And then that individual there at Pima Community College, my teacher who showed me the love for microbiology, and then continuing on and Chuck Gerber's lab and him having the confidence in me and remember I was at Well, one thing I forgot to tell you is, I'm the first one in my family to get a bachelor's degree. And so and certainly the first one to get, you know, a graduate degrees as well. And so that was a big thing for Dr. Gerber to take me on. And I was a single mom, by the way, as well. So I had a lot going on, and for his confidence and his belief in me and supporting me through the way it was. Anyway, he really set off my career quite well.

Wow, that sounds great. Yeah. what a wonderful amount of support you had for somebody, obviously, that believed in what you were able to do. Yeah, yeah. To read on through it. Very fortunate. Yeah.

So how'd you end up in Washington, then?

Oh, okay. So I missed that step. So. So for my first job after finishing up my PhD, I took a position with the USDA, the United States Department of Agriculture, their Intramural Research Branch is called the Agricultural Research Service. And so I was offered a position there, I had a couple other opportunities, but they were postdoc opportunities. And so you know, as I said, Before, I was a single parent. And for me, the safe bet was a full time permanent position. And it was quite a nice position. It was research microbiologist, what they call a Kaplan, scientist in Lincoln, Nebraska. So I went from Tucson, Arizona, living there most all my life pretty much to Lincoln, Nebraska, a little bit cold, a little bit. A little bit different environment. But what a fantastic opportunity. My boss was Dr. Jim scheppers. And again, I've been lucky throughout my career, I have all these people who've really supported me and believed in me, and Dr. Shepherd is certainly one of those as well. And so I started a research laboratory there and I had graduate students and undergraduate students and gotten in grant funding. Of course, agricultural research, service, scientists also get funding from the USDA, so that helps support my program as well. I was there for eight years I loved what I did was a fantastic place to work. I did a wide variety of research in that area, from working directly with small dairy producers on their farms trying to understand ways that we can treat their wastewater so they weren't getting in trouble for the leaking of that wastewater into roadside ditches, which as you know, is a violation and you can have EPA knocking on your door for those kinds of things. So worked with some of them looking again, you know, that was my background, my master's degrees and constructed wetlands, we looked at constructed wetlands treatment of this kind of wastewater in Nebraska. And so myself, and actually, that was my first experience working with Extension specialists. And so it was a wonderful pairing between the two of us because he was able to identify the needs, we were able to come in and offer solutions to the needs of the producers need needed, excuse me. And anyway, so I worked on that project we worked on cattle feedlot yards, we also looked at wastewater spray irrigation and understanding the fate and dissemination of pathogens from those environments, either from runoff or from aerosol drift. I think those are the some of the major prize, I continued to work in the water quality area looking at drinking water disinfection, continuing on with UV disinfection and some other disinfectants as well. So that was eight years in Nebraska, absolutely loved it. But I'm high energy person, as you can probably tell, because my hands are moving. None of a nobody can see this, but I'm a very high energy person. And so and I like to change things up. So I was ready for a career change. And I had to serve on a peer review panel at what used to be the National Institute of Food and Agriculture previously was an was named CSREES cooperative research and I always forget extension, and there's two E's there and I never remember which one goes first, last service. But anyway, so I was asked to serve on a panel for their water and water quality program back at that time. And, and the program, the panel manager had asked me to serve a second year. And by the time the second year rolled around, I got to know the National Program Leader versus panel manager actually was from K State by the way, Dr. Bill Hargrove Oh, yeah, yeah. So he's fantastic anyway, was so I guess, thanks to him, that I got my last position at the National Institute of Agriculture. But anyway, I said, you know, science leadership at the national level, sounds very interesting to me, this is something that maybe I might want to do. And lo and behold, a position came up for to be a national program leader for food safety, I threw my name in the hat. And I was lucky enough to be chosen. And I took my family and drove across halfway across the country again. So halfway across from Tucson, and then my parents were teasing me saying, you just keep getting further and further from us, right. And anyway, so I started at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture in 2009. I was there for 10 years, at a couple different positions there. As I said, national program leader for food safety, where I oversaw along with my colleagues, I wasn't the only national program leader in that program, but we oversaw the portfolio, food safety, of course. And then again, I learned that job and I felt like I was doing it pretty well. And I was ready for a change. And so started looking for new positions. And one came up at the National Institute of Food and Agriculture at my agency, and it was a science program officer. And that position was to help oversee the entire science portfolio of the agency alongside the Associate Director of Programs and the director, of course, and so threw my hat in the ring. And I got that. And I did that for the last five years of my tenure at at National Institute of Food and Agriculture.

Wow, that sounds very impressive. I mean, you've Busy, busy, busy and diverse, I think. And you've seen and done a lot. I would imagine at those at those in those NIFA positions, that you saw just an enormous amount of not only research, but activities that moved over into the industry side of things. And so when you're talking about food safety, this is talking about meat safety, generally, is that not true? Or it was the food safety on that side of it over all foods?

It was over all foods. Yeah, yeah. So there's a wide variety of different programs. And when I first started, they had a fairly general program. And for those of you who are aware of the programs, we had it NIFA prior to becoming NIFA. In 2010, we had a real paradigm shift in our programming, right? And so that we had our very first political director, publicly appointed director. And that director came in and said, you know, what, we need to do things big, It was focus, scale, and impact were his three words. And so sure enough, we were told to sit down and think on that level. And so 2010 We actually committed $100 million in the food safety program. And that, so you're thinking meat safety because of the sugar toxigenic E Coli coordinated agricultural project, which we committed 25 million to but we also had some other programs too. So we also looked at viruses and food. And as you know, or I'm sure I'm sure Maureen, you know, that viruses and food, of course, are more from the hand food handlers, right? So we had a $25 million project on that. And by the way, $25 million for our little agency was huge. It was hadn't been done before. Our climate change programs were committing, I think it was $40 million or bioenergy, $45 million. These were huge grants. And actually really important to the work that you're doing Maureen is that these grants were required multidisciplinary teams and interdisciplinary. And I would argue, maybe even it would have made them even more competitive. I can't speak for all the programs for that transdisciplinary approach. And so those teams that were picked that year, as you know, K State was a co PI on Michigan, toxigenic, e coli. And beef grant, I think that was led out, I don't think I know, it was led out of University of Nebraska, and the one for viruses was led out of North Carolina. Dr. Leon Juncus, was the lead of that. And these were huge teams with multiple universities, tackling challenges, you know, looking at opportunities, but also taking those harder challenges from all the way from in the case of produce, for example, it'd be when it's grown, you know, from from production all the way to the consumer, they are tackling those social challenges as well. You know, thinking about the virus cat, for example, I think I had told Dr. Jacobs that, you know, this was near and dear to my heart, because my background is enteric viruses, enteric viruses or foodborne viruses, which are borne viruses, you know, they go hand in hand. And I told her because when I was in grad school, norovirus was a tough nut to crack. This virus, by the way, is that virus that you hear about that takes down, you know, large, a cruise ship, right, yeah. And believe me, you know, when you have it, because you're out for 24 to 48 hours, and it's just miserable. But anyway, that was an organism that I worked on in grad school, but not the human noroviruses, we use surrogates. It's because we didn't have a way to culture it and use it and study it in the lab, which was really important for the kind of work particularly that I was doing. And so I told her, when she got the grant, I said, Boy, if you guys could crack that nut You have made my day. And sure enough, they say, I'm getting goose bumps. So I can be a huge nerd when it comes to this stuff. But anyway, so they did crack that nut, they were able to culture using a very complex now it's not widely used, because it is very complex culture system. But boy, you know, the rewards for the position that I had at NIFA were tremendous. While I wasn't actually doing the research, I certainly had a heavy hand in enabling that research and pointing the direction. So I think maybe I've gone off from your question. That was very, very exciting.

That is exciting. That's a good story to tell a good story.

And that you're raising some things about the way science works and food policy and other things work that maybe a lot of people don't really, you know, understand sort of the role of program officers or government agencies for helping shape, you know, what gets done, and then, you know, you so you played couple roles, like one of them, was that right? And then the other one was, was thinking more, more in the regulatory lines, too, right? Or?

No, no? Yeah. So for USDA, the regulatory agency would be your food safety inspection, service FSI s. And throughout. Yeah, yeah, I get it. Well, you know, and I don't even know if I could tell you all the different agencies and their missions. USC is a huge department enormous. It's a second biggest department behind DoD Department of Defense. So, no, I worked for the Agricultural Research Service early in my career, which was, which is the Intramural Research Branch of the USA. So I was, I was a scientist conducting research and publishing papers, and you know, graduating students, just like you all do here at K State, I just reported to a different person, right. And actually, I was housed, I was housed at University of Nebraska Lincoln, as there are a lot here. You know, I gotta tell you, that is the most fantastic partnership. It benefits everyone, at least, at least in my experience. And then I worked for the National Institute of Food and Agriculture, which is what we call the Extramural Research Branch of the USDA. So we're the ones who we have oversight of the capacity funding that you all get here at K State and other land grant institutions receive, we also provide external grant funding opportunities. And so I, maybe I'm reading into your comment, but perhaps everybody wants to understand how we make those decisions on what kind of science and when I say science, my definition of science coming from USDA includes research, education and extension work outreach work. So well, we collect stakeholder input, and I think one thing that I always like to say as a national program leader when I was in my previous position talking to faculty members that either came to DC to visit us or when we went out and gave presentations was, you need to reach out and provide input to these folks in these positions, because that's how the science priorities are determined. It's through the current literature. It's through important information that's provided by, you know, faculty, and even students and staff and, you know, people all over this country. And, you know, I think it was a really proud moment for the Associate Director of Programs. Dr. Merrill Broussard, you know, firstly, he passed away last year, but two years ago, he implemented a really fantastic stakeholder input approach that we hadn't done as an agency before, where they go around the last two years, they've gone around to four different locations, regional locations, to be able to collect on the ground stakeholder input from my mom and dad, from small producers, from small farmers, from small processors from, from people in academia, from people, even at the high schools, because remember, the mission is Research, Education extensions. So anyway, so collecting that kind of information and collecting information, current literature from participating on high level committees, either around the government or within professional organizations, all this information is gathered, and then really a team of national program leaders gets together. And they sit and discuss what are the top priorities that we're going to be addressing, for example, with the flagship competitive grants program, afri. And they'd probably be having those conversations probably right about now as well.

So with the work that you're doing their work that you did there, now that you're with us, it's no longer the case. What kind of overlap and discussion did you have with groups, it's at FDA. So you're doing a lot of research on a lot of different food products, it's in the food safety side of things, obviously, they're going to be the ones that are going to be setting, setting the requirements and regulations there was a good connection between our groups?

There absolutely was so when I first started, actually, we had a joint program together, and it was looking at, I see if I remember, right, it was looking at methods for detection pathogens in the environment. And as you may already know, that one of the limiting steps is really being able to extract micro organisms from an environmental sample that boy, that's a limiting step, we can detect to the end of the day using molecular techniques, because they're very sensitive. But if you can't pull it out of that sample matrix kills you. Yeah, that's right. The Matrix skills. Yeah. So that was one person, we had a joint program with them. And also the food safety outreach program. That's a joint program, joint partnership between USDA and FDA, and they work very, very closely together on that program and identifying from what I remember from identifying priorities and how to actually develop that program in the first place, that person has been going on for, I don't know, three to five years now. And the actually, the funding just increased again this year. So it's very well supported.

So if I want to ask like a little bit more just about the role of government in sort of shaping sort of what happens, right. And in, in the food and agriculture world, and like, in all these different ways, right, sort of, there's the pushing of the, you know, particular priorities for sciences, right, you know, the major needs that we have, right, and then there's the using of that information to shape regulation, and, you know, sort of what, what are your views about sort of what you know, from from that other side that, you know, you saw being in Washington, seeing the way these pieces, you know, kind of work together sometimes don't work together? Do you have views on? You know, the whole mix of it? All right, in terms of how, how we do better and in the world of food safety?

So let me make sure I understand your question. So it's understanding the role of government and setting the stage for the science that needs to get done to tackle those challenges of bigger need. It's very difficult, in my experience, identifying the highest priorities, because what I can tell you is, well, you know, when I was at NIFA, National Institute of Food and Agriculture when I was there, we were very happy with the increases that we got every year from Congress. However, a $1.6 billion budget is nothing in comparison to science organization like NIH. And I would argue, and I'm sure my NIH colleagues would disagree, but I'm gonna say it anyway, I would argue that agriculture, the breadth of agricultural science is much, much larger. And the challenges all along the way are bigger, of course. Maybe it's just because I'm, I'm biased. But that's what I guess my point is, is we have a very, very small budget, to be able to tackle all the challenges in this country as well as the global challenges as well. And so that's what was very difficult as being able to take you think about this huge funnel of all this input that you had. And you had to funnel that down and be able to prioritize, okay, this is the big. So for example, in 2010, what are our biggest challenges? Well, we wrapped our heads around five different areas that year, it was viruses, we burned viruses, it was shiga toxigenic e coli. It was understanding gut ecology and shutting of pathogens. In that case, that was sugar toxigenic e coli, we had an emerging issues, which was kind of a bigger bucket. So it's kind of a catch all, but it was looking forward to having a proactive approach. I think that's actually another point I'd like to make is, I think the agency prior at least in our food safety portfolio, we were really tackling the here and now we weren't thinking proactively looking into the future. And I think that needs to be done as well. But again, with a very, very small budget, 100 million sounds like a lot. But I'll tell you what, that 100 million we mortgaged ourselves for five years to carry out what we did in 2010, which really tied our hands behind our backs as far as new funding for new programs. I don't. Does that help answer?

Yeah. And certainly, we saw that at the principal investigator level, in 2010, because the world kind of turned upside down on us, or, you know, to different to different areas, which is fine. But then it also affected follow on the size and frequency of follow on awards as well. But we'd never been faced with a group that prioritized the way it did. So that was our we had to relearn the way we wrote grants.

Yeah, well, you know, not only the priority areas that were chosen, I mean, I will, I will say that when I'm talking about those prior to that 100 million, that was just for what we called our challenge areas, we still had quite a bit of funding in our foundational applied science program. So there was still a lot of opportunities there. And that bucket continues to grow. But right, so we were focusing our big dollars. And the other part of that was requiring integrated projects. I remember that's integration of research and in our case, for the food safety program, it was integration of all three science areas research, education and extension, which we hadn't asked anyone to do before. So that was really hard to do. And I think people still struggle with that it is, it is a real challenge.

Could you say something about the rationale for that? Why do you think all three need to be in?

Yeah, yeah, that's a great question. Yeah. So when you think about, so research can be done. And it's fantastic when it's done in a publication is written. That's great for fellow scientists. But that information really needs to be delivered to the people who the science was, was actually done for, right? Yeah, the people who need to use it. So that's where extension comes in. And then as far as education, we need to be training the next generation of scientists who will be tackling these challenges, the current challenges we have, we're not able to solve them, but then the future challenges as well. So all three are critically important. And for us to be advancing agriculture, and making sure that we're highly competitive globally, and making sure we're keeping our environment, you know, safe. And anyway, does that make sense?

Yeah.

And you said there are challenges people, right. So kind of new for a lot of the groups that you were funding? Right. And so can you say something about the challenges of putting all three of those pieces?

Yeah, so, and chime in Jon. But it's, you know, I know, for myself, now, my experience in Nebraska, I didn't do any teaching when I was at Nebraska. So that would have been a challenge for me to come in and bring in an education piece, I was working close to the extension. So that was easy for me, but remembers the some of our sciences, they're doing fundamental science, in their laboratories that are interacting with others. You know, so one, building those relationships, and having those interactions of who even to work with, I would think, would have been a little bit challenging. And so back in 2010, what I don't think any of our programs offered I could be wrong was we didn't we didn't allow for planning grants. So this was, boom, here's, you know, all these great opportunities, but you need to have a fully integrated proposal. So people were probably scrambling for those collaborations and those connections. Quick, can we add you to this. And that's the next problem that I was gonna bring up. So a peer review panel, as you can imagine, and it's easy to be on a it's easy to react to something that's written God knows. I know that it's easy for me to tear apart something that somebody else already wrote. Because you're reacting to it. So, you know, your pure peer review panel took a look at those and said, Oh, we can absolutely tell that this research team went over to this extension group and said, Can you just add a couple more objectives. And so it looks like a tag on. So you don't really have that complete integration, that back and forth conversation and planning that needs to happen to really, truly make an impact on production practices, or mitigation strategies, or whatever it is that you're trying to tackle. So that integration is incredibly, incredibly important.

And hard, hard, hard,

because you find, yeah, people find themselves sitting in their little castles. And then and then meeting, yeah, late in the funding year, to find out what everybody has been doing. And then they attempting to write that up as an integrated effort and serve. So really a pseudo integration, yeah. Or was

And possibly realize the things they missed along the way they should have been focusing on as a team.

And that's why the planning grants were so incredibly important because PI started to get the idea. But the other thing, I think I would I can't believe I'm saying this, I'm speaking in favor of the department heads. is the best department heads kept people's nose to the grindstone on that, and Oh, very good. You know, that's I'm Yes, I think I think it was, and that was part of the part of the success of some of the grants that have been more have lived up to the expectation of being able to deal with the outreach as well as with the hard science.

And I can tell you that, you know, I was there long after 2010, you know, and I can tell you that the quality of those proposals, integrated appraisals really significantly increase. And I would like to think that we're and I think I know we're having more impacts with that kind of work than we would with the kind of work that's done individually, rather than cross communicating across pollinating if he will. I think another another requirement for a lot of these grants was including the social sciences, which is an incredibly valuable piece that we never thought of previous well. And by the way, speaking of stakeholder input, that came about because and I don't remember the name of the organization, but their professional organization, I believe, had reached out, drafted a white paper got in the hands of the director of NIF at the time, which was Dr. Sonny Ramaswamy. And that went a long ways because hey, guess what you saw the every one of our almost every one of our solicitations, saying you must include an understanding of social behavioral sciences.

That's been popping up in grant applications over and over since then, too. It's amazing how frequently the social science side has been put being pulled back into it, which is clear those agencies listen. Yeah, they did. Absolutely did. Well, now you have moved then from the next activity to Kansas State University to take over the Food Science Institute. Yeah. And a little background on what brought you to that point. And maybe we'll discuss a little about what your goals are with the Food Science Institute.

What it is, yeah, so. So I grew up, if you will, at a land grant university, University of Arizona, and then I moved on, even though I work for the USDA, I was on campus at University of Nebraska as adjunct. I had graduate students that I advised and I moved on to DC and had that job. And my former boss, Ashley Broussard would say to me, you know, and it was an eval, I think it's an evaluation time right now here, right? And he would sit me down, he would say, so what's next career development? What's next? And some of the things that I had said to him. I think it's maybe even my first year working with him. As I said, at some point, I want to get back to academia. Because this is the truth. And I'm going to get goose bumps again. The most rewarding part of my career has been mentoring students. There is nothing more fantastic than mentoring students. I have one short story if I can share loosely. So I one of my first graduate students in Nebraska didn't have a lot of them because I wasn't there that long. But one of the few. She started with me and I did the same sit down. So she was an undergraduate in my lab, and it was getting ready for her to finish up her bachelor's degree. And I had the same talk with her as Dr. Gerba had with me, I sat her down because I saw real potential. Her name's Amy Kaler. And I said, somebody can do the rest of your life. You know, what do you want to do the rest of your life? And I'll never forget, she said, I want to work for the CDC. And I said, Okay, I said, Tell you what, why don't you stay here, get your Masters with me. And you will have the tools you need to be competitive for that kind of a position. And so sure enough, she did she stayed in my lab she worked at on an emerging pathogen called microsporidia. Anyway, gets her master's degree. And I have some, some friends over at CDC and one of them said to me, Hey, we're looking for, you know, lab manager. Do you know anyone. And I was like, Amy Caylor is getting ready to finish her degree. Anyway, long story short, she now works for CDC loves her job I keep, I mean, I've lost touch with her over the years, but I keep up with her, you know, online, you're looking, she's publishing, she's, she's still there. Anyway, that gives me goosebumps. And that is incredibly, incredibly rewarding for me to see my students be successful and get the kinds of careers and lives that they wanted. So anyway, so I want to get back to academia. And I heard about this job. And I thought I had a little bit earlier than I thought I would leave the federal government. I left at 18 years. But I thought, you know, I know folks at K State I know the kind of work they do. I know, especially know quite a few people in the Food Science Institute. It's a good place to be, I'm gonna throw my hat in the ring. And so I did and here I am. So…

Yeah, very, very good. So you came here? And what is the Food Science Institute at K State?

So I've been here about six, seven months. Now I have to stop saying six months. So seven months? Oh, my goodness, it's been a long time. So the Food Science Institute, it's not a separate department, food science program, the undergraduate program is actually under the Department of Animal Sciences and industry. But the Food Science Institute is an interdisciplinary institute that has a graduate programs. The the focus of the institute, of course, is the same mission as everyone else is research, education, extension, and we function all those areas. We have faculty from all over the university, I believe it's five colleges and 13 departments. And we will actually need to expand that. Because there's some new areas like artificial intelligence that we need to start making some good connections. There's a lot of good opportunities speaking with the federal government. So yeah, so we work across the university and tackling important challenges and food science, food safety.

Are you going to are you going to be having students of your own in the position that you've got? I mean, that you had mentioned that that was something that, yeah, definitely peaked your interest.

It does. So actually just happened to take on a new graduate student. She's a master's level student, she's going to be doing a systematic review, understanding water quality, and you know, that's my guess, selfishly, water quality, but its impact on fresh produce production. And the United States, Mexico, Canada. Anyway, so she's just getting started on that. So yeah, I'm pretty excited. I have my first student. We'll see where that leads, I think the dean is, talk to me about, would you like to get back into research and have a lab again, so what we'll see where things take us, but what I've told him and I've told others is, I need to understand my job. I've these last seven months now, it's been a lot of learning, meeting a lot of people understanding, you know, what the Food Science Institute does what who's in the Food Science Institute, meeting stakeholders. This week, for example, we're heading out to meet some folks at Corbion and National Beef. And so getting to know some of our important stakeholders, industry stakeholders, as well as other stakeholders. I've gotten to meet a couple donors since I've been here as well. And really trying to understand the whole landscape of the Food Science Institute and really trying to be able to narrow down and identify those areas that I need to be focused on. So I do have some priorities for this year, like everyone's priority, it's to increase enrollment. So how do we go about doing that? And I think in food science and marine, John, you can certainly chime in, I think a lot of people don't quite understand what food science is very true. Very true. So actually, one of the things we'll be talking to Corbion about is some of their food science outreach that they're doing in the Kansas City area. And maybe we can get some good ideas from them. And we're doing a lot of recruitment activities and thinking about increasing enrollment. But also the other part of that is also thinking about ways that we can retain students as well, and how we can increase the breadth of both our on campus but also our online programs.

I think one of the unique… go ahead.

No, I was just gonna ask. So what are the major misconceptions about food science?

Oh, so chime in, feel free to chime in? So a lot of folks, you know, as a kid, what's food science. And so I've been in some of these recruiting activities. Since I've been here. I've been fortunate enough to be in quite a few and whether it's junior high kids, or if it's high school kids, and I've actually we've had some that are elementary school kids. A lot will tell you that it's the chef at your restaurant.

Culinary science, which can certainly overlap.

Yep, yep. And so then I understand that there's actually a lot of science and I think the other piece of it, there are so many job opportunities of food sciences that interdisciplinary science, whether your passion is biology or if it's getting a mystery of his engineering or if it's nutrition, there are just so many incredible opportunities. And the other thing that I'd like to add, and I didn't know this before coming here is that almost every single one of our undergraduate students has a job, undergraduate soon it says a job upon graduating, yes, they do. And they paid darn well. And while that may not speak a lot to this, the prospective students that are coming in mom and dad are like…

It shouldn't be the entire motivation for a particular major, but it doesn't hurt. Yeah, well, for that,

Just I guess the point is, there are so many opportunities, and we're just and you know, companies like corbion, they're doing this outreach. But one, they have an incredible passion for STEM. But they but they also need to fill these very important positions that at their companies. And so there's a real glut. And so I think we can help fill that.

And I think a couple of departments that make up the institute have had longer and more effective histories of interacting with industry. Yeah. And I'll speak for my and Maureen, right, the great. We really had no place else to go for funding. And so oh, yeah. Yeah, for a very long time. And so we learned to build relationships, which turned into recruiting relationships, which turned into internship relationships, oftentimes, which then turns into employment. Opportunity. That's great. So it was driven by necessity. That's a lead. Absolutely, yeah. Yeah. But that's, still a good thing. Animal Science, of course. Oh, yeah. Animal the same, the same thing?

Yeah, they have a lot more students.

And he built relationships with they do producers with funders with processors?

Yeah, and that's, yeah, one of the things that I've seen, since I've been working in the position that I've got on campus with the interdisciplinary approach to things is actually getting these people to want to work together how to how are you kind of you do have a lot of people in a lot of different departments, my guess is that you got a pretty small core that actually worked together a lot and a lot of peripheral that are on the list. But it's really tough pulling them in how, what's your What are your thoughts on how that's gonna change moving forward? Or maybe morph into a more collegial working environment? Yeah, collegial is the wrong word. But more of a, you know, an accepting that this is the right direction to go.

Yeah. So there are, you know, just like, when I was doing research, there was a few people that I worked with only so much, so many hours in the day, you know, and so I think I think initially, is just getting everybody to know each other. Not to say they didn't know each other before. So one of the things that we've started as regular meetings, I'm not sure how that's going. Because it seems to be to your point that there's a core group that always attends so obviously need to think about some additional additional methods of getting people to talk and actually just share and what I can tell you in our faculty meetings, just going around the room and sharing what my most recent research ideas are, or what, you know, a grant that I just submitted, or new graduate students that are aboard or a trip to Caribbean, and this is what they're interested in, just talking to each other, I think is a good way to start. But I think also this next so I have like, as I said, I had sketched out my own priorities for this next year. And one of those is to get us talking more about research opportunities. When I say research, I should probably say science opportunities, back to my own definition, science opportunities, and getting everybody in room who's interested and going from one of these larger grants, let's start talking about all the expertise that you all bring and what your ideas are. And let's put a grant and together I think that's probably the best way to facilitate those kinds of discussions. I know Maureen and I have talked about at least one idea. But you know, there's a lot of good opportunities right now, whether it's the NSF NIH AI opportunity right now, or it's one of those sustainable ag systems grants that the USDA has, I think there's a lot of opportunities for us to stretch ourselves even beyond the Food Science Institute faculty that's listed on the webpage. So you know, for example, I know that we would love to get some folks from computer science and food science faculty. So that's all on me. And I have I plan on doing that here this next this next year, so

Hopefully I can help you with that a little bit as well. Absolutely. Yeah. Anything that I can do.

I've seen those announcements come through the email of the faculty meeting and like in person, I think it's absolutely brilliant. Because you've been given sanction by the people that you work for to do this. So their expectations and as the faculty Appreciate that that sanction has been given that there are expectations, they're going to be more likely to participate. There's no, there's always a fraction of the faculty that say, if we just wait long enough, they'll go away.

Well, you know, the my impression actually isn't my impression. And the time that I've been here isn't that folks don't want to go after the things they don't want to they do want to work together, not that they don't want to work together. It's that they're doing their own thing, what they need, is that, that person to come in and say, and, you know, get them all together in a room and say, Hey, let's talk, what do we want to do here? That's been my impression. So you know, we had a faculty meeting recently, we're talking about, you know, a big meeting. Well, you both know, the IFT meeting. And so my question to them was, well, have you organized it before? And, you know, let's think about different ways of, you know, our booth because they have booths at those meetings. And traditionally, we talk about our undergraduate graduate online programs. And I said, Well, you know, this is industry, boy, you know, it's probably a lot of good research opportunities, maybe we can highlight some, some of our research as well there. And, and how do you guys organize that? You know, how do you discuss getting prepared for this? And it was like, you know, kind of crickets? And well, we really haven't. And well, you know, one person takes it on, and they do it. That's right. Yes, that's usually the way. And it's because there isn't that middle person who takes leadership over, you know, it's not gonna be just ideas and their ideas, but I'm going to be the one that pulls them all together and get some talking and identifying what we need to do at those kinds of meetings to be effective. But I think that's I think that's what is because we'll get so darn busy. And they're very busy. You know, they're teaching classes, they're doing research, they're doing extension, depending on their appointments, they have you know, they're advising graduate students, and hey, guess what, they have a home life too. So there's a lot going on.

Yeah. Well, it also gets you then you get feedback from not the right word, but you can profit, I guess professionally from those successes. It's like having a grad student.

Yeah, that's right. That's where I get goosebumps again. There. Yeah. Yeah.

So the time things are one of them than a time challenges. The other is sort of the subject matter. And right, you know, kind of understanding how to put something together, right. So one of the things that happens when you got these big interdisciplinary projects is, you know, somebody thinks about their piece, and somebody else thinks about their piece, and they still kind of live independently, it's a totally different thing to put together a truly integrated, interdisciplinary package. Right. So what do you what do you think about, you know, that aspect of interdisciplinary work that the food scientists wants to write be encouraging, right?

Yeah, no, that's right. And you need to get in, I would like to say that you need to get in the other your colleagues shoes, right. And you need to be able to try to understand how we had a conversation about marine, correct me if I'm wrong, we had a conversation about speaking the same language. Yes, we can. Sometimes that's difficult and a interdisciplinary meeting, because you're physicists there on the team, maybe speaking one language or microbiologist, and then you know, don't understand the whole conversation. So the, you don't get that cross talk. And that synergy, if you will, between the disciplines is just what you're looking for, to be successful. And I think everyone wants to be successful. So I think an understanding that I think people will try harder to listen to each other and ask questions, I think sometimes we get in a room. And our colleague may use a term, we don't know what it means. And some of us might be shy about asking, What do you mean by that? And I think we need to be more open in our conversations. And I think that'll help these discussions and putting together these interdisciplinary grant opportunities.

Yeah, language, and what words people use may are such a huge barrier in some of these, some of these discussions, because as you said, the physicist and the microbiologist do not speak the same. They can be talking about the same thing using completely different words.

That's right. Yeah. And at some point, if it if you're not very careful about it, it starts sounding judgmental. Right, right. Yeah. Oh, you can't be a scientist because you don't understand. Yeah. Where's your laser? Where's your? Yeah, becomes a problem.

So what are your some of your long term goals for the institute? I know that, like you're early on here, you're kind of setting your own goals year on year right now, what's your vision long term for this? Activity?

So are we there yet? Yeah. Well, yeah, no. No, I'll never be there. Because we'll always be wanting to advance the work that we do. But of course, you know, in very simplistic terms, advancing the mission of the Food Science Institute, which I like I said, to be cutting across not just research, I think sometimes we focus on the research, but we lose sight or maybe some people lose sight of the extension work that we do that's incredibly valuable, as well as the teaching and the educational programs that we conduct. And so you know, advancing and all those three areas right now So for this next year, and probably for the next several years, there's gonna be a real focus on recruitment and retention and thinking outside the box of how to get kids to understand what food sciences to get the word out, not only Well, right now we're focused in Kansas. I would like to share one very novel, recruitment idea that one of our faculty came up with that we just tried, it looks like it's going to be pretty successful. It's called home for the holidays. So we offer scholarships to our undergraduate students that are juniors or seniors that have a real passion for food science. Of course, all of our students have a real passion for food science. But those that are juniors and seniors are those who can probably talk a little bit more about their experience. And some of these have had research experiences in the lab or internships or those kinds of things. Anyway, they go home for the holidays, right? So Christmas break, they go home, but our break is a little bit earlier than the local high schools. And so these folks go, this is the first year we've done it. These folks went into the high school and talk to their classes of their former high school teachers and talked about food science. And yeah, so. So this was the first year. So thinking outside the box like that, having a broader reach. Certainly, we need to get out to the western portion of the state. And we need to think about diversity of our programs, why that's really important as well. You know, I think about underrepresented students, you know, first time college goers like myself, very important, non traditional students. Also, those single moms and dads are those moms and dads that are out there that would like to get an education have different challenges, how can we work with them and make them successful as well in our programs. So students is one big priority. Another big priority, as I said, is research and thinking about how we can provide or we can get together get our heads together on our strategic path as far as what kind of research opportunities and things that we are best suited to tackle. That'll be conversations this next year. Some very, some simplistic, but it's actually kind of a big deal is rethinking our space, then making it more attractive to students. So I know sounds kind of simplistic, but just even our front office and thinking about how we can redo that space so that we have space for the students to come in and feel comfortable and talk to us and sit down and chat and meet with our faculty.

And that makes a lot of sense. space that you've got, you've got the very traditional front desk, that's it stops everybody right there. And what Yeah, no, and well, many, many places are set up that way. But I can appreciate having that more open and inviting.

And yeah, so and other things like you know, making sure that our faculty have the spaces they need. We're in the process of remodeling some of our food microbiology labs for safety reasons, but for other reasons as well, it's been a long time. So that's another priority. And then the last priority is really getting connected with stakeholders. I haven't done a lot. I've done a little bit. But I want to get out there and do a whole heck of a lot more. And this would include maybe thinking of an advisory board, I'd talk to you about that. But you know, also thinking about actually how we're going to go about collecting broader stakeholder input for our programs to help guide us in our conversations, the faculty helped guide us in our conversations of what our priorities should be across research across, what can we do better in our classes? What are some of those new topics that we should be tackling in our courses that the students really want to hear about an extension? What additional extension programs should you be considering? So those are the big priorities for this year. So wish me luck.

That's pretty good basketball. Yeah.

I guess it'll be two or three years, I'm sure.

Well, you came here you asked for work. So that's right. It's a challenge. Right. It's a good challenge. You have anything else to add Scott?

Oh, this is great conversation. Thanks so much for being here.

Well, Jeanette, this has been a great discussion, great conversation. I want to thank you for being here. And we very much enjoyed having you.

Absolutely.

Yeah. Thanks a lot.

Thanks so much. This was fantastic. Great. Take care.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

The history of agriculture can be viewed from many different perspectives including breeding crops with improved quality and yield characteristics, understanding fertilization requirements, challenges with water and weather patterns, but there are also historic social and political accounts that had profound effect on the landscape of today's farming communities. In this podcast, Dr. Bonnie Lynn-Sherow shares a sobering look at some of the challenging events uncovered by her research as she dug into changes that occurred in land ownership and farming practices of white settlers, Native Americans and African Americans on the United States great plains.

Transcript:

Agricultural History in the U.S. Southern Great Plains. One Story on "Who Wins." with Dr. Bonnie Lynn-Sherow

So we have a number of moments, really big moments in US history in terms of farming that I see echoed today.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello, everybody and welcome back. We can review the history of agriculture from many different perspectives, including breeding crops with improved quality and yield characteristics, understanding fertilization requirements, challenges with water and weather patterns. But there are also historic social and political accounts that had profound effects on the landscape of today's farming communities. Our guest today is Dr. Bonnie Lynn-Sherow, Associate Professor of American history and executive director of the Chatman center for rural studies. Bonnie researches and teaches the environmental and agricultural history of North America, with particular emphasis on North American Indians and minorities. In this podcast, we are going to take a sobering look at some of the challenging events uncovered by Dr. Lin Shiro, as her research dug into the changes that occurred in land ownership and farming practices of white settlers, Native Americans and African Americans on the United States, Great Plains. Welcome, Bonnie morning. In the past podcasts, we've had discussions on a lot of technical aspects of agriculture and production and nutrition, and we've talked about the aesthetics of food. But I think this is the first time we've ever taken a dive into the history of the complex food system and what that might teach us on things going forward. So I'm really very excited to learn more about you and the history that you study, and where that fits into the food system today. Okay. All right, welcome. So with that, could we start out Bonnie by you telling us a little bit about yourself?

Sure. My training is in American history, as you mentioned, but I actually all historians have lots of specialties. My specialties are agricultural history, history of food, but they're also very deeply embedded in history of race, and culture. So my first book was about African Americans and North American Indians and their relationship to agriculture, especially in the Midwest, specifically in some counties in Oklahoma, which then I extrapolate into the experience of North American Indians and African Americans and the rest of the country.

So what what got you interested in this I, sometimes people take it all the way back to their childhood, sometimes not. But how did you get started in this area and really find that interest.

Well it was actually very, as you say, most people take a very convoluted pathway to where they end up, especially at my age now it's gotten even more convoluted. But I would say that I grew up in southwestern Ontario, which was a heavily agricultural region and I took it for granted, I didn't realize how productive it was, it is the most is the set of most productive counties agriculturally in the entire country of Canada, heavily involved in onions, tomatoes, a number of other what we would consider to be high value crops today. And so I grew up in this bounteous place. And I didn't realize how bounteous it was until I moved to the United States, and ended up in some, you know, pretty much some food deserts and Evanston, Illinois, and places like that, where I could no longer get the fresh summer corn that I wanted to eat on a regular basis. But my research essentially moved from when I was an undergraduate, when I was working in Amherstburg, Ontario, and it was a primary Historic Site. That was my first job. And there were a lot of native people that I had to interpret specifically, names we would recognize, like to come see actually was died and visited the site that I worked out for, you know, during his lifetime. And so when I decided to do a PhD, much, much later on, I immediately wanted to do North American Indian history and My advisor said, Well, you really ought to go to Oklahoma, because there's a wonderful newspaper there, that has been a continuous operation and continuous publication since the beginning of Oklahoma since before since Oklahoma Territory. So I went down there. And I actually talked to the newspaper editor. And what became extremely clear to me is that the story of native people's relationship to agriculture had never been told, it had not been explored in any kind of effective way. And the deeper I got into the project, the more I realized that a number of African Americans, you know, newly freed, slaves had walked all the way to Oklahoma with the promise of agricultural land. And so I'm sort of like wondering, like, my, my goodness, we're in the I'm in the nexus of the United States, I'm in the last best west of the entire country. And we have white settlers, who would be potential settlers, many of them from Kansas, but also up on southerners from Texas who are vying for this last best place. But we also have African Americans who've come out here, hoping to be a part of essentially Westering and in the American tradition, and we have native people who've been here all along, who are trying their best to adapt into an agricultural mode of production. And I thought, My gosh, this is the primary power play of the United States who's going to win. And it was clear to me that the relationship of these four of these cultural entities to each other was just as important as their relationship to the land itself. And then I realized this is a very, very important story. Who wins? How does farming turn into what we what we now realize is a a white dominated agricultural economy. How did that happen when there were these other people who were trying to do the same thing, and that unfolded into an extremely interesting project. I wasn't completely convinced about what I was going to study until I met with Ray doya. Re DOJ as a Kiowa elder, who I was talking to, rather casually and explained to him I was very confused about the way agriculture worked in the region and Central Oklahoma. And he says, Well, I'm confused too. He says, Why is it that Kiowa men Kiowa families farm and farm and farm, and they lose ground every year, they lose ground economically, and socially and culturally. And specifically, they actually lose real ground, they lose parts of their farms, he says, but my white neighbor five, down five miles down the road, he says he's got a new tractor. And he's got a new truck, and he's got a new combine, and he's adding ground, or we just bad people. And that just broke my heart. And I was like, Ray, I can't imagine that your pet people, and I can't imagine that you're bad farmers. And he was, and I was right. They weren't it was an historic structural racism. That prevented Kiowa people from becoming successful farmers. And there were several aspects to that. One of the aspects, of course, was that what everyone takes for granted, in a place like Kansas, especially if you're white, is the is the Experimental Station, which become, you know, part of the United States Department of Agriculture, the Hatch Act, which then provides extension publications to farmers. And then eventually, of course, the entire farm agent system, which provides direct help to farmers. And what I discovered right away, of course, in a place like Oklahoma's the 1890 school, meant that African American farmers could not access the resources of Oklahoma State. They were forced to go to Langdon Langston rather, I'm sorry, the historically black college, just outside of Stillwater. And even worse, the Kiowa farmers were prevented from accessing those resources, and told that they had to work with a Bureau of Indian Affairs agent who would help them to become farmers. And neither of those other support systems got any funding whatsoever. So for example, for every dollar that was spent in Stillwater, Oklahoma State, Langston University got five cents. That's all. So suddenly, the whole picture started to emerge. There were some there were some interesting aspects to this. The chi was story. As a group, they had all Ways worked as in clans. So they created a village. And then they work together. Well, of course, allotment, which most people are not aware of which was the breaking up of reservations into 160 acre parcels per person. They that forced the breakup of a support system of neighbors and friends and relatives that would help you in times of trouble. And suddenly they were isolated from one another, which was not a natural or even actually very helpful system with which to begin learning how to become farmers. And, you know, sort of ruminated on that since then. Especially in Kansas, when you consider that the Mennonite migration to Kansas around Newton that that group came over together and bought 100,000 acres together. Nobody called them socialists. Nobody said, oh, you can't do that. But suddenly, for Native people, though, they weren't allowed to do that. And it didn't occur to me actually, till really recently, how hypocritical the Bureau of Indian Affairs and USDA was regarding native people that way. And then, of course, at the time that they were beginning to take up farms. Kiowa people still had horses, and they were transferring over to cattle, they were natural herders. And quite frankly, if if you look at what Oklahoma people, Oklahoma farmers, landowners are doing now with their property, they're hurting, they're not, they're not trying to graze, you know, multiple, they're not doing all MacDonald down on the farm, south of Oklahoma City, that there's not enough water there, the sand and soil is not conducive to that at all. And this is what Native farmers were being told to do. And they knew better. They were like, no, we want to become pastoral. And so they wanted to raise animals and they ran into a major problem right away, they needed water for those animals. So they had to spread out along watercourses permanent streams and creeks, which put them farther apart from one another, of course, and then they wanted, they needed wood, because there was no other heating fuel. And so they ended up in these patch places these 100 nakey 160 acre places, which would be great for cities, you know, eventually they would be covered in little towns, because of water sources and wood sources weren't so good for for you know, crop row crop production. And they wanted to become pastoral. So they actually pushed against the Bureau of Indian Affairs agencies about how they should use their property, and try to put horses and cattle on their on their land. But there was this little problem with a little five letter word called Texas. And eventually, every time they would put out of this, we're talking the 1880s 1890s, right up until the turn right up until Oklahoma statehood in 1906. Every time they built up a herd, that herd was stolen, literally stolen from them. Texas, Ben DeRose essentially would come up in the middle of the night and cut the fences and take every one of their cattle. If they didn't take them all. They brought up their own cattle and pastured them on Kiowa land, Kai was had 6 million acres of common pasture, which they needed, frankly, given that pasture quality there, which was pretty low. I mean, you needed about 20 acres per steer to to keep them alive, which is pretty much I think, the average size here is about six or six acres per animal. So they would so they would enter in the springtime, they would go in and try to take their cattle into big pasture and they would find it it was already destroyed by Texas cattlemen that had been overwintering there illegally. And of course, the US Army would try to move the Texas band or bandits out and and that would end up in wars. And so essentially, they would simply move the Chi was out of the way. So they just consistently got smaller and smaller and smaller parcels of land to the point where they their fractionation of their land became so dramatic that the only way in which they could make any money at all with which to subsist was to rent their land out to a white farmer, who would have access to capital who could take out a loan. American Indians were not allowed to take out loans, because their land was actually held in trust and the way that we would hold land and trust for a minor child. Their land was held in trust and they could not use their land as collateral for loans, believe it or not. So talk about being put into a box canyon in terms of production and so that was the story that I uncovered am a very similar story unfolded with African American farmers. They came together in walking trains, they literally walked and they set up 25 All black towns in Oklahoma, we had over 20 black towns in Kansas. And they wanted to be a separate economy because their long experience with slavery, let them understand, help them understand that they had to help each other. There was no question that they were not going to get a lot of help from their white neighbors in terms of being successful. And so they attempted to set up these internal economies for themselves. As you can imagine, that did not work out very well, when they got very, very little support from the 1890 College case state was integrated from the beginning. So we all know about the story of George Washington, Owen, who was the first African American graduate from Kansas State University will KSA see at the time, and he became a expert in a number of different agricultural products, but especially agricultural education, and worked at tusky. And he worked with web, WEB DuBois and George Washington Carver, in fact, and many other leading agricultural experts at Tuskegee, who became leaders in African American education.

How does this history intersect with agriculture today?

That's a really, really big question. Historically, I can see threads leading back directly to the first part of the 20th century. Specifically, I see a lot of repetition between the kinds of agricultural resistance that we saw in the 1890s. Interestingly, right up through the 1920s, I see a lot of agricultural resistance. As farmers in general have a reputation and a history of being kind of rabble rousers doing things to get attention when they don't feel the things are fair, they feel very strongly about not being treated fairly. Part of that goes back to I think we talked about this about agricultural fundamentalism, in which farmers believe that their work is more significant and more central to the United States experience than other forms of work that they actually produce things that people require in need, and that they're the center of what keeps the United States going economically now, as their numbers have dropped over time, they have become less politically relevant. But that has not prevented them from feeling that they're still economically relevant. And what I explained to my students, of course, is that the agricultural economy as a sector of the United States, economy has continued to grow almost exponentially at times. And yet the number of people involved in production agriculture has shrunk to almost to the disappearing point. And of course, it has a lot to do with technology has a lot to do with international global markets. And the way in which distribution of food happens and the processing of food happens. But that has not prevented farmers from feeling that they need to have a greater voice and the way in which agriculture is unfolds, especially US policy. So we have a number of moments, really big moments in US history in terms of farming, that I see echoed today. No, one of the course of the populist moment in the 1890s was a big one. And interestingly enough, I love showing the Omaha platform to my students, because almost every single thing on the Omaha platform has become reality for Americans today. William Jennings Bryan's he actually got co opted, of course by the Democrats. But the platform remained very similar. And really, that platform included the direct election of senators, because they felt that state legislatures had absolutely too much control over national agricultural policy. It included increasing the amount of bullion and silver that the US government held as a back for paper dollars. So that would that's what the silver issue is. And many people even today don't understand that the United States government essentially didn't have enough cash and gold in order to produce enough paper money, which caused huge amounts of inflation. So it was extremely difficult for farmers to come up with enough cash to do basic simple things like pay their taxes. And of course with that, and as we all know, farmers only get one paycheck a year. And so holding over for that whole year meant that you generally had to take out what they called a note or a loan. And we call it nicer things now. But, and debtors prison went away in the 1830s who Ray However, people the sheriff could come and confiscate everything you owned and many of the farmers in the 1890s had been through The major economic upset in 1873, they had seen 10s of 1000s of farmers lose everything that they owned. And so they're very sensitive to changes in policy and sensitive to changes in the economy, especially as it affects their one paycheck a year, which is pretty dramatic.

And they found their voice in the Grange. quite loud. Yeah,

yeah, all of our heads and Kelly started the Grange up in Minnesota. But that was more of like, a self help organization, you know, like, we'll hang out together, and we'll help each other. But it was really the farmers alliance that became the political arm and then became the the populist platform for sure. Raise more hail on less. Yes, that was definitely Lisa's phrase, you know, which it's interesting, you know, she was not actually a farmer, her. Her father was a pharmacist. And I believe she was married to a professional man too. So but she had been deeply affected by the changes in agricultural policy. So farmers are well known for getting upset, let's put it that way. And so I see a direct connection between their reaction to big changes in policy between the 1890s again in the 1940s. And then again, in especially in the 1980s, we have tractor, Cade, we have farmers breaking, I would guess I would call it civil disobedience, we've had a number of issues of civil disobedience. And now we currently have a similar thing happening again. So we have farmers, again, who are very upset about the imbalance in trade and the trade war and the tariff war, which, of course, is in a, you know, on proportionate in its effect on them, based on the other people in the United States. And from what I understand, farmers telling me today, and this was just recently, two weeks ago, in in Lawrence is they all understand that right now, the economy, the agricultural economy, is like a big bathtub, and it has a plug in it, which is the payments to the farmers that are losing money because of the trade war. But as soon as that plug gets pulled, it's all going down the drain. So they are very clear that they aren't. This is not a sustainable system whatsoever. So on the one hand, they're hard bitten about the economics of farming. And they understand that they have to take care of themselves and that their individual entrepreneurs in a sense, but on the other hand, they realize that as a class of people, they face very, very similar obstacles. And I know that for many farmers right now, their sense of grievance is growing. And that's their sense of grievance is growing. And that's being reinforced by the number of suicides in agricultural communities, which has increased dramatically in the last in the last two in the last two years. And, and we had, we saw a similar increase in despair in rural communities in the 1980s, especially when we saw farmers who had completely paid off their farms, they were without a mortgage. And then they had because of the agricultural low prices, as a result of Russia essentially re booting its own agricultural economy, and they no longer had Russia as a market. That was the what do you call it that that was the trigger for the fall? That of course that we all remember, or maybe some of us remember how high interest rates were? Oh, yes, my my so so farmers who were taking out loans against their property values, which were at that time, super inflated, when the price of commodities went down, of course, their interest rate didn't change, their loan payment didn't change, and many of them had to remortgage farms that had been paid off for a generation or more. When was this? This was in the 1980s.

In fact, Kansas State had a hotline. That's correct. Yeah. It had three or four specialists that dealt with there were counselors, there were ag economist, finance folks,

lots of that we had I mean, well, right program at K State got started as a result of the agricultural crisis of the 1980s. And we forget how much just total distress happened in the 1980s. And it was no joke to take to make a decision to drive your tractor and park it on the Washington Mall. I mean, you don't make that lightly. No. And, and so that we the generation farmers we have now of course, is dramatically aging, the number of the average age in Kansas as well over six 60 Now, and the number and what's interesting, according to the demographics that I've learned from one of our own sociologists on campus, Matthew Sanderson, is that there's a slight bump in the number of people who are in their 20s, who are in rural areas. And of course, we continue to see the population of the over 60. Communities however, the people in the middle are missing. So people who are in their 40s and 50s, at the height of their economic power or economic potential, are essentially hollowed out from those communities. And that's a big, big concern for me, too, for maintaining a tax base for many of these communities. And of course, we I think we mentioned earlier that more than half of Kansas counties now fall below, right, the definition of a trend here,

I was listening to a presentation a little earlier today, discussing Kansas counties, where the average population was less than 10 per square mile.

And in some places, it's seven.

So one of the things I mean, you're talking about farmers as a group, you're also talking about sort of how different groups are affected very differently to right. So what kind of similarity you see, today, I mean, in terms of bias on the effects, or how, you know, certain subgroups are seeing things differently. I mean, I was really, I was just gonna say I was really struck some of the some of the history, I knew a lot of it, I don't but but the, the, the challenges that the, that black farmers versus white farmers versus the Native Americans in Oklahoma face was just striking how different that was. Right. So what strains of that do you see sort of going through from?

Well? That's a really good question. I mean, the I think the most striking thing was the Agricultural Adjustment Act in the 1930s, provided relief for land owners. And so anybody who was a tenant farmer, didn't get a thing didn't get $1. And, of course, in the Americans throughout the American South, and in much of Texas, and even Oklahoma, you had a lot of tenant farmers. Even in Kansas, we've always had tenant farmers, people who rent their ground instead of owning it. And the Agricultural Adjustment Act was very, very clear that it didn't provide any money to tenants. And so we saw an enormous exodus of tenant farmers off their properties in as a result of the 1930s, which we consider, you know, a New Deal program, we don't anticipate that that's going to have a racial component. But it did. And really, what we have all throughout American agricultural history is a distinction between owners and workers. And agricultural workers, of course, far outnumber owners now, massively. It's totally disproportionate now, and in fact, almost all of the farmers I know, are also tenants, right? Yes, they don't, they own maybe, you know, 400 acres, but they're renting an additional 1000 from someone else, as farms turnover as a result of, you know, inheritance. And people don't want to come back and work it of course, just like Native Americans had to rent their ground for their grass money. Because they didn't have any ability to rent it to farm it themselves, because they didn't have any capital and all of that litany there. I mean, just it's similar now is that people have left the farm a long time ago, and they don't want to come back. And, and so there's a lot of ground out there that's being rented. But the majority of the people I think, that we see working in, the agricultural sector today aren't even in that situation. I think we see them not as either owners or tenants, but literally as day workers. So there's been a de Skilling and also an A parallel de-munition of their value in agriculture, that they're expendable. And of course, that's a long term and a long time process that we see. So I mean, when, when we think about people who are only here to pick crops seasonally, and that's really what we're talking about in general that began at the beginning of the 20th century, and that continued on through the 1930s and 40s. With the Bracero program in the 1950s Anytime especially this very clearly happens during World War One World War Two when you have a large number of young men and and women actually leaving agricultural areas for work either in factories like Wichita, we saw a lot of small towns completely empty out as a result of of that, especially in Kansas

And four consecutive very good crops.

Yes, well, absolutely, I've had forgotten all about that, thank you. And so, you end up with a lot of crops in the ground and not enough people to harvest them. And that's that put a lot of pressure on the federal government to create the Brasero program in a legal way. And so you actually have now generations of people who are used to coming to the United States, and working for a season and working seasonal crops moving from one part of the country to another, they might be harvesting grapes in the Central Valley in California, in the Napa, Sonoma, and then moving over to another part of the country to harvest on their schedule. So it's not just like, one time coming up, and then going home, they move from place to place and all the way across the country. When I lived, I lived in Northern California for about four years. And I'll never forget my complete and utter shock, the first time that I came across a tenant community. And I was living in Northern California, and that's well known for Almonds, and apricots, and just you know, 1000s and 1000s of acres of these high value crops, but they're also very, they're also very labor intensive crops. And you have to get up there and pick apricots. You can't vacuum them off the tree I found anyway, they do have some mechanical picking, but not very much, you still have to do a lot of it by hand. And those large fruit and nut farmers had housing, you know, so called housing for their families. But I had never seen anything so dire in my life. I had never seen people living in the late 20th centuries, the 1990s living without running water, and without latrines, you know, outdoor latrines, and places that clearly didn't keep anyone warm, or cool, depending on the time of year. And I was so disappointed to see that there was still a class of agricultural workers being treated that way in the United States of America. I guess I shouldn't have been surprised, but I was. And so I do think I see that. That's the thread that I see. I see agricultural workers, people who have been expendable within the policies that have privileged land owners, I have seen them consistently devalued and made almost invisible.

And back East the term would have been the hired man who would have worked for 25-30 years, and was doing a little bit of everything. The farmer didn't you get out to other parts of the country? And it really has it recreated for quite a while sharecropping.

Absolutely, absolutely, yeah. And sharecropping was one of the reasons that African American farmers left American. So yeah, and of course, we have the whole story of the furnishing merchant. The furnishing merchant was somebody who bought your crops and gave you the loan to put the next crop in the ground. And low and behold, oddly, you know, what you owed was always more than what you sold. And I, you know, one of my one of my favorite things to do is to tell students stories about how especially black farmers, but any kind of farmer that was not in a privileged position. How they got around those things, and no, so fun little story. So one, one family, this is in the 1880s. They grew cotton. I'm pretty sure that I'm thinking about Alabama here. And he realized that when he took his cotton, you know, this gigantic, you know, 600 pound bales, they obviously don't check all the cotton in the bale, you know, it's wrapped up in and so they, they stick a long fork in there, like a long, it almost looks like a crochet needle. And they they pull out some and then they check the quality that way. And what this African American tenant farmer discovered was at any time, he went to have his bale sold, and they pulled out the cotton, it was always grade B or C, but his neighbor who he was working right next to itself was always grade A. And his neighbor was white. So he convinced him to take his bales for him. And so the two had a pack that they made a little arrangement between themselves. And I found the same story in in Oklahoma, with African American farmers, finding interestingly new immigrant farmers, which I think is so fascinating. Farmers from Russia or Germany. We're brand new, and didn't have that history of racial tension or discrimination. And as far as that German farmer was concerned, like I have a bit wagon, you have a horse together, we can get a lot more done. They would work together pretty closely. And often African American farmers are smart enough to get that white farmer to sell their crops for them and get a little bit ahead. I always love those stories.

Changing gears, one of your titles is executive director of the Chapman center. Yes. Can you tell us a little bit about the center?

Absolutely. No, yeah. Chapman Center has been around for 14 years this year. And it started when Mark Chapman who's an alumn of case k state history alumn, his family, homesteaded in a little area called Broten, Kansas. And Broten is just a little bit to the east and south of Clay Center, Kansas. And it was condemned for flood control in 19 in the 1960s, to create Milford Lake, Milford reservoir, not really like it's really a reservoir. And it's not actually underwater, not the way Randolph was underwater for Tuttle Creek, but it was within the floodplain so that if the water ever did top, its banks that this this is where the water would go and kind of like our spillway, so it's kind of in the spillway, and so they condemned everyone in this in the town, everyone. There's some wonderful stories about Broten. That way the postmistress refused to leave Broten. And the same the day that the bulldozers arrived to literally knock every single building down in the town, she was sitting in the post office, the bulldozer was sitting outside the door. And she shut the when she closed the curtains and closed up the post office box, and walked outside and locked the door, put the key in her pocket, and walked away. And then the bulldozer knocked the building down. defiant, to the end, she was great. So that's a really great story. But Mr. Chapman had an idyllic childhood. Growing up in Broten of fishing in the written the creeks and rivers and chasing animals and raising, you know, wild animals. You know, everybody seems to me everyone in a small town before 1950 had a pet raccoon, I could be wrong, but it sure seems that way. Everybody had a pet raccoon at some time. And if you if you thought, you know, Tom Sawyer was a good life than a boy, I'll tell you being raised in those small towns in the 40s and 50s. Must have been pretty fun. But he felt bad because his parents Leo and Irene Chapman moved to Clay Center as most of the residents of Brighton did they move they even physically moved the church five miles away, and saved it. But his parents were in their 90s. And he was worried that the story of the town was going to be lost. And so he approached the history department, myself and a couple of other historians and asked if we could do some work on that town. And Dr. MJ Morgan, who was an adjunct professor in history department, she thought this sounded like a fun project. And she really took it on and started to train students in how to do that kind of research. And so Mr. Chapman was so pleased with the work that MJ and the students did I was kind of hands off at that point that he essentially paid to have a center created to continue to do that work. He said, if I learned so much about my town, through the work of these students, what about all these other towns and he didn't even realize at the time, how many towns there were. We know now? How many towns there were, but that's because of the work of a wonderful man in Rossville, Kansas named Melvin Brenzel, who was the state audiologist from like 1950 to the 1990s.

I didn't even know such such thing existed.

Oh, yeah, I don't remember getting your hearing tested when you know the beep test. He administered the beep test. So he did that for the whole state, going from school to school. So he was he was I witness to the number of schools are closed because of the school closings in the 1960s the consolidations and also how small towns were just curling up and dying all across the state and he was so concerned about the stories being lost. Talk about a goldmine of information that he created. So He will, when he retired, he spent 11 years, get that, 11 years researching and recording the location and basic information of every single place name in the state of Kansas. We had oh my oh my word, oh my word. And we didn't know this. We had no idea. One of our one of my students was at a sale barn. And she saw this ad on the wall. And it was called, you know, place names in Kansas lost, found, interesting things like that. She's with a little phone number. And she goes, my goodness, I wonder what that is. And she pulled it off the sale barn bulletin board and brought it to me. And I read it. I was like, Oh, my gosh, and I immediately called him, it turned out he's not very far away. He came right over. And he had an index get this of over 9000 place names. Oh, my gosh. 9000. My favorite one, everyone asked him, What's your favorite place? That doesn't exist anymore? And I'll tell you what it is. It's magic cans.

Magic! Name was a little tiny school. It is now on the Fort Riley reservation. And that's what happened to it. And how do we know it's not still there? Oh, yes, it could be there. Speedy Kansas. Oh, my gosh, there's so many great names we. So he had it all beautifully laid out of all these 9000 place names. If you look, if you look at a roadmap today, you won't find even 700 places on that map. So that's 84-8300 places that we essentially can't drive too easily and existed at one time or another.

So are some of these still being used. But it's just like a small, smaller community that, you know, still calling themselves this, it's just not on the map.

I would like I would say the majority of them are just gone. They're like magic doesn't exist in any way, shape, or form. What does exist in many of these towns, and I don't have a proportional, we haven't done that kind of that would be really hard to work through what doesn't go away or the cemeteries. So interestingly, what we'd like to talk about is even though most towns are gone, and the people don't live there anymore, they still want to go home. At the end of their lives, they still go home. Think about that. That's interesting, isn't it? This cemetery,

Just participated in one of those funerals two weeks ago.

Daniel Boston said way back when you wrote the American, yeah, that Kansas had the largest number of dead postoffs. Oh, yeah, of any other state. And he put it down. If I remember correctly, to people moving west, they will just pick up the towns and Northwest. It's much more complicated.

Much, much more complicated than that. Yeah. And I think people like to want to hear some simple answers. Why did the town die? Oh, because of the railroad, but didn't go through or something like that. But what I tell people is, there's really only a very few reasons to make it down. But there's literally limitless numbers of ways in which the town died. That the main focus of the channel, it has been for the past 13 years, we have our other big focus has been in providing undergraduates research experience in which they get professional training and how to do the research that professional historians do. Um, if you think about it on our campus, students who are chemistry majors or other kinds of bench scientists, majors, or even archeologists, in anthropology majors can get field experience, or bench experience and doing what their professors do. Well, how do history students get that kind of experience, so they're not going to stand behind me and watch me write a book. So this is a very boring, you know, I'm not going to sit there with a dictionary and say, Okay, you look up these words. So that's not a good way to organize an undergraduate research experience, but researching these small towns is, is within their grasp. So what we did is we created a format, a series of, I call our bag of tricks, where we unlock the secrets of how you learn about these towns like these are this is this is hard earned information that we have databases, we subscribe to a number of online databases as well as collect material in which essentially is unpublished that students can use and, and then we tell and then we but the greatest part of it is we bring in those the nearest community members to help us. Yes. So if you think about it, if we wanted to learn about Leo and Irene sprouting, and we went and talked to them, they were they were in their 90s. And we went and interviewed them. So suddenly, we have students that are talking to people in their 80s and 90s. And they form these fantastic bonds, and suddenly our students are like, wow, they're, they get so excited. They're like I want to go find out about this for, for funeral prefer Martha who who's in the nursing home and wanting to know more, and she has pictures for me and I'm going to go meet her at her house and, and suddenly we had students all over rural Kansas, doing these things, and it made them excited, it got the community's excited, and led to a number of really fantastic interactions. And then I won an, I was awarded a National Endowment for the Humanities, digital digital history or digital humanities award in which I basically use that money to create a digital online database. And all of our students work, the best work is published. So not only do they get the research experience, they get this interaction with engagement, they also get a publication before they leave. And so it's been very popular.

Again, changing directions. You and your husband, Jim are both historians. And locally, you've also had a sideline of restoring historic homes.

Well, we restored five, and one of them was in partnership. We restored the Damon Runyon birthplace, fourth and Osage that was very important to us to do. And the very first house interestingly, we purchased on the corner of sixth and pierce Street, it's 529. Pierce Street, was our very first house. And we had no idea at the time. But the President of Kansas State Agricultural College, Thomas Will lived in that house for the two years that he was president of the university. And that was because he was a populist president and he didn't believe in being treated differently than other people on campus. He didn't want to be he wanted himself to be considered a first among equals. So he was actually president of the Bicycle Club, which is amazing, because remember, bicycles then were the giant wheels with the tiny one in the behind. So I love to think about Thomas wheel, and all of these high wheel bicycles all around my house. That's a fantastic view. So that was the very first house that we did. And the reason that we did it, the reason we did all of those, those things was had to do with believe it or not the Walmart, this kind of corporate behavior, which pushes commercial activity to the edge of cities, is what's killing the downtown's of towns. And as historians, we knew the trajectory of those kinds of things in towns and we said we ought to become urban homesteaders will become urban homesteaders. And we'll go back into areas that have been blighted, and will reestablish. And so that's how we came to buy 529. And we restored it, and we loved it. And then we had to buy the house next door in order to protect our house. And then we bought the Damon Runyan house with some help from Telestrator. And then we restored a house behind that one. And then our last house was a house it was owned by Oh, what was his first name is his last name is Daughter's Curtis daughters. And he was a board member of the Board of Regents and he built the house, he bought the house from someone else right after it was built, and where the Municipal Court is now, that was supposed to be the courthouse and for the holes for the city that was Courthouse Square. But then someone in town donated the land that the courthouse sits on today on points Avenue, with the caveat that they put the courthouse there and so in most small towns, you will notice that the courthouse and the jail are together in a square in this in the center. Clay Center is a perfect example. But are separated the jail was in one place in the in the courthouse in another place. And that was the reason and so so Charles Curtis, that's his name. He built he you know, he moved into this house so he would have easy access to the courthouse and he moved into that in like 1899 and then the courthouse got built downtown in 1904. So I'm sure he was quite disappointed. But he lived there till the 1930s. And by the time we got it, it had been abandoned and not lived in for over 20 years.

Any ones that got away that you wanted to?

Oh there's unfortunately there's been many of those. Yeah, but I I don't think people today remember Burn Forster?

They do.

Oh, I'm glad you guys do. Burn Forster was one of the original framers or writers of the 1966 Act National Park Service Act have created the National Historic Register for the United States. And he was a member of the National first National Trust for Historic Preservation. And he was the dean of the College of Architecture here at K State and when we were first thinking about moving downtown, etc, and I wanted to learn more about historic preservation. I could called Burn. And the first thing he said to me is like, well, who are you? And why should I talk to you? Eventually, he became one of our closest friends he and his wife Enel, and he was extremely inspirational. And, and he said to me, he says, not, not everything old should be torn down, he says, But not everything new should be built. And it was such a fine. Oh, such a good way to look at things because people just assume that if it's new, it's better. And he said, That's not true. And he says, But not everything old was very good at the time, either. So he said, you know, be discerning about historic preservation, I've always taken that to heart.

So, I mean, we can't change history, right? And in some ways, we don't want to go back to, you know, many of the ways things are right.

I never want to back! Yeah, no, I think about tuberculosis. And I never want to go back.

It's really easy to get nostalgic for certain things, right? Or a certain way of farming are all these loss towns and right, but so. So what's your perspective on like, the way we live today into towns and the way we do agriculture, like all this, that you kind of, you do look back on the past and sort of say, oh, but that's a piece that I would love for us to, like, recreate or regenerate or do something like that? Yeah, that's still Yeah.

You've stunned me now. I do believe that. People knew their neighbors better. I do believe the connection between people was stronger. My dear, dear friend, Pat sobble, just died on December 7, and he was 98 and a half. And I just finished putting together all of his ranch stories in a book, we just published it. And talking to him for three years. This is what most strongly struck me as what's missing from our lives today in rural United States. He was a rancher in Chase County, and the stories that he could tell the intimate stories he could tell of his neighbors, and of things where, where men and women got together and families got together, I feel strongly that were missing a lot of that he knew everyone around him in a way that we don't know each other today. I mean, I'm not the first one to make this observation. But it really came home to me. He had some wonderful stories about his father putting him in a wagon or on or just both of them on horseback and just visiting just going around to the neighbors to see who was up and who was doing this and that and just sitting around not doing much of anything. And he had some great funny stories about the first time he saw an indoor flush toilet and, and his father actually put him on horseback and took him to see the neighbor who had one, you know, so they could all have a look at it. And it's that kind of thing. Ray Joya actually. The a Kiowa, oh man that I mentioned at the beginning, he told me something very similar. And it didn't occur to me until much later that how similar it was he said, he used to be able to stand on the back of his farm porch. And look out at the valley and see the lights in the dark. And each of the lights represented a little farmstead. And he knew the name of every one of those lights. He says now goes, no one knows the names of those lights. And so I think that's what I'm nostalgic for, I guess. But I don't think that that's impossible to recreate, I actually think it would be quite good and quite possible. That's the distances now between farmsteads that makes that more difficult. It's also the fact that so many agricultural families have to have off farm jobs. So you don't have people at home very often. And so I don't have any solutions for that. I'm a big advocate of getting broadband and greater Internet access to agricultural and rural areas so that people don't feel so disconnected. Not just from the world at large, but from one another.

One of the thing I wanted to bring up, because I thought it was really very cool. You and Jim, I don't remember exactly how this worked. But we were invited to Barack Obama's inauguration. Can you tell us a little bit about that?

It was a shock. We don't know Barack Obama. But there's a there was an historian. His name is Fergus Fordwich. And he works for the Smithsonian. He's written many, many books. And he came out from he lived in Washington, DC, and he came to Manhattan, Kansas. He actually sort of came out on his own, and he was looking for information related to the very first home homestead in the United States which there's a museum Homestead, Nebraska where you can actually go and see the first patented homestead and talk about it. But he wanted to know about the first land grant school as well. And so someone said, Well, you know, you need to go and talk to Jim and Bonnie and he was who and they were like we said, we'll meet you for dinner. So we took him out for dinner. We didn't know him at all. And I remember very clearly Jim saying to me, Do we have time for this? And I said, we should be hospitable. Because we want when we go to other places, and we do research, we want other historians to be hospitable to us. And it's like, oh, yeah, you're totally right. And so we took Fergus out for dinner. And at the end of the meal, we had convinced him that K State was the first operational land grant school in the nation which we had researched, and we knew. Absolutely, without question. Michigan State Michigan claims it, I will claims that they all have a different reason for claiming it. Michigan's is to me the most disingenuous, they said that they had a research farm back before Michigan, was a school Michigan State was a school, and that that farmer was running experiments on it with a little group of students or something. And so that counts is the first land grant. Yeah. And I'm like, no, no. Yeah, I'm really I'm like, I'm thinking I was running around with his beat with his beans, too. I mean, that doesn't get so. So But anyway, he became convinced and so forth. Fergus went on to write his thing about homesteads and land grant colleges, and that was all great. And then suddenly out of the blue, and that was like, 2005, and then suddenly out of the blue. No, no, it was 2010. And so out of the blue is, we get this call from an office in Washington, DC, and it's from Chuck Schumer's office. I don't know Chuck Schumer either. And I'm not in his district. So but what it was, they were putting together a portfolio, and it was going to go to the members of Congress and other dignitaries and invited guests to the second inauguration luncheon. So right after you see the president inaugurated, there's a social event, and it's limited to 200 people. So not even every member of Congress gets to go. You have to own a small country, I think, if you're on the guest list, and they give them a special gift, each time that this has happened, and I don't know a lot how far back that tradition goes. But apparently about a century, it goes back. And everyone gets a gift. So this gift in 2012, was going to be a series of essays, written by historians about the 1862 presidential administration, which, of course, was Abraham Lincoln's, and boy, 1862 was a busy, busy year. I mean, we got the Railroad Act, we got the Banking Act, we got the moral Land Grant Act. We got the Homestead Act, The Congressional Dome was completed. During this all in the middle of a war. In addition to that, I mean, it was just incredible the number of things and so historians were asked from across the country who were experts in those particular things. And we were extremely honored to be included as one of those historians. And we co authored the essay about the land grant school system. And so we started with a celebration here in Manhattan, of a group of people who got together to have a wonderful party, at the same time that people are dying in the Battle of the Bull Run back East. In Virginia. It was like this, I think it was the second day of the battle. And it was not going well. But here in Manhattan, people were celebrating about the fact that they had created a college and looking forward to the future in the middle of one of the darkest moments of US history. So we wrote that essay. And then we each have we got a copy back from the Government Printing Office, which is all on vellum and everything but then it got better with Oh, great. Isn't that nice? We get to put that in our library. And then we got another call and say well, aren't you coming? Are like excuses what what they said, Well, you're invited we have tickets for you. I said, Well, that would have been good to know six months ago. Yeah, that would have been good to know earlier and they let us know like the end of November and you know, the inauguration in January and I'm like, Oh, we're never gonna get a ticket to DC of it at the airlines are just jammed. And then we're never going to get a place to stay. But somehow, it all came together. The tickets were available. They were not expensive. A friend of ours said hey, you can stay with my mom in DC and we were like We're going. And it was the most amazing experience. It was. I can't explain to people enough how different Washington DC and I've been to DC more times than I can count probably 30-40 times at least. And I have never been to DC at a moment in which I saw people so joyous in my life. Getting onto the train onto the just to get downtown, people were pouring into your free that day, everybody was pouring in wearing little flags and carrying babies. Women were singing kids were jumping up and down. And, when we got out of the subway, walking up to the security, I'll never forget this. There was just all this wonderful feeling of camaraderie. And just sort of like we're all in this together. And when we went through the security, I remember I had a lipstick. And that was the only thing I had with me was a lipstick. And the security man he looked at and he goes, Hey, goes all bet this looks beautiful on you. Could you put some on for me? And I did. And he said You are beautiful. And wow. Not what you expect from you know, Customs and Border Patrol today. And we were seated with people from all over the country to that was wonderful. There was Native Americans near us. We were sitting next to the granddaughter of Medgar Evers. We had people behind us. We had a lovely couple behind us that sobbed through the entire event. And it just and then at the end, this is wonderful. We were walking through and a big loudspeaker came on and said, we're looking for the Tuskegee Airmen. And there was a number of Tuskegee Airmen that had been invited that were sitting in our section and, and these were very tiny little people. I mean, these men were in their late 80s, early 90s. By then, and, and one of them was standing beside me and I. I said, Sir, I believe they're calling for you. He goes, Oh, my gosh. And I said, Hey, we the Tuskegee Airmen here. And so everyone just parted so that he could walk through and they put him in a limousine to take him to a special reception. Yeah. It was a wonderful experience. I'm really glad that I wish all Americans could have that. But for me, it was it'll always stay with me.

Bonnie, this was such an interesting discussion. Are there any other questions?

Many, many, but we should. I enjoyed it.

Do you have any questions for us?

No, no, no, I'm just, I'm just really excited about global food systems. And I'm really excited about the podcasting. I think you're making a really big difference on campus. I am seeing the profile the Global Food Systems is really going up and I'm looking forward to working with you guys more.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

At the very heart of sustainable food production is the health of soil. Not only does soil health and microbial community impact the production of food for humans and animals, soil can be a major player in the sequestration of carbon – a main variable to climate change. Through focused research goals in finding ways to improved and protect the environment while also boosting agricultural productivity, Dr. Chuck Rice shares his thoughts on many facets of the complex agriculture system, new technologies, water policies and soil health.

Transcript:

Where Soil Health Meets Global Food System Challenges - A Discussion with Dr. Charles Rice

There's lots of challenges. There's, you know, the increasing population. How do we deal with increasing production but also food waste? But how can we do that increased production without harming having impact on our natural resources?

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello everyone and welcome back. At the very heart of sustainable food production is the health of soil. Not only does soil health and microbial community impact the production of food for humans and animals, soil can be a major player in the sequestration of carbon, a main variable to climate change. Our guest today is Dr. Chuck Rice University Distinguished Professor and recipient of the Marielle venir professorship in the Department of Agronomy at K State. Chuck's research goals are to find ways to improve and protect the environment, while also boosting agricultural productivity. In today's discussion, Chuck shares his thoughts on the many facets of the complex agriculture system, new technologies, water policy and yes, soil health. Dr. Rice, welcome to the podcast.

Thank you.

I've heard recently that you've received a $10 million USDA grant. Very exciting and we will talk more about that as we get into it. But first, I'd like to hear a little background on who you are and how you got to where you are today.

Okay. Well, I actually grew up in Illinois a small town outside of Chicago at that time, many years ago. It was a rural community. They called it the super boonies, Yorkville, but now it's part of the suburbs of Chicago, but I didn't really grow up on a farm. But I was active in 4H. My parents, I was a first generation college student, my parents, my mom worked in a cafeteria, my dad worked in a factory, but they were really supportive of science education. You know, they bought chemistry kits, we had a microscope, they we hatched an egg, cut a window and an egg and watch the check grow. So I had a lot of that kind of science background in that. And I had really some key teachers third grade, that third fifth and, and then freshmen in high school that were really instrumental get me involved in science, I guess I was attuned to science, but things like we made butter and then but what really got me started into science and biology related was my freshman, high school biology teacher. We he took a select group at the end of the year to a the sand dunes in Michigan. And we studied this we spent camping, but spent the time from looking at the development of plant communities from the lake beach dunes all the way into the climax forest which is a beach maple forest and Western Michigan. So that kind of what got me started and then to certain things, moments in time in college, got involved with water and soils in geography. I was a geography major. I switched in midterm but to the geography and really got involved in soils particularly did an internship at Argonne National Lab on surface mine reclamation at that time. And then my advisor for college. I was thinking about doing a master's in land use planning at Northern Illinois. And he said well, we've done as about as much as we can do for you. You ought to go somewhere else. I got married and my took my wife and myself and went down got a assistantship at Kentucky do surface mine reclamation for my masters and then stayed on for my PhD in soil microbiology nitrogen side tackling in knotel systems, so that was my real first, real indoctrination into agriculture.

You stated in some of the materials that I read online that soil microbiology impacts everything beyond the local level, it gets to be an international. How can you explain where that how that impacts and fits into the bigger picture and how that might, the bigger picture may bring information back to the local.

Right, right? Well, so soil microbiology is a relatively new field, particularly with a new techniques. But people don't really understand the value of soils, and particularly the microbes and soils. I often tell people at for the human aspect, that we only understand about one person awakened only cultivate 1% of the microbes in soil. So we know genetically, there's the other 99%, but we really don't know their ecology, but yet that 1% We get 90 plus percent of our antibiotics. For human health. We did an analysis about 50% of our anti cancer drugs, anti immunosuppressant, or even number suppressant drugs come from soils, which a lot of our microbial origin. So the whole world's wide open for trying to discover what the other 99% are doing, both for human health, but also for this planet. And so while I'm not necessarily doing the work on human health, I do quite a bit of work on what those microbes are doing in soil, for our culture, but also the effect the planet. And so the, the hot topic, no pun intended, but is the carbon cycle. So carbon, stored in soils, is about two to three times more than what's in vegetation on this planet. And a lot of that carbon, is processed by the microbes as we're getting into fall here, tree leaves, drop, corn, soybean residue, all that plant material is processed by the microbes in a portion of that is then sequestered or stored in soils. So now we have the tools to understanding the global carbon cycle and those microbes, how they're involved really affect our planet because of global rise in co2 and the implications that has on climate change. But, you know, now we have the tools to understand those microbes and really, to create healthier soils, and store more carbon become more efficient with nutrients.

So I take it, you're no longer are you the scientific community, are no longer at quite the loss, you were to be able to cultivate these. Are you is that part of the problem that you

Yeah, that's still the case today. That we know with the molecular techniques now, genomic analysis that we can know, we know, DNA strands, the DNA, but we really still can't cultivate a lot of those organisms. And we really need to have those tools so that we can understand the ecology, how do they fit in the soil environment, how they interact with each other. So we know the genetic potential a little bit what their potential activities, but trying to figure out how they live in the soil, how they live and plant roots, the potential there for increasing efficiency, water resilience in crops, is really key. It's really a kind of the next, next frontier.

So how do you study some of this? If you don't, if you can't bring it into a lab and cultivated that's part of what you're talking about? Right? It's sort of that being able to sort of in the lab, then see what's going on? Are you at? Are you at a loss? If you can't do that, are there things that you can do to know, actually in the field, right?

Yeah, so there's, I don't. So there's people that do the genomic analysis, and I guess I'm looking at the products of that microbe activity. So I look at processes, and not the individual organisms, per se, but those groups of organisms and how they process nitrogen, or how they process carbon, so I'm looking at the tivity, and what environmental factors affect that activity, but I don't know necessarily who they are. But I want to know what they're doing.

Famous story when people were studying slime mold, dictyostelium. They knew that they aggregate it and they knew that there's something you control that aggregation, but they couldn't figure out what it was and all they could see was the spot on chromatography paper, and so they called it magic spot. For about five years until we finally got to characterized,

Okay, that's interesting. Yeah, I didn't know that. But yeah, they I mean, it's, it's something like that, you know. It'd be nice to grow, cultivate those organs. So we could look at their specific mechanisms and their ecology. But at this point in time, we know enough that we can, some of the general enzymes that make those products are really useful, and then what controls them. So I'm looking at things like moisture, and how human management of soils affects those processes for the detriment or for the benefit.

Could you say some of the things that you see there? Like, what, what are the kinds of interesting effects that that you're that you're studying? And that you're looking at? Right, in terms of the effects of, you know, water or human activity? And what are the outcomes? Are you looking at mostly carbon sequestration? Or what other kinds of things that are was interesting.

Yeah, So I guess, well, the current topic that's been working on soil health, but you know, that's very generic and how to improve soil health, and particularly, the microbial aspects of that we know the chemistry and the physics measurements, but microbial techniques, which you know, are just time out are fairly new. And so how do those measurements can be used to indicate direction of soil health, but the reason for the interest in soil health is for multiple effects. One is carbon sequestration. You mentioned, you mentioned, like I said, there's three, two to three times more carbon in soils, and then there is in the atmosphere, or in vegetation. So understanding how that carbon is retained in that soil. How can we put more carbon to the benefit of the environment to the atmosphere. So things that we're working on is we know that certain soil management practices like less tillage is beneficial for more fungi in fungi are more efficient with a carbon so more of their carbon a process or return is retained in the soil over bacteria. Also, we know that the fungal hyphae that permeate through the soil just like if you look on your bread moldy, bread, you know, those hyphal strands, those hyphae, grab onto the soil particles in physically bind them together. And what happens is that organic carbon is trapped inside those aggregates. And that protects them. And that's one of the mechanism for carbon sequestration. So I use, I work on both agricultural systems and grassland ecosystems, the Konza prairie here. And so I try to understand the principles of the prairie ecosystems, because they're water resilient, they're nutrient deficient, and look at those principles and try to figure out how those principles could be applied to access them, make them more resilient, more efficient.

The idea of the microbiome, I think, is just absolutely fascinating. And the work you're doing, obviously, as on the agricultural side of it, and looking at the human side of microbiome, and how those things are all going to fit together, I think in the future is going to be open up new areas that we never even considered.

Now, we're really excited. It's a fascinating time to be microbiology, so I saw microbiologists, and there's going to be lots of job opportunities, too.

So this is an area that is being viewed this specific area with more favor as far as funding potential.

Sure. Yeah. Well, I think so. You just mentioned the $10 million grant. Part of that was a component of that was soil health, and how do you improve soil health as well as being more nitrogen deficient? The goal of the program is to be 50% more nitrogen efficient in agricultural systems, which is a really daunting task. But it's aspirational. But really, I'm biased, but I think microbes are at least part of the key for that we can talk a little bit more about that. But the National Academy of Sciences came out a report last year, talked about breakthroughs research in agriculture and food systems. And the plant and soil microbiome was one of the one of the themes out of the five.

Well that's certainly hopeful. Yes, yeah. You'd hate to find yourself in a situation with doing unsustainable research or you got a grant.

Yes. Yeah. Yeah, no and USDA, NSF Do we all have are currently putting more money into kind of the microbiome area?

A lot of the work that you're doing in the area of climate change. I mean, obviously, that overlaps into this quite a bit. How do you respond to people that really don't believe that climate change is caused by things that we're doing today?

That's a good question. And it's changed over time. 20 years ago, it was a lot more controversial than it is now. But you still get the deniers or the skeptics. What I try to do, particularly when I, if I'm given a presentation, and there's usually skeptics in the room, is that I just try to show the data. And, and now, it's easier to show some of the implications of that. So actually, this morning's class, I show the rise in CO2 in the last 800,000 years. And if you put that that concentration graph, you know, shows that it varied between 180-280 parts per million, up until the beginning of the last century, but then there's been a huge increase, not only have we surpassed the 280, you know, when I came here, okay, stay in the late 1980s. It were we're doing experiments at looking at elevated CO2 on effect on plants. And that was 350 parts per million. So we're above that to RNA. And today, we're above 410 parts per million. And so just, if you put on a graph on a timescale, it's to sit here bounce around between 180-280. And then it shoots up dramatically. And so you can't deny that co2. And so we're beyond what our human existence pretty much in that 100 or 800, almost a billion years. And then we talk about sources, and about 80% of that increase is from fossil fuels. And we know that because of the carbon signature of that. So we know it's traced back to fossil fuels and the other 20% is from human activity, deforestation primarily. So that's two pieces, I show that data and then I show well, what's what we talked about CO2 and as a gas, heat trapping, and potential and then try to show the temperature records. And again, I'd say it's a little bit easier now. Because the last 20 years, it's continued the temperature records for the planet, aim for the country, US has continued to rise, and we set new records almost every year, but certainly decade by decade. And now we're seeing the other things that's happening. And that's the change in extreme events, not only temperature, but also rainfall. And, you know, the last few years, it's made it easier to talk about it because here 2012, we had a major major, a three year drought that affected Kansas, and the central part of us. And then last year, September or Labor Day, last year at rain, what a 10 inches in about four hours, and flooding. And then this spring, it's just been a disaster across the central part of the country with major major floods and huge amounts of rainfall. This year, just in Manhattan, it's been you know, it seems like oh, we get a four inch rain storm event each night, you know, and every couple of weeks, so and now we can track those and so we can show not even forgetting or not even talking about the future. What's happened already is more extreme events, both on temperature and water. And then that's affected the agriculture sector which tends to be one sector that's more conservative, not politically but in the idea of climate change. So they're being affected with their normal operations, and then we can talk about the future implications. But the point here is that, you know, these things are already observable now. And then what's potential in the future.

Being able to look that at a longer time scale much must be a really big help because I know farmers will tend to to answer the well. This is Kansas we get really good one you're really bad, the other and that's just what it is.

And they're right you know, the weather is always changing. And they've had to deal with it. But the problem is, or the challenge is that those changes are occurring much in a greater extreme and much more rapidly. So you could breed a crop. And you know, it takes 15-20 years to produce a new variety, while 15 to 20 years, we're in a new paradigm. And so, we it's a challenge for our culture, and it needs that investment in our culture, for the research to keep up with those increasingly rapid changes.

Do you have the opportunity to take this information out to an interdisciplinary group? Um, you're, obviously you're teaching within your program, and but you've got a lot of information. I think that that is valid.

Yeah, I've been fortunate, I guess, to have opportunities to talk to a variety of people, groups, from local citizens, I talked to, you know, Kansas producers, but I gave a talk. Last fall, I guess, was earlier this year, sorry, in Wichita, to one of the TV stations down there, and they had a panel and talked about climate change. And that was broadcasted on the NPR or the TV equivalent of NPR. But then I, you know, I, I try to present the facts. And then I guess one of the things is trying to relate it to local level, it's one of the things I've learned is, figure out your audience and then present the material at that level. So I've saw I have talked to producers by talk to I've given testimony at the Kansas legislature or briefings in Congress, in the US Congress, but I've even talk to the legislators in New Zealand, Brazil, and some other places. So it's given me a variety of opportunities to learn how to transfer that information to different groups.

How much of the research that you do is interdisciplinary to I mean, so you got this work with the IPCC, which is very interdisciplinary, right? And is that a kind of thing where you just contributed sort of talk about how that happened? Right?

Yeah, well, he made the process of how I got selected via an IPC or and then what he did for it. So we had a, I guess, a little bit of background, we had a major grant, from Congress to work on climate change, and air culture mitigation. In Kansas State was lead and I was the project director for that was 10 universities, or 10 institutions, and it was about $15 million. But that set us up, this is early 2000. So it set us up as the group of leading experts on agriculture. And so there was other countries that wanted to basically mimic our consortium. So Australia, in particular. And so I got engaged with Australian scientists, and some of our colleagues, all scientists, that made it easier, but and so in during the that time period, the US was doing bilateral negotiations on research on climate change. They weren't in the the global UN effort. And so Australia came to us and said, you know, we want to work with this group from K State, this consortium led by K State. Well, one thing led to another and State Department was doing these bilateral negotiations, and they asked me to participate in those negotiations. So I go and set coordinate plans for research to coordinate between the US, Australia, New Zealand, Brazil, and Canada were the four countries. But then the State Department asked me to, or asked if I'd be willing to be nominated for the IPCC. The process is that each country nominates a person, then that's sent to the UN center, and then they look for expertise, diversity, other criteria, and then I did get selected for two rounds to report that 2007 and the 2014 report. It's a fascinating process, because you're right it is the ensnared interdisciplinary so Even in agriculture, if you think about it, there's soil scientists. But there's animal scientists, there's agriculture, agriculture economics, there's sociology. You know, modelers, engineers, so it's a very diverse even when the agriculture sector and then you have to each chapter as it's written, so I was one of the lead authors for the Agriculture chapter, but then you have to coordinate, and then talk to how your piece fits in, like, for example, biofuels, well, how does that fit into the transportation sector? So then you have to bring in a new whole cadre that don't know anything about soils, or, or have, you know, perceptions on agriculture that are not necessarily true. And so it's just, yeah, it's fascinating. And, you know, you could, I could stay in my lab and do soil microbiology work, but to be transformative, and what impacts the world you need real science is really complex. Now, you really have to be transdisciplinary. In order to bring these complex systems in, I would argue Agriculture is a complex system, because involves sociology involves, you know, the physical environment, the soils and the water, and that, but then it's economics. And so one of my jokes is that USDA, in these large grants required that you have a sociologist, and so it's not just putting them on the grant, but it's embedding them in the project. And so my joke was, I'm not very social person. And but I've learned to work with sociologists, and but it's been really valuable and educational to understand why consumers or why farmers don't accept certain practices or understanding. And so it makes my work, hopefully more impactful.

In that sense, has that kind of thing changed any of what you actually do? Like in your work? Has it changed the direction of some of the projects or any of the actual research methods?

Yeah, I guess I would, in one sense, No, I'm still doing my detailed field and lab experiments. But I now work with teams of people. And so I'm looking at how we can design agricultural systems that improve soil health, or affect the microbiology, and then how those practices would be accepted by producers. And what's the economics? When I give, we were talking earlier, giving talks to various groups, you know, I give briefings to Congress or a lot of times talks to producers, you know, okay, fine, you know, the soil microbiology is great, or soils are great. But you know, what does it mean, to my bottom line, my profit, you know, we can be sustainable all we want, but if you're not, for the for soils, or, but if you're not providing a profit, that farm is not going to be sustainable. And so it has, I guess it has affected how I think about this, the whole system. And that's one of the advantages, being on the National Academy Board, is that it's pulling in from all these different disciplines and trying to develop what's the future of agriculture.

Can you talk a little bit more about the National Academy board and this clearly a very prestigious position? And it's, it's a something that your peers brought you into that and put you in that spot? So how does it work?

Yeah, so the National Academies, now it's all merged sciences, engineering, and medicine used to be three separate, but they have the honorific which are the fellows. But then they have operational unit. It's still kind of called the natural National Research console, but it kind of is really under the National Academies of Science, Engineering and Medicine. So under that, the research console, they have different divisions in different boards. So while back, I guess, about nine years ago, I got asked to be a board member of the board on agriculture and natural resources. And then three years ago, I ended up being appointed as chair of that board, and I just found out yesterday I got reappointed for another three, three years. It's a you know, it's well, one is prestigious. But the idea, at least my goal on the board, particularly as board chair is we do different studies on issues related to the US, related to Agriculture and Natural Resources. And part of our job is to be also looking at what's the future of Agriculture and trying to help lead innovation in agriculture natural resource, that the challenge that our board is that we have Agriculture in natural resources. So there's agriculture, but then there's also soil water, forestry, and so they can be synergistic. But they can also be in conflict with each other, you know, if Agriculture is imposing impacts on water or, or forestry. So it makes it challenging, but I think it also makes it fascinating, because it is one whole ecosystem, and how can we have, you know, sustain food production? And sustain the environment?

Is the anticipation that you on the board will be advocates? Or, you know, is it a bully pulpit, as well?

Well, yeah, we produce policy, relevant information. And, but so sometimes, so the National Academy was set up by Abraham Lincoln, the same year as same time period as the land grant system universities. And so it was designed to be provide scientific advice for Congress. And so we are, we can be commissioned by Congress to do a study on a certain topic, and hopefully provide money for that, or they direct the agencies to provide money for that. Because the studies aren't necessarily cheap, because you're bringing in expertise and depends on the activity, it can be a three months, or it could be a three year effort. So there's a lot of staff time, my time has volunteered a lot of other people, all the studies, the experts are all volunteer time except for their travel. So then, Congress, but more recently, we'll get group states or even NGOs will come to the boards and say, You really need to have a study on this topic. We're doing run right now on soaring of Tennessee horses, which is looking at the ethics and how to detect soaring as the Gatewatch of horses. And so there's training but then they can also put devices in hooves that cause pain, and create that exaggerated gait. So what we're being asked to do is how can you detect some of that? So, you know, here on my own, and I'm dealing with, you know, Tennessee, walking horses, and so on, or we're going at this, but at a rad advocacy? Yeah. So. So then we will, then this recommendation will be you know, how do you detect that and of course, that could lead to legislation. In that sense. Citrus greening is a major issue for the orange industry. And so we were asked to evaluate their research program. And, there's multitude of sources, as agriculture as typically they got consumer groups, industry groups, the federal government supporting sectors research, and so it was very disoriented. And how do you bring those groups gather and groups together and then figure out what are the top priorities to have a more effective program? It doesn't necessarily lead to well, parts of it could lead to legislation, but would we directed and say, Okay, you need to coordinate better and these are the topics so yeah, I'm trying to think food safety, of course, are right now we're, we're looking at some of the innovations robotics in ag, you know, how do we spur that innovation? So it would the studies, workshops, could come out and say, Okay, these are the priorities and that would help direct industry and as well as the federal government on direction.

So a lot of people in the public maybe, maybe elsewhere, right start to think about sciences, a little more politicized now, right. And sort of part of that is like climate science, right? And sort of, you know, the way you talked about it was just, you know, here, here are the facts, right. But of course, a lot of people view this as it, you know, as John was just saying, sort of, you're already like advocating a bully puppeting. Or you gotta, you got an agenda, right. And, and then a lot of the things that you're just talking about, you know, there is at least sort of, oh, maybe some trade offs, or some areas where you kind of you might have some questions about, alright, so how much of what we're doing is really, you know, value driven or policy driven, or we have, we have a point, or there's something we're trying to accomplish, and how much of what we're doing is really just like, oh, you know, here's the facts, folks. Right, as we see them, could you? I mean, how do you think about, you know, I guess, like all of that, you know, either as it comes up on the National Academies and other people on the board thinking about those issues? And, you know, are they are they going for further being, like, truly objective? Or can you be objective? You know, and then, you know, all the way back to your science and IPC, I mean, it's a big huge question, but just like, in general, I think about these things.

Well, yeah. Um, so, yeah, a couple examples. IPC was probably a good one. You know, the critics say, well, the IPC is just pushing their own agenda. But I will tell you, you know, if you've had in science, right, peer reviewed manuscripts, and then you get outside people look at your work. And, and, you know, you know, you get, you don't get all these great comments here. You got pages of that. And, you know, usually there's two or three reviewers. For the agriculture just agriculture chapter alone, we had, I'm forgetting the number exactly, but over 2000 individual comments, and we had to respond each single comment. Now, we could say, we accept that we'll make changes or no is wrong, but and then we had a reviewer watching us to make sure we just didn't ignore those comments. And that's all. So you got to have the comments that you make, or the recommendations you make aren't just off the cuff. They have to be based on scientific background, and you got, and so you have, you know, hundreds of people watching you, and then the reviewers are watching the other people watching, make sure we're responding to those. So there's a lot of oversight, you can't just, you know, forget the fact or the science, you know, yeah. And so IPC, we would say, you know, this is I forgot what the terms were, but this is highly likely, you know, and some uncertainty level, you know, there's a 50% chance that we're wrong or whatever. But, you know, it's fair, the scientists are fairly conservative, you know, so even if you say, Well, it's a 90% chance that it might be right. It's probably a lot higher than that. But scientists, at least in particularly an agriculture, but we tend to be more conservative and are judged.

Like yeah, right, so not not going too far.

Yeah, yeah, yeah. Yeah. Status, establishing likelihood. Yeah.

But there are cases, you know, we're in negotiation or discussion for the National Academy to look at water in this country. groundwater, and it, it's probably as sensitive a topic as climate change, or maybe even more so. Because our country doesn't have a water policy. It's as a whole. I mean, we have Kansas policy, we have Texas, you know, and water is very dear to not only the state, but to an individual and it doesn't respect state boundaries. It does. Yes, that's right. And so Texas is very, you know, you can pump it, if you any water below your land, of course, it goes beyond that. But you can just pump until it runs dry Kansas, actually, as a state has a more advanced water policy, though, than most other states in this country, which is interesting.

California has this heritage system.

Yeah. So, we've talked about how do you it's a major issue, affecting our culture, but also going to affect competition with industry and cities. And that's already happening out west on surface waters. And so how do we do we need to look at what's the science behind what how do you mind What the recharge rate is, and then look at opportunities for efficiencies. But it's probably going to have to come into some discussion on water policy, which could be challenging, you know, because the state water rights issues, but, but we'll have to, if we're based on science, and say, these are policy options, not prescriptive, but say, you know, if you do this, this could affect, you know, save water you do this other policy or, or programs, it could undermine and increase water use, or Yeah, so. But you'll have, again, you'll have to be the economists and, and, and sociologists to help design or provide those policy options. We're not saying it's this policy, but these are the implications of those different policies to help.

Yeah, yeah, I think that's one of the clearest explanations of why we need sociologists. Truly, honestly, series. Spectacular.

Yeah, but also why you need the science to write together the pieces, right, sort of it's, you know, the thinking about designing serious policy without having some science behind it telling us what the implications are going to be of doing this thing, or that thing is just sort of mind boggling.

Yeah. But and that's why, like, you know, I enjoy working these interdisciplinary groups is, is having that interaction and and other viewpoint to think about, oh, yes, there's just, there's the economic or sociology piece, you know, I can design agriculture practices, but nobody takes them up. I haven't done the world any good.

This one's kind of a wide open question. But basically, what are your thoughts on the future of agriculture? When you're talking? I mean, we, you've talked a lot about the science and the under the climate change, and those kinds of things. But there are a lot of challenges coming forward.

There's a lot of serious challenges. But agriculture, in this country, and around the world is in everybody's conversation. I think, now, it's a wonderful time to be in our culture. But it's also we got to get it right, because there's a lot of interest in agriculture right now. And so we need to take hold of that opportunity. There's lots of challenges. There's, you know, the increasing population, how do we deal with increasing production, but also food waste? But how can we do that increased production without harming having impact on our natural resources, forests, grasslands, soil water. And so I really think I was at a roundtable, week ago, of innovations are can't really what you just talked about future of agriculture innovations. And so from a technical standpoint, we need to be innovative agriculture is one of the least technology advanced sectors, I think it's like seven out of eight or something. And so we need to think, look at those other sectors, but robotics data, data acquisition and data analytics are going to be critical. Looking at efficiencies, this new grant that we have, we're supposed to increase water use efficiency by a rain fed agriculture, by 50% and nitrogen by 50%. As well as the same time increase production by 2% annually. So that's kind of Yeah. So but you know, I think if we can look at, there's a lot of startups let me back up. There's a lot of startups, now interested in agriculture all the millennials from Google and all that they're pumping millions and billions of dollars into agriculture startups. So I've been talking to companies. They're looking at robotics, and so instead of spraying a whole field for herbicides or chemicals, they got sensors on and spot spraying. Okay, this is wheat, and this is a corn plant or cotton plant. Okay, I want to spray this one, but not this one. And so one, you've reduced your chemical use. So that's profit for the farmer, but you also have less impact on the environment. So things like that are really key. We talked earlier about the microbiome. There's a lot of investment in looking At taking advantage of the soil microbiome to increase productivity and increase efficiency, so there's a company called pivot bile that is, has taking a microbe and adding it to corn plants, corn roots. So it's not a legume or sore, it's not fixing nitrogen inside the root, it's actually living around that root. And it's fixing nitrogen, and then shares that nitrogen to the corn plant. So it's in its early stages. But if it works, and I like the concept, then what that means is, then we wouldn't have to apply as much commercial or synthetic fertilizer. And that makes it more efficient. Because if it's fixing nitrogen as the plant is growing, then it's sharing that nitrogen and not giving it and then it's not available for loss, it's out of the system.

What's the advantage of the microbe? I can see the advantage to the corn plant.

They're living in the root and they're getting the carbon. Okay, so root exudates, from the, from the plant. And so they, so they're just, they're after carbon, they're after energy. And so if you added a microbe before and microbe to the general soil, it couldn't compete. Because there are microbes out there that have been that are used to low nutrient low carbon status, we think saw as a rich, but relative laboratory media, they're very poor. And so the general biology additives to soil generally don't work. But you now you have this root rhizosphere. That's a special niche. So it's almost like a laboratory culture. And so you can add that microbe and it's getting the carbon, a continuous supply of carbon is growing, and then it's fixing nitrogen. And they've manipulated the microbe. So it fixes excess nitrogen, and then that nitrogen goes then to feed the corn plant.

Typical post harvest biochemist asking you to pre harvest Yeah, right. Right. Question out of ignorance. I think.

So. Thanks. So how much of this you study grasslands to? Right? So how many of the kinds of things like that that you're talking about, are mimicking processes that are, you know, that you see in in grasslands? And how much does it sort of, like, brand new innovative, like, we're gonna do something different?

Yeah. So well, I guess the basic ecology if you look at, like the tall grass prairie, it's never tilled. Okay, so we don't have to do tillage. And that's what we're trying to promote. In agriculture is no till systems, but it has diversity there. And we can come back to that because it has different plant communities. But we don't add nitrogen, or nutrients, nitrogen, phosphorus, other nutrients to the system, other than what comes through the rainfall. So their nitrogen economy of that system is either recycle it, or do some nitrogen fixation. Well, it turns out, most of the prairie nitrogen is recycled. It's very, very nitrogen efficient. But it's also in my model climate resilient, you know, the droughts it slows down, it has deep rooting systems, it has diversity in there. So it's climate resilient, it's water efficient, it's nutrient efficient. And it's a fairly stable ecosystem, you know, you don't have past outbreaks and wipe through. Well, so how does that translate to agriculture? So there's just those basic principles. Well, can we design that we don't have to tillage, so we got no till? We're still planning monoculture and single crop, which you know, some people think, well, we can do polyculture, that's going to be hard to do. But can we increase the diversity, not maybe in space in one point in time, but can we increase that diversity over time, so the value is then you plant a corn crop and then you have cover crops, or you do rotations that are plant corn every year you plant corn, soybean, wheat, or other crops, and do cover crops so you have continuous cover, so it's more like the prairie. You can actually choose your cover crops for what you want to do for the soil. So say if I got compaction, I want to plant a tuberose crop like tillage radish, or turnips, they'll create bio pores in the soil. You don't have to tell it or I want nitrogen. Well, I plant a legume in that system. To fix nitrogen for the succeeding crop. So there's, we need to have design or cover crops, or our mixes to make the agriculture system more efficient and resilient. So and then, part of the innovation is that a lot of people are going out and bioprospecting those microbes in those root systems to figure out okay, can we take those microbes and then put them into an ag system? Cool.

Can you say something about why polyculture? Is, is a challenge? Is it sociological? Is it economic? Or is it sort of a matter of the, you know, I don't know. Other aspects of the biological processes?

Yeah. Well, if you think about, like the prairie, you got, you know, you know, 100 different kinds of plants, but say, even a polyculture, you know, slanted to West Jackson was really doing the polyculture work. They backed off a little bit. Now we're looking at perennial sorghums, and wheats and that, but the polyculture, conceptually is nice, because you have a diverse mix out there. You know, pest outbreaks are going to be less but the problem is, how do you harvest that. Now, if you're going to graze it, that's fine, you put animals out there and graze. But if I want, I got I want harvest the grain from a wheat, and a corn, and, you know, some legume, I got three different species out there, they're gonna mature at different times. And then I got to figure out how to separate the grain. And if they mature at different times, you know, one's ready to harvest the other one isn't. But if I wait to the one that's later, that we're for the first one's probably going to shatter. And so it's someone's technological. But then I guess it's somewhat sociological in the sense of how do you manage three or four crops growing at the same time? And so you know, the systems we were talking about earlier with cover crops and, and rotations. It takes a lot more knowledge and skill. Well, now, if you got three or four crops growing at the same time, the management skills have to increase dramatically.

Are there similar issues with the managing the microbiology of the soils. Do you think in terms of the complications? And how much additional, you know, basically, management expertise it takes?

That's a good question, I haven't thought of it that way. I guess from an occulant side, adding these organisms like the corn, we're used to adding treatments on to corn seed or soybean seeds for for, generally for pest control, but, and legumes, we coat legume seeds for rhizobia, that fix nitrogen that's, we got 57 years of experience in that area. So that's not necessarily a new technology, and it's just, you inoculate it then you plant it. And then you just hopefully provide the environment. So you're not actively managing those microbes that's providing a good environment, and then adding the inoculant. to that. I suppose there be certain things you got to worry about, if you're doing seed treatment, adding a fungicide that might affect that added microbe or added bacteria. If you're adding chemical fertilizer, you're gonna make sure it doesn't. It isn't caustic to those microbes. So there's a little bit of that, but we're probably I guess I'm once you know, it's those are practices that most farmers are used to doing dealing with.

When you're talking about diversity, the scale you're talking about, you're talking about maybe two different three different plants going in corn and wheat or whatever it might be. What are your thoughts on kind of the small farming the smaller farming type practices that I know with the reduction in population in western Kansas, the state looks at ways of trying to increase population and bring in other other kinds of growing patterns. What are your thoughts on the small versus the very large agricultural practices?

Yeah, I guess from a technology standpoint, these innovators I don't think I think they're scale neutral. At least I hope they are. There may be out modifications, but in my global travels, I was so, so one one way, or one thing that we do like to manage nitrogen is look at sensors that detect the greenness of plants. And if it's less green, that means it's generally nitrogen deficient. So then you can go in and apply more nitrogen. Well, you know, so we got drones and other on tractor sensors. But I was at a one acre rice paddy in Vietnam. And they're using their smartphone and sensing the greenness for color from the smartphone and then one of the international research centers, Irie had developed an application well then this is how much nitrogen need to put on your rice. So here's, you know, one acre, rice, Paddy farmer, Vietnam, and a cell phone or smartphone technology. And so in that case, is technology neutral is packaging it differently, but the information still is applicable. You know, I've heard people say, Well, no till has to be large scale, big farms. But Brazil is you can plant knotel by hand, or they got no till planters or horse drawn or oxen drawn. So it doesn't have to be now. And there are some farmers, least in Brazil, I've seen are doing organic knotel. Not using herbicides. It's possible. But it's a lot harder. We talked about the sociological aspects, the management skills required for organic no till is much, much higher skill level and management skills.

So when you get into some of the smaller farming practices, I didn't take my question to the level that needed to be and you're looking at small farmers putting in a variety of different vegetables, fruits, grains, whatever it might be. Is there more of a positive impact on the microbiological soil?

Yeah, yeah. So yeah, because if you get more plant root systems, we're worried about the above ground, but more root variety, as a good thing for the microbes, because they're feeding off of different sources of types of food from that roots. So, you know, I talked about earlier, well, increasing diversity. And that was probably more big farms is adding cover crops and rotations in that sense. But a small farmer can actually do it easier because he or she can plant well. I mean, it's very common practice to plant corn and beans in the inner row, you know, if they're hand harvesting, or that's easier to do than trying to run a machine through these rows and crushing your inner row. thing. So you could do things, like some of the things you could actually do easier on a small holding. So the principles still apply. And, and going back to soil health, particularly the continent of Africa, though, a lot of those countries, I was in Ghana, February, they really need soil health, because their soils are so devoid of organic matter. And if you could improve organic manner, improve aggregation. So when it does rain, infiltrates, and then it's held in the soil, then that makes those soils and those small holding farmers much more resilient and not subject to the variety of climate extremes, weather extremes. All comes back to the soil.

The fundamentals, yes. You talked a little bit I think earlier about the grant that you've got coming in, what are the outcomes that you're looking for from that program?

Well, so it's a five year program is based in Southern Great Plains, primarily Oklahoma, and Kansas. And the idea is to Well, I mentioned earlier but the idea is to develop systems that are that increase production, also increase total factor productivity. And that's what's I'm not that's an economist, again, working in the Transdisciplinary Areas, how to figure that one out. But simply it's looking at how much inputs you put in, and what's the output and so the efficiency or the, the cost per unit of bush or grain produced, and then we have to increase water and nitrogen efficiency by, like 50%. By, well, it's, I forgot the timeframe, but we have to provide the tools for them, we are going to do it in five years. And then also be climate resilient. And so if you think of Kansas, and Oklahoma, in the non irrigated areas, we are extremely vulnerable to these weather extremes. And we talked about that, you know, from super dry to almost flooded conditions. So we have a group at University of Maryland that's also in the project. And they have expertise on modeling. And particularly, they've looked at weather. When I say, weather probabilities. So I've seen this et Cie, in Colombia, where if, for example, in April, we can look at the winter weather, what's the probability that the summer is going to be a wet year or drier, cooler, wet? And so it's not a climate model, but it's a more of a statistical model and say, if we got a 30% chance it's going to be dry, or 30%. Chances wet? So can we take that information? And this will be the challenge, and I predict we will fail many times, but that's okay. You learn from failure. But can we say okay, there's a 30% chance it's going to be a wet year or 50% chance? Well, instead of planning your normal summer crop, should we look for something that can take advantage of the extra water? So instead of planning? Well, maybe instead of so you harvest your wheat, and now if it's gonna be a wet year, the chances are, we can go to double cropping with sorghum, or even if it's really wet corn, okay. Or if it's going to be a dry year, maybe we aren't going to double crop, but we want to keep that soil covered. Well, maybe we plant a summer forage, and then that forage can be used for hay. So there's still a little better income, but you're still keeping that solid cover and keeping the microbes fed and some economic production from that. So looking at tying in, improve soil health to be more climate resilient, and maybe some weather projections, and once I predictions, but projections, it'll be a challenge. And that's why I said, I think we I, I expect we will fail some, but I hope that we will have some successes or learn from those failures. Because I'm sure there'll be times when we say okay, it's going to be a wet year. It's not. Okay. So that's, but that's what science and innovation should do. We hope to get involved some of the technology. So can we put in, in ground sensors for soil water for nitrogen to make on the go decisions to? So there's, I'm excited, I think it's a huge opportunity, a great opportunity. And if we're truly innovated, innovative, can we really produce some transformational change? Not incremental, but translate transformational changes in agriculture.

Very exciting. Yeah. Sounds like a really exciting project. Well, the last, the last question that I had, in my mind to bring to you is just something on the Nobel prize that you were named in in 2007. Can you give us a little bit of background on what that was all about?

Yeah. That was interesting. I wasn't even aware that we were even up for it. So the first thing is it was for the IPCC, IPCC report that came out in 2007. And it was for the entire group. So it's not like I won the Nobel Peace Prize I did, but I shared it with several 100 others. Scientists are authors of that report. Like said, I wasn't even aware that we were up for it. I woke up that morning and had a text from one of the faculty members on campus that congratulations on winning the Nobel Prize. I thought it was a joke you know, and then for a while there, we weren't sure, because it was a shared and it has actually split with Al Gore, he got half of it. And then IPC got the second half. And so we weren't sure it was for, you know, for the name group or for us included. And so there was a lot of confusion that morning saying, Okay, are we individual recipients and but anyway, it turned out that we, it was a shared, but we are part of that sharing process. And in fact, there was a lottery for groups, you can send 20 people to the ceremonies in in Norway. And so, of course, all the, you know, administrators, you know, leaders got there, but I think there was out of that 20, I think there was six slots available. So there was a lottery and I was had the potential fortunate I didn't win the lottery. So but we got a plaque, and there's artwork associated with each Nobel Prize. And so we got a copy of that artwork on that. So it's very, so it's kind of kind of, it was cool.

Yeah, no, it's very cool. Very, very, very nice. No. Okay, are there any other questions? I know that we, we've want to be conscious of your time, and the other folks around the table. Do you have anything more you want to add? Any questions of us?

No, not again. Thank you. It's been good conversation.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

Dr. Jay Weeks is a recent graduate in the College of Agriculture at Kansas State University where is research focused on soil chemistry. Jay joined with the Global Food Systems Initiative at K-State early in its relaunch and has been instrumental in the development of "Something to Chew On". Prior to his new professional journey into the agriculture industry with Indigo Ag, Scott, Jon and I talked with Jay about the student experience, the expansion of information sharing at K-State through podcasting, and his personal and professional development during his time here.

Transcript:

The Future of Food: Food Systems, Podcasts and Farewells - with Dr. Jay Weeks

I feel really fortunate to be beginning my career in agriculture right now because of where we stand. From an environmental standpoint and the public perception of agriculture. I think people are willing to, to say, you know, there's enough information out there people understand that we need to make changes right.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Maureen Olewnik, coordinator of Global Food Systems.

I'm Scott Tanona. I'm a Philosopher of Science.

And I'm Jon Faubion. I'm a Food Scientist.

Hello, everyone and welcome back. At its core, a university exists to help students become aware of the world around them understand the past and learn to identify current and future questions and how to confront the challenges of their generation. Our guest today is Joseph J weeks. Now, Dr. Weeks, J became involved in the global food systems at K State early in its reincarnation and well into his work toward completion of his PhD. The idea of using podcasts to help deliver information on those core university requirements in the area of the food systems was a cloudy notion in my mind when I first met Jay, his enthusiasm for this form of information sharing helped to develop the current platform, something to chew on. Jay worked with me, Scott Tanona and John Faubion, on the idea of bringing information on K State food system related research to students, faculty into the world. Its current success is testimony to the university's ability to accomplish the goals of developing the next generation of leaders like Jay. Jay, as you moved on to your new job and new life, we hope for your continued input and direction from the perspective of food systems professional. Congratulations. Now, let's hear a little bit about Jay how he got here, how he completed this series of goals and where he is headed. And I get to say this this time. So Jay, welcome to the podcast.

Happy to be here. It's exciting to be in this seat for once.

Absolutely. Well, this is a little bit of a bittersweet podcast for us because this is Jay's last time that he's going to be taking off and moving on to another, another part of his life. But congratulations on your PhD.

Thank you. I really appreciate it.

And your job and your job.

Thank you. Thank you. Yeah, like you said, it's, uh, I'm sad to be leaving all of you. But I'm excited for the next step as well. So very, very way things go.

That's right. Very exciting. Well, as our audience knows, Jay, you've been the one sitting in this spot for the last eight months, six, eight months. And this was pretty much your brainchild, and in putting this podcast system together, and I really appreciate all the work you've done on it. It's been a real journey for us so far. And it's been quite a success. And so we're really excited about it. And I guess we'll just take the same tack that we do with the other presenters.

My own medicine.

Yes. Tell us a little bit about your background.

A little bit about my background. Well, if I go all the way back, my interest in food, sort of stems from the fact that my grandparents owned a small dairy farm in central New York. So growing up, you know, my grandmother watched me when I was really young. And so became familiar with, you know, being around the farm and all that when I finally was old enough, I got to participate in farm activities. And I thought that that was really cool. So I spent school breaks, and summers and things like that, on the farm all the way up through my undergrad actually. And I wanted to run the farm when I was done. I wasn't even planning on going to college, although my mother especially thought differently and said, No, you're going to college, you decide to do something different afterwards, then that's fine. But I want you to have that. So I decided to pursue a degree in agricultural sciences at Cornell University. And I didn't know what I didn't know which is kind of a running theme in my life and that fell in love with soils and found out I really liked chemistry, which I didn't know before and found that I could marry soils and chemistry and use that you know those passions to do make progress. And in other parts of the world, I had a professor who was doing research on lead contaminated soils. So I became interested in the pollution components of that. So I decided that for graduate school, I wanted to do research and lead contaminated soils and tried to protect people from those soils, and that when they're trying to grow fruits and vegetables, and that sort of thing, especially in inner cities. So I met a professor, I worked here at K State, Dr. Ganga Hettiarachchi, at soil conference in San Antonio. You know, she, we hit it off right away. And, you know, here I was, that's how I got started.

Excellent. So that's your background? That's my, what about your foreground? What's up next.

So I started off with the, with the soil lead stuff. But I, you know, after a couple years of that, realize that I really was more interested in soil fertility. And I realized that there was probably a greater chance to make a global impact working in soil phosphorus than in necessarily working in soil lead, although both are very important for different reasons. So I started pursuing research related to improving the use efficiency of, of soil, phosphorus fertilizers, and trying to understand the chemical mechanisms there and how we could improve farming practices and make better fertilizers. So I pursued that for most of my PhD research. And then, you know, again, I started seeing that there are other options out there besides just working in soil phosphorus, and that it's not just limited to, you know, you none of these things operate in a vacuum. Right, you know, so phosphorus interacts with the carbon. And you know, so I became more interested in carbon cycling, and things like that. So this opportunity came along at a company that's relatively new called Indigo egg, where they are trying to build a one of the things that they're trying to do amongst many, that they're trying to build a carbon markets, where they actually pay farmers to implement practices that build carbon on their soil. So they can sequester carbon as a, as not only a means to improve soil health, but also reverse climate change, right? And because not, because those practices initially, are always profitable for the farmer, especially at the beginning, sometimes by paying farmers to sequester this carbon that sort of makes that process roll. So I'll be working as a soil scientist, they're helping to move some of their work from their r&d departments into into commercial commercial products and things like that.

And this is in bucolic rural Boston.

This is they're based out of Charleston, Boston. Excellent.

So could you How much of that is, is about like the economics, right? And how much is it about sort of the science? So what kinds of things are they developing? That you can say? I mean, and talk about right? And what kinds of what they're doing. You said they have to incentivize farmers for doing things to so like, what's going on there? I mean, I don't know how much you can say about what they're actually up to. But..

yeah, I mean, because I'm still a little bit out, right? I don't want to I don't want to overstep, overstate what they're doing. But you know, we really scientifically, we know that there are ways to build the carbon stores in the soil, and that it's beneficial for for soil health, because it improves nutrient cycling, improves water holding capacity makes makes the soils more drought resistant, if you're growing crops in them and that sort of stuff. But there are there can be financial barriers to, you know, to growing a cover crop for a variety of reasons, some of it is just the cost of growing it, and terminating it and things like that. So I really think that I personally believe more in market based solutions to problems. And I think that if we're going to come up with ways to mitigate climate change, or actually start to reverse some of the effects of carbon emissions, that we really need to find financial incentives, because although there will always be people who adopt these practices for the good of the environments, or find that it's beneficial on their own farm and things like that, I really find that if, if we can build functioning markets that pay people and incentivize people to implement these practices, and they get the added benefit on the in the field to then it's a win win for everybody in that case, and it's not just relying on the farmer to do what's right, because it's necessarily what's right, even though in the long run, it probably would benefit them anyway.

Do you think this is transportable successfully outside the limits of the US? Is this a model or an idea that that would work? In Africa, for example?

Oh, yeah. I mean, absolutely. I mean, as long as there's a functioning carbon market, right. So as long as there's people putting money into that market to pay for these practices, which sort of depends on you know, the political process and what the consumers who are buying the products of the companies are paying for the carbon offsets For as long as that sort of process exists, then yeah, I think it could be, you know, it could work anywhere.

And clearly sounds to be a mid range to semi long range solution, as well, if at least unless I'm, if I'm understanding it correctly, this is something we're not gonna see large quantitative differences in right away.

Well, no, I mean, what the concentration of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere right now is something like 415-420 parts per million, right? You know, if we, if we implement this in in five years, that's not going to all of a sudden be back.

No, no, no, no, I'm 100. Yeah, what I was gonna do was make an inequality between that rate of change in the rate of change in politics, you could find yourself on the wrong side of the political balance, and then you'd be all up?

Well, yeah. I mean, that's why again, I think it's important to build markets around this sort of stuff, that that can be resilient to at least some of those whims of the politics, right. You know, we, as we've seen in the last few years, the politics can be pretty capricious, and, you know, what gets implemented by one administration can easily be redacted by the next. So if we build something that, you know, the public or the private sector believes in and that farmers buy into, then that can operate independently of, you know, then of what the government's doing? Ideally, although, yeah, the government will always have some influence over them.

Yeah. So what's the idea with the carbon market? So this is people paying for offsets? Is this is the idea generally, you know, I actually don't know that much about what people are proposing here is it but is, it is generally that governments are going to be paying right for these offsets, or that other other people who are using right emitting a lot are going to be paying. So it's just sort of it's just between content producers, right.

Yeah, it's my understanding that, at this point, I'm not 100% certain, but it's my understanding that the government won't be paying necessarily for the offsets that it's, it's going to be the the company's doing the right meeting, right? Because they want to be able to say that they're carbon neutral, or even carbon negative, because now with increased public awareness that there's, there's possibly a market for that, right? People will pay a little bit more to know that, or have the idea that their products are or not, are more sustainable, right.

So yeah, so this, and again, this isn't about the company in particular, just sort of about the idea. Right? So then, so then we have the potential to sort of, you've got the potential to mitigate. Right? So right, you know, people do this personally, too, right. So if I'm gonna take a flight somewhere, right, how do I offset right, my, my, my carbon footprint there, right, and I do something else, or I pay into something that, you know, does something good to plant some trees or something like that right. Now, you know, generally that's not gonna, that might mitigate your impact, right. It's not reversing it by itself. Right. And I think that's one of the big challenges with that is it might slow down, right, the rates of increases, right. But, and so one amongst many things to be doing Sure. Right, you know, sure.

But I don't necessarily I know.

I don't, I'm not picking on you or the company either. Right. But I sort of, yeah, I mean, all these ideas are, it's hard.

Well, and you mentioned that the offsetting your flights. I know, there are companies who have tried to set up personal kiosks in the airports, pay X amount of dollars for every mile, you're gonna fly or whatever. And for my understanding is those actually weren't that successful, because it was sort of confusing to the consumer. But it's actually what I understand a lot of the airlines have signed on to an agreement where they actually are purchasing offsets to some degree as part of an international agreements. So I think that it's that right, the, you know, whether it be American Airlines, or Delta, or somebody who really commits to buying those offset credits, if that's really what's going to build the market, if we can get more companies on board, doing that sort of thing. And people vote with their dollars to support companies to do that, that's a better way to do it.

And then and then we need more ways of actually sequestering carbon. So then we Yeah, right.

Yeah. But that are mutually beneficial, right. What's great about what I'm hoping to participate in is that this is beneficial for farmers anyway, right? So it's not a sort of a win win, right?

Well, taking it back to kind of your time moving through the university setting, how you work, you identified a major professor that you wanted to work with and went through and work for that. Who else did you have as mentors kind of working with you on the way through that? That piece of it?

Uh, well, I mean, there's been I've been thinking back I've been getting really nastalgic. Yeah. Yeah, weeks here, but there's been a lot of people who've had a really positive impact on not only my career, but also my, you know, my personal development as well. I mean, you Maureen, had have had tremendous impact, giving me this opportunity. Just getting to know you better over time. And you and Scott and John as well. It's been great to get to know everybody. But my graduate committee has been has been really influential in helping me to identify what my research priorities are and ways of thinking about my research that I might not have considered right. It's really important than I think, you know, in my experiences isn't even done enough that we need to have other people outside voices challenging what we're doing in research, so that we get outside perspectives, and we don't get too siloed. And what we, the mental models we build of the impact that were of the things that we're doing? How did our maybe absent from the real world, so constantly asking those questions. So that's been really influential. Obviously, my friends out at piccalilli farm have had a been immensely influential net analysis and have been great and really have been a significant influence on my life. But, you know, other things that have been immensely influential have been podcasts, to be honest with you. What got me into doing all of this to begin with is a couple years ago, a friend of mine sent me a couple podcasts that were like three hours long a piece, he's like, I think this is really interesting, you'd be, you know, I think you'd find this fascinating. And I was like, three hours, time. So

I remember having that talk.

Like, who's got time to listen to this. But I, you know, I eventually, you know, in the car, and things work through a couple of months, like, wow, this is crazy. And that sort of opened up my mind to a lot of different possibilities. And what people are talking about it, it's helped me frame my research a little differently, too, because you get outside perspectives from different scientists, you know, listen to physicists listen to philosophers, and psychologists and all that kind of stuff. And it really helps me build a more interdisciplinary, understanding of the problems that we have in society, and how sciences is one part, you know, technological solutions are one part of those solutions to those to solving those problems. But there, as we've talked about, in previous episodes, that it's only one component, right? You know, it has to work politically. It has to work socially. It has to work to scale and all that kind of stuff. So, I mean, there's been a lot of different influences. I'm sure I'm missing people and things in there. But what am I grateful for the opportunity?

What about the rigor of working on a dairy farm? As a means to focus you?

Sure. Well, yeah, I mean, there's definitely something to be said for growing up. Never cultural family. You know, my, my grandfather won both grandfather's on both sides and my grandmother's to work, we're constantly working seven days a week, you know, from the time the sun comes up to the sign the sun comes down. Yes. And that's just the way life was.. You can't stop the cows no matter what, I can't stop the cows. That's for sure. So yeah, I think it was enormously influential, although, you know, I've changed my thinking about, you know, hard work a little bit. Over time, I think, you know, staying focused and working hard, is really important. But I also think that, you know, always grinding and outs and always doing the same thing, because that's what needs to be done is maybe not the not always what you should be doing. Sometimes you need to take a step back. And, and say, you know, is what I'm doing still working for me in the capacity that I needed to, and where do I need to make those changes. And I think sometimes if you're always focused in and this happened in grad school, too, you know, you got to get this project done, you got to get this project done, you got to focus on publishing this paper you lose sight of, of the whole thing. So you know, especially as I've gotten later into my, in my degree process, I've sort of slowed down a little bit, which, you know, isn't isn't always advisable. And reevaluated, and that's, that's actually part of what turned me into going into the commercial sector for a job versus academia. I think academia has a lot of positive things, but thinking about my own personal goals, and where I wanted to focus my efforts, you know, it's not for everybody, but that's by taking that step back is, I think, important.

So, in the process of working through you, you went through and talked about some of the mentors that you had and people that that influenced you. How, what kind of interaction with students had a very positive or negative I mean, how did that interaction work as you were working through your programs?

Oh, yeah. So I've had a lot of different interactions with students, both graduate students, fellow graduate students that I've been working with, I had some that really helped me get started. And I as I got older, I began to appreciate how much they helped me get off and running and how important it is to have older graduate students and postdocs in the lab, so that you can sort of they can help you speed along your development. You know, this is where you need to go to do this. And this is how you accomplish this and I was much further along because, you know, people like Philip were, you know, helped me get started in my research. So there's definitely that aspect. I've had the opportunity to work with students and other departments, which has been good, you know, learning how different research groups do different things, and how geology looks at soils very differently than soil chemistry in the Agronomy department looks at soil. So it's helped me build that perspective as well working across departments. I taught I was a teaching assistant for six semesters here, and two semesters at Cornell. So I was able to interact with a wide array of undergraduates. And that was, that was interesting as well. I learned a lot about how people learn. And I learned a lot about how, you know what makes sense to me, because of the way I learned doesn't necessarily make sense to other people. And one of the most striking things was mindset, and how important some of this stuff is, and I hate to sound cliche, you know, saying that there's a difference between a growth and a limited mindset. But it really makes a difference in some of those undergraduate students. I had a really bright girl once she missed class, she was on a field trip or something like that. And she said to me, she's like, No, I really enjoy what we're doing in lab these days. And I want to teach eventually, but I'm afraid that I won't have enough smart kids to do some of these things. And I was like, What? What do you mean, you're afraid you don't have enough smart kids? And she's like, Well, I'm not sure that everybody's gonna get it. And I'm like, well, everybody can get it, you know, eventually, just we got to, you know, think about how to do this differently. And she was, she was really shocked, she'd really thought that there was this dichotomy that there were some kids that were going to get it, and there are some kids that that weren't, and never the twain shall meet. Right. Yeah. And, you know, that made me think, well, you know, she didn't come up with this out of nowhere, right, somebody had taught this to her, whether it be, you know, I don't know, it could be parents, it could be her own educational experience, but it was coming from somewhere. And that really makes it you know, that matters. So it makes me wonder sometimes with students that are struggling, if it's, it's a framing issue, in some ways. So my you know, my interaction with students has been diverse, and it's been different depending on you know, kind of where they're at along their, educational process, but there's always something to be learned for sure.

So we've talked a little bit about where you've come from and, and where you're heading to, in the process of starting into your graduate work. And from that point, till the till, till now, have your impressions or thoughts about what agriculture is about changed. I mean, you came out of you came out of a situation where you were working on a farm and, and had all kinds of notions of what that was about even thought about taking over that farm. And you're heading down a path that's totally different from its agriculture, but it's totally different. How do you think about agriculture in a different light? Or are your opinions on what it's about? Have they changed?

Well, yeah, I mean, as I've gotten older, not only just about in agricultural specifically, but I find that a lot of things tend to be on a spectrum, the, you know, a lot of things that are presented to us as is, you know, in these individual silos, whether it be an agricultural sandwich, conventional agriculture versus organic agriculture , or sustainable agriculture , or small agriculture versus big agriculture , and all that kind of stuff is that is that none of those fit neatly within little boxes. And when I, when I started, I definitely sort of had that mentality, right. I mean, we were, we were a small, pastured dairy, we were trying to do things as environmentally friendly as possible, and, you know, supported the agriculture or the organic movement, to some extent. And I kind of grew up with this idea that, you know, the big commercial agriculture wasn't, wasn't always the best, right? But, you know, I, my perspective has definitely changed and that there can be very good, very environmentally friendly, very successful, very big farms. And there can be very small farms that do things that are horrible for the environment, right. And there's, there's organic, that's, you know, is very careful to, you know, recycle all their nutrients and all that kind of stuff, and they're gonna be organic, that is even worse than some of those really big conventional farms that none of this, you know, we it's easy, because I think mentally we like to put things in little boxes because it's easier to think about rather than everything fluctuating. But we really have to identify agriculture on an individual farm basis. And what what works well in one region, or what works well on one farm doesn't isn't going to work on another and that there isn't a simple prescription to what makes farming environmentally friendly or productive or even financially sustainable, that we really need to consider all of the options that are on the table and make the best choice individually.

Do you think there are particular issues with scale, sort of doing things on the large size? I mean, sort of like you just said, so there can be huge farms that do things better in some ways, right? Is the risk to the environment, though from a small farm, even if they're like really being bad, right, sort of the impact of smaller right? How much do you think that's a factor to really worry about?

Well, it depends on what they're doing. Yeah. Right. You know, if that small farm is in the, you know, at the beginning of a tributary that flows into a large reservoir that New York City uses for its drinking water, that could be, you know, hugely detrimental, whereas a farmer out in western Kansas that maybe doesn't have x, you know, that's maybe pumping groundwater for irrigation, but does things as sustainable as possible as building the carbon on their soil? Is drought resilient, that might not have anywhere near the environmental impact? It's tough to quantify that plus, you know, it depends on what you're, what you're quantifying, you're quantifying water usage. You're quantifying use of certain fertilizers, you know, greenhouse gas emissions, there are so many very different variations.

Yeah, this is super important. I think we've talked about this too, a bunch of times here, I think it's important to keep on emphasizing that, right? There's no, there's no one dimension, right? You know, there's so many different things. And sometimes you try, you do better on one dimension, sort of it makes it harder to do better on this other one, right? Yeah.

Yeah. Yeah. And that's, it's important for people to acknowledge that, right? I mean, there's always going to be trade offs with things and one way or another, you know, if you want, if you want food, that's, that's produced in ways that maybe are better for the environment, while it's probably going to cost more in the in the grocery store, right? That's the crazy thing about the commodification of a lot of grain crops is that it's a race to the bottom, you know, the more you produce, the more the price goes down. So when the farmer makes less than then they have less money to implement those practices. You know, I think, going back briefly to the carbon market thing, I think that's the nice thing about that as essentially as a secondary source of income for farmers to, to get paid to do those sorts of practices independent of their yield. And I think that that's really, important.

Yeah, that sounds really promising. It really does.

Do you get much pushback? When you? What has the type or the amount of it changed over the course of say, three years? Four years?

In my own personal opinions on things? Or?

Well, you either one, you know, when you when you're talking about this, somebody puts up their hand goes nonsense or some other?

Yeah, I mean, sometimes people push back on things, I always welcome criticism, I think that's the only way that you can really make sure that what you're saying is true and holds up to debate, right? So anybody out there that wants to review anything, I say, please, please leave a review on iTunes. Yeah, but you know, it's interesting. It's an it's a fascinating time to be in agriculture. I was just having this conversation with my roommate the other day, I feel really fortunate to be beginning my career and agriculture right now, because of where we stand. From an environmental standpoint, and the public perception of agriculture, I think people are willing to, to say, you know, there's enough information out there, people understand that we need to make changes, right. And technologically, the sky is the limit right now. It's just, you know, it's what, what incentive structures are we going to put into place that allows some of these things to flourish or not? So it's, it's great to be thinking about what the food system could look like, even 10 years from now. So yeah, I mean, there's pushback, but I think people are becoming more and more open minded, especially as you know, I don't think a lot of people in the past have had a lot of, we kind of went through this dip, right. I mean, there were people who came from there was a lot of people a while ago, that had some relation to farms in their family, right. But as farms have consolidated in the small farms have gone away, to some extent fewer and fewer people in the greater population have any connection to the farms in general. But that slowly, that trough is slowly building again, people are now paying more attention to what they're eating, where their food is coming from. So that's sort of opened up a lot of space to start talking about how could we be doing things differently? And, you know, some people might be willing to pay a little bit more for those kinds of things. So I, you know, I'm hopeful. I think there's less pushback now than there what there would have been 10 years ago.

10 years ago, it was still very much an argument about whether or not this was a way of life that had limits to which you wanted to or should allow change. So you ran up against those walls in any discussion, and that's changed substantially.

Yeah. And I think that there's a lot more willingness to compromise around things like you know, whether it be genetically engineered crops, is using those things as one tool in the toolbox of many different options. As opposed to it being, you know, either you're going to be organic, or you're going to be an agro chemical user. Right? You know, it's a much more hybrid use of some of these tools.

So you while you're doing all your studies here, you've spent time on a farm here, too, right? So can you say something about how that like, how that worked like the, you know, keeping, keeping connected to actually, you know, being on the farm and doing that work, but now, you know, you're going, you're going to Boston, right? Sort of right? Are you gonna, are you gonna miss all this to like, what did it mean to you while you were here? And then, you know, how's that going to be going forward? Are you gonna still try to find some connection to the land like that?

Well, yeah, I mean, my position is going to be something like 50% tribal, so I'm still going to be visiting a lot of farms around the country to make sure that what we're what we're proposing is, is working in the field, it's important to really have that, that connection to the farmers. They can't just, you know, farmers, like nothing less than somebody standing in a big city being like, You should do this. Yeah.

I'm from Boston, and I'm here to help.

My future boss, said that he's even had farmers say, you know, you're one of those guys that works from a stand up desk. Yeah. Well, that's, that's, you know, that's not the goal. Yeah, it's really important to stay to stay connected to the land because farmers are doing what they're doing for a reason. And it's important to understand how, you know, if we're, if we're proposing any changes that works within within their model. But from my own personal standpoint, yeah, I've been working with Piccalilli farm for five, five years now or so. It's been great just because of the camaraderie I love Nelson and their daughter, Mary, a lot. So it's been great to have that connection. But I believe in that physical labor is a really important component to a healthy life. I think that the research out there shows pretty conclusively that getting exercise is good for your mental state, and your emotional state and all that. So it's been beneficial there. But yeah, I mean, I didn't have much experience with vegetable farming in growing things, like you know, pea shoots, and sunflower shoots in a greenhouse. So it's been, it's been a really great experience, to learn all of that sort of stuff to Nelson, it really opened up my eyes to a lot of different practices that I wouldn't have been familiar with before. Also, you know, it's given me a different appreciation for the use of food, you know, as something you eat, you know, they're, they're great cooks, and they're, you know, they're interested in using things like sunflower shoots in a dish, which is something that I wouldn't have ever had experience with. Before even you know, eating different cheeses, fresh chev, and that kind of stuff is just something that I didn't have a lot of exposure to. So yeah, I mean, having a diverse array of experiences with different kinds of farms is it's always good to get more experienced, no matter what you're doing, you know, the more you you more you interact with people who are, your more tangentially related, but are doing things differently, the more you're going to understand that, that everybody's human, and everybody has their own needs and priorities, and that, you know, people are doing what they're doing, because for a reason.

One of the things that I know that you are really good at as well, is mixing wonderful cocktails. So you have mixed a cocktail or two, cocktail or two. So there's a lot of chemistry involved in that there's a lot of there's a lot of artistic thought that goes into it. I mean, where did that come into your life?

Well, yeah, you know, I often bartending I got a lot of people asking me, you know, whether or not I use much of my chemistry knowledge to make better cocktails, and the sad answer is no, not really. You know, I understand some of it, you know, that, like, ethanol is a great, you know, agent for you for extracting certain flavors and that sort of thing. But honestly, you know, I liked bartending because it was a break from some of that kind of stuff. And it allowed me to explore the artistic side of food a little bit more. I mean, I think a cocktails are absolutely beautiful, you can take you know, three or four different ingredients that you might not think go together and they can just be in the right proportions. And if you shake them just enough for stir them just enough or you garnish them just right. That, you know, it can transform into something completely different. And I love that and I love sharing that with people. You know, it's, it's great when I have somebody who's like, oh, you know, I like to drink gin and tonics or something like that. So you're like, Well, let me show you this gin cocktail, you know, you would have never, never had an experience with before. They're just blown away by and I think that that's great. It's, it's a fun social thing. It also you know, honestly, bartending helps me become a little more social. Helped me talk to strangers a little bit better. It helped me with my, I guess you all listening will be the judge of that helped me with my podcasting to being able to have a conversation with people that you might not necessarily know. So yeah, there's I mean, there's all kinds of interactions there. But I'm not saying that everybody should should go into the bartending business, but it's not, you know, it can be an immensely beneficial experience.

Well, in that is kind of a segue into some of the discussion we thought about heading into on in the area of podcasting. As I started this out today, I mentioned that this was really your, your brainchild, this was your baby as we put it together. And when you came to me and said we should we should try podcasting. And you said an hour long, I had the same reaction you did with your friend giving you a three hour long podcast thinking, no one's gonna listen to an hour long podcast. And we've both seen really great response to what's been happening here, which is encouraging, but just really fulfilling to see that there are a lot of people that are interested in understanding what the faculty members on this campus are doing. So you talked a little bit about how you got into the podcast, what were your thoughts about this particular one, when we got going?

Well, I mean, podcasts as a media have been around now for I don't know, a little over a decade. And like I said, I just got into them a couple years ago. What I but I mean, they're rapidly growing here in the last few years. And I think the reason for that is that people are starving for nuanced conversation on some of these big issues. You know, I've always been pretty critical of the of the media, you know, some deserving, some not. But you know, I think what draws a lot of people to podcasts that are an hour long is that was it a couple of things, you know, one, there can be a lot of podcasts, and they can be produced cheaply, and pretty, you know, pretty easily on topics that there just isn't enough of a market for otherwise, right? You know, some of the topics we cover or more popular with the public, and some of them, maybe not necessarily as much, but nobody's gonna go out there and you know, spend, you know, $50,000 to make an hour episode about one of the things that we're talking about, right. So this is a really great way for people to explore all different aspects of life that don't always get a microphone, you know, because the barrier of entry is so low. So it's really great in that respect. And, you know, again, like I said, the the nuance we can spend, we could spend an hour discussing, you know, the, you know, why it's important to consider, you know, certain whether we should be eating fats, or sugars or something like that, right, or, you know, any of the topics that we've covered. We haven't published this yet, but the the Linda Duke one talking about the art and the aesthetics of food, you know, there are people out there who are interested in that sort of thing. But, you know, how often would we be able to broadcast you know, Linda Duke to all these people who don't necessarily have access to it. So I just think it's a really great media for exploring ideas and learning more about, about life, I'm always fascinated by the world.

So tremendous irony to this, in that back in the 50s, at the start of the television age, it was not uncommon to have half hour or even hour long talk shows where people would discuss particular ideas. They tended to get broadcast generally on Sunday mornings, but you had a chance to engage not one on one, but at least be exposed to those ideas and those opinions. And that sort of went away. And it's good to see it come back in podcast form.

Yeah, I mean, like I said, people are I think people are starving for more detailed discussions of some of these issues and ideas. And it's it you know, people are so busy, too, that podcasts are great, because you can listen to them, whether you're at the gym, or if you're on a commute or you know, whether you're cooking dinner or something like that I can consume podcasts in a variety of ways that I can't read a book. And I think that's another reason why they're becoming more and more popular.

Yeah. And that's, that's maybe a sad commentary on sort of why they're popular. Right, sir. But I do think it's true. So lots of people have long commutes, right, and what else are you gonna do? Right. But I love that podcasts have filled in some of that. I also think people really looking for community too. So it's not just ideas. I think that's another thing that podcasts provide a lot of right is this feeling of right, that conversation and there's these people talking and you're entering into, you know, entering into, you know, somebody else's world in some conversation, right. And, I mean, a lot of them aren't very idea. Focused, right. Some of them are idea focused about content. Some of them are just like, friends chatting over dinner kind of stuff, right. And then some of them are funny, and some of them Yeah, so it's amazing the diversity of stuff that's out there and I love that we're able to provide one little, you know, niche. Right. And it's pretty cool. Really is.

Yeah, it's fun. I think you're right that there is a community. But I know I listened to two podcasts where I sort of identify with some of the people who were or you know, the hosts. Oh, yeah. Right. And it makes a difference. Yeah, you could imagine some of these people is, you know, pallin around having a beer with them.

There you go. Right. That's our goal. Right. So this one, right.

Yeah, it's great. And like you said, you know, it is sort of sad that people have these situations where they have the opportunity to hear podcasts instead of reading a book or whatever, but they're gonna have those anyway. Yeah. So I'd rather be filled with, you know, more substantive content than being filled with something else. Yeah.

I mean, it's, it's amazing. The podcast world is amazing, really is cool. I'm really glad you kick this thing off. So So tell us more about like, yeah, I don't know, the process and how you felt going through it. Starting it and seeing it actually successful?

Well, it's Yeah, I mean, it's pretty cool. Because, you know, I had actually talked to a couple people about having idea to explore more food related ideas. In a podcast setting, there was an informal conversation sort of thing about, I don't know, probably six months to a year prior to teaming up with Maureen here. And when she mentioned that there was they were thinking about doing a podcast, I you know, it just happened to be a really great coincidence. You know, so we were able to kick it off. I mean, I, I was just curious to see whether or not I could do it, right, it's fun to have those sorts of challenges. And I, you know, I guess I would like to, to some extent, turn it back around to you guys, what it's been like, and we can make this a little more of a discussion. What's it been like, for you guys to be involved? You know, I know that you were a little excited, a little skeptical when I came to you at first saying, hey, you know, is this something you'd be interested in doing.

I was definitely skeptical, sort of not about the idea, but about sort of how much I would be comfortable in this role, right, because I think that this is something that we probably haven't ever talked about in the podcast, but we talk about it a lot outside of it, right? When we're talking, you know, a bunch of us are academics, both our both our guests, and, you know, people who are hosting here, right. And our, the way we do things is really different, right? Sort of when you when you talk, it's you know, it's in front of a classroom, or it's, or it's a presentation of research, or you know, you know, working with colleagues one on one, and those are all very different kinds of, you know, interactions and, and plenty of us do things sort of out in the public, but it's still, there's still something very different about being recorded live right at every little thing that you say that might just go a little wrong. Right. And you know, about, you know, how, so I was worried about how prepped, I would have to be right sort of how how much I would need to know, don't want to say something ridiculously stupid, right? You know, so yeah, so this was a challenge. So it's, but I but I'm, but I love podcasts, too, right? I don't listen to enough of them. Because Luckily, I have a very short commute. And on a bike, so it's not a good place to listen to a podcast, right. But, uh, and I'm committed to the idea of communicating, right. And the idea of getting ideas out, right, so. So I jumped in, I guess, right, you know, it's been, it's been great. It's been surprisingly not too bad. And I don't know, I think I'm sure I could be much. Absolutely. And better as though it's like, it's been great. But..

There's a word weird vulnerability. Yeah. And you're like, you're having your conversation being recorded.

It's like, oh, it's it's, as was alluded to earlier, we just some extent, even though we might claim we aren't, we generally know where we're going with a lecture or with a presentation. So we've got the confidence of that, that knowledge net down there in case something goes wrong here. It's wherever it goes, you know, it's a random walk through science, and you have to be ready to flex your head and respond.

Well, and I think that that's why it appeals to so many people in this format is that it's more conversational, right? It's more like you're sitting around a table talking with people as opposed to, you know, the quote, unquote, sage on the stage or whatever, that's just sort of telling you what you should know. It's more you know, these people, we're all just people exploring ideas. And…

Yet the idea is that it's a threat free environment, I think, makes a big difference as well. I'm not going to stand up, hopefully not to disagree with her.

Now it's been really good. Reach. I have not gotten directly involved in doing the podcast until just recently and have enjoyed what I've done so far. But the whole idea as you said, when you and I first talked about this, I was thinking about doing a podcast, but I was thinking 15 minutes, you know, something very short, just little clips on what faculty are doing on campus. And I'm really glad you talked me into the hour approach to it because it's being picked up all over the world, which just shocked me. People in many parts of the world are interested in what we're doing here. And it's giving a little bit of voice to some of the research that's being done here that, you know, that may not, may not get out in anything other than a peer reviewed journal or something like that, where you've got a small handful of people that would read it. So it's been a great journey. For me, it's been very, very interesting. And hopefully, we're going to be able to keep that going.

I'm sure you guys will do great. I look forward to listening to some more in the future is after I move away, and you guys continue with this, but yeah, I mean, you bring up another good point, as far as podcasts in general is, not only is it a low barrier to entry to make the podcast, but it's also pretty easy for people to access them all over the world, right? People who might not necessarily have access to other means of educational materials, you know, can be downloaded in any country anywhere. And they're there for, you know, as long as the internet's alive, right? Which may be good or may be bad. Think a little bit about like internet archeology and stuff, right? It's like stuff that you can find from 15 years ago, that's, that's still there, but it's out. Now, think differently, or the public perception is differently. You know, there'll be a huge graveyard of podcasts just available somewhere,

Which is waiting to be mined for Well, yeah.

But there's so many of them too, though. This is the thing, right? sure that there's so much out there. It's kind of Yeah, it's kind of crazy.

Next week, we're putting on a big data workshop, this is gonna be one area of big data as we move forward. Lots and lots and lots of information sitting out there. Yeah. Yeah.

Jay, what was your most surprising thing that happened in a podcast? One of our, one of the ones that we had here? Or, you know, something that you just weren't expecting? Or something that you learned? Or? Or? Or, you know, I don't know.

Well, it's funny I think Maureen and I have talked about this a little bit is, I think this is true of everybody is that are most people, at least as people love to talk about themselves, right? You know, we thought at the beginning of this, that sometimes it would be challenging to get a faculty member or something to talk for an hour about what they're doing. But it hasn't been as a challenge at all. But think about day to day life. When do you besides us being in this room? Do you sit and talk to somebody about themselves for an hour, right? You never, we never get to have those conversations anymore, because people are busy, or they don't want to get into something that's controversial, and have that weird, you know, social moment, and all that kind of stuff. So I really appreciated just getting to know people, because people can be pretty fascinating. And they have a lot to share. And that's another great thing about the podcast is more people get to share what they know and what they've learned. And I think that that can only be a good resource for people moving forward.

I think the degree of passion that people exhibited for what they were doing, and dedication. Yeah, but beyond that.

We've never had one that we walked out of here and said, that didn't work. Or we can't, you know, we're not going down that path or whatever. It's they've all been positive. I mean, I think we've had good experiences across the board.

People are huge repositories of information and ideas and, and passions and that sort of stuff. And it's, it's fun to explore that a little bit.

I find myself thinking every now and then. Oh, I wish so and so we're still alive. What a what a podcast that would make sure Yeah.

What do you think? You have something Jay?

Well, I you know, thank you all for, for being part of this project and giving me the opportunity. It's been a real pleasure to work with you all. And we can all stay in touch for sure. And like I said, I'll be look forward to listening in the future.

Yeah. And, and thanks for making this happen. It really has been great. It's been great to be involved. Absolutely. Glad you glad you pushed.

Yeah, I remember saying well, maybe he comes back again, it comes back it goes. It's not too bad.

Yeah, no, this is all right. I could do this.

Yeah. And we just wish you all the best.

I appreciate it. Yeah. Thanks so much. All the best.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

Linda Duke is the director of the Marianna Kistler Beach Museum of Art at Kansas State University. Formerly the director of audience engagement at the Indianapolis Museum of Art, she joined K-State in June of 2011 and has worked diligently to develop the atmosphere within and opportunities to engage with the museum, while also educating students about the roles of art in our lives. Our conversation covered the many ways we can experience art and its complex relationship with what we eat and drink. Scott and Jon joined for this one as well.

For more about Linda and the Beach Museum check out: https://beach.k-state.edu/

Transcript:

Food as Art and Experience with Linda Duke

In our culture, we we think about nutrition and we think about weight and diet and, and that kind of thing. But I think our aesthetic appreciation of food is only recently kind of beginning to be given more importance.

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of Global Food Systems produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Jay Weeks PhD candidate in the Department of Agronomy. My co host is Scott Tanona, an associate professor in the Department of Philosophy who specializes in the philosophy of science. How often do you consider the aesthetics of your daily life? Think about the last meal you had. Or perhaps you're eating right now. We're or are you fully in the presence of what you were tasting? Or were you thinking about the myriad other things you had going on? In the hustle and bustle, I know I forget to stop and smell the proverbial roses. The more I think about it, it said in something I tried to focus on more and more. Fortunately, today, to help us better explore the art and beauty in our lives. Our guest is Linda Duke. Linda is the director of the Marianna Kistler Beach Museum of Art here at Kansas State University, formerly the director of audience engagement at the Indianapolis Museum of Art, she joined the University in June of 2011, and has worked diligently to develop the atmosphere within and opportunities to engage with the museum, while also educating students about the roles of art in our lives. Our conversation covered the ways we can think about art, and how we personally experience our lives, mainly through the lens of our relationship with food. I don't want to spoil it. But there's a description of beans in this interview that really captures something we probably all could pay a little bit more attention to. Scott and Jon joined us as well. This talk is one where it's really up to you what you take from it. So enjoy. Linda Duke, welcome to the podcast.

Thank you, Jay. Happy to be here.

So you came to K State in the summer of 2011. Correct? That's right. So what brought you here?

Actually the job to the chance to be the director of the Mariana Cussler Beach Museum of Art. In truth, I didn't really take it seriously. When the university first contacted me, they had a search firm, and I just threw away the first few emails I got from them, because I didn't think the description sounded like a good fit. But they stuck with it. And the search firm guy eventually called me and talked me into coming for an interview. And that's when I realized what a great opportunity it was.

So what got you into art in general? Is that something that you had always enjoyed? Or?

Yes, I think, I think in our family. My brother is an artist, Our father was a commercial artist, you know, back in the days before all the technology, he illustrated products, you know, drew pictures of them to go into magazine ads, and, and whatnot. And so as a family, we always went to art museums and saw art. And then I think I was struggling because I was and I don't say this as a boast. I think it's just a weird thing that I was born with. I'm pretty good at drawing. But I also knew that I wasn't an artist in that way. And so I really anguished over that a bit as a young person. And then I started studying art history in addition to studio art, and really fell in love with sharing the arts with people in that way. And I guess I'll just say one more thing that I studied tea ceremony as a young person at university and then in graduate school.

I wrote about that and I wanted to ask you,

Yeah, and one of the things that a tea host does in Japanese tradition is create a client sets up a temporary shared experience, you know, chooses a work of art to display chooses the incense, the tea, the sweet the utensils that are used, and the whole thing is designed to really create a wonderful aesthetic experience for the guest or the small number of guests. And at a certain point, I realized that's what my job is in the art museum. That's exactly what I do. I'm like the tea host at the art museum. And so that's been, that's been a real privilege for me to be able to do that.

So could you say what you pay attention to then? Besides that the art pieces in particular, right, so that the tea is about the whole experience. So how do you think about the museum that way?

Well, I think the hospitality part of it is really important to me, one of the things I felt uncomfortable with when I first came to the beach is that visitors come in the front door, and the galleries aren't there, they're upstairs. And so people who haven't been there before, feel a little bewildered and sometimes stumble into the offices. And so I'm really happy that we've been able to work on having student lobby hosts, and they do a wonderful job of welcoming people. And then when people get upstairs, there are more student employees to welcome them to the galleries. And so I just I do put a lot of importance on making people feel comfortable. Sometimes we have visitors with various kinds of disabilities. People from cultures everywhere, I always want them to feel welcomed in our space.

Is it? Is it difficult when you walk into other art galleries to take off your curatorial hat and just experience? The gallery? Or are you always sort of working in the back of your mind catching, catching things do you think are good or bad?

I don't really think of it in terms of good and bad. Oh, man, I don't know how deeply to get into this. But another fortunate thing, and this is getting back to your question, believe it or not, but early in my time working in art museums, I encountered some research that was being done at the Museum of Modern Art in New York, on aesthetic development, is what the researchers were calling it. So they were very interested in the kinds of thinking people do when they're trying to make meaning of an art experience. And it eventually developed into a curriculum that we teach teachers to use and to be facilitators of discussions is called Visual Thinking Strategies. And that really changed my professional life, because it helped me in my own viewing to learn to slow down and really appreciate deep ambiguities that are often in works of art, and how provocative that is when there's a contradiction or an inconsistency. And how many thoughts that triggers. So I remain very fascinated by that process. And that really benefited me as an art viewer, too. When I go to museums.

Tell us more about that. What was that educational experience like? And what does it mean to be a visual thinker into taking those aesthetics and things like that?

Well, I'm first of all, I think in our culture, even though we're awash with visual images all the time, especially now with technology, as a culture, we really privilege language as the way to communicate as the embodiment of knowledge or the conveyor of knowledge. And for that reason, I don't think we really pay very much attention to nurturing visual thinking skills, or to understanding how much variation there probably is among people. I feel that some people are, and I think there's research to back this up, are more oriented to know the world visually, and others are much stronger verbal thinkers. I went through a period, when I was working at the hammer in Los Angeles, I started asking people, how do you think, are you conscious of thinking in words, and I was totally blown away by how many people said, Of course, I had people even tell me, I even think about punctuation. And I was like, because I don't I I've and I think, and I think a lot of people with learning differences, dyslexia and, and other differences from the norm, probably a high percentage of them are visual thinkers. And so I think for me, what I've loved about the VTS work is that it sets up a discussion protocol where people are constantly asked to connect what they know, in a sensory way with language, and to go back and forth. And so I think, pedagogically, it's sort of serves people at both ends of the spectrum.

So it makes them more adept or more aware of these two types of origins.

Or fluent, a stronger, fluent, more exercise connection between them.

So I don't want to sort of dig too deep, like you're just saying, but we're, there's some views about sort of thinking cognition that I think are sort of the in the end at all has to be in some sense. language based, right, you know, you don't you don't have, like a proposition or a view about something unless it's kind of expressible in a sentence, right. And we've got these sort of views about visual thinking that are sort of, you know, I mean, some of us definitely, like, we'd like pictures, right. And some of us, you know, to organize our thoughts, sort of, you know, on a on a page with diagrams and stuff, but, you know, Can you can you push more like what you actually mean by like visual thinking, Do you have a specific, you know, way of describing it? Or is this kind of, it's so open ended, that it's hard to pin down?

Well, I'm starting to feel pretty nervous here. Because now, no, I, the reason I feel nervous is because I think we're venturing into a realm where I can certainly give you my opinion, based on my experience and my life work. But that's very different from the kind of scholarly knowledge that I'm suspecting you guys want in these podcasts?

No, not necessarily.

No, I mean, actually, I think personal anecdotal evidence is, you know, and that's worthy of discussion as well. Right?

Yeah. Well, I think first of all, I am not convinced that thought is ultimately language. And I think, but I think there are some people who struggle mightily, for example, people with certain kinds of autism struggle with the lack of fluency between those two, and Temple Grandin has written about that. And I've spoken pretty extensively with her about that. There are other people who are researchers who have said visual thinking is so quick, that people are largely unaware of it. So it's not like people say, well, tiempo wrote a book called Thinking in pictures, but most people would say, I don't know how I think, and I'm one of those people. I couldn't tell you, I know that I don't know what words I'm going to say until they come out of my mouth. Unless I'm planning to say something, I can do that. But it's not my normal mode. And so I don't know that that may be too out there. But I think a lot more research needs to be done on that. Because I think we waste a lot of people's lives, we waste a lot of giftedness, when people are thinking in a way that's not the norm and doesn't get doesn't get the support it needs as they're growing up.

Can you give an example of an exhibit or of a piece that you saw that really kind of exemplifies this? That example, the visual, the visual thinking how important it is as a way of kind of thinking about the world, or just approaching it or, you know, changing the way you view? Right, because you experienced something that you were looking at, right. And rather than sort of thinking about it in words, right? Yeah.

Well, I'll tell you something that recently, well over the last couple years, every three weeks, I do a VTS seminar with veterinary pathology students. It's different students each time unfortunately, it would be great if we had multiple sessions, but they're rotating through a fourth year program in pathology. And so just once again, yesterday, I was with one of those groups and we were looking at An image, I always start them out with slides of images that I've chosen. And then we go upstairs and practice in the galleries, and they take turns being the facilitator. But an image that I really like to use is, is a painting by a man named Vernon Fisher. It's called Man cutting globe. And the, the painting is done in a style that looks kind of like a 1950s reading primmer like a dick Jane and Sally book for those of us who are old enough to have learned to read that way. So black outlines flat areas of color, some people say it looks cartoonish. And it shows a man wearing a red polka dot tie and a white long sleeve shirt at a table and a little boy, looking over his shoulder watching what he's doing. And on the table is a globe. And you can see the edges of the continents. And he has his hand in a position like you would stab with a DAG or any any has some kind of tool in that hand that people debate the meaning of during the or the the identity of that tool. And it's going into the globe, it's going into a hole that's been caught in the globe, and on the table. So there are two holes visible in the globe. And there are three pieces that look to have been cut from the globe laying on the table. And then across the bottom of this painting. There's something that looks like the periodic table with those little rectangles that have the symbol for the element and the atomic weight, and then the name of the element. And the letters of those rectangles spell out the words man cutting globe. If you look really closely, some of those are genuine elements like oxygen for oh, and some of them you're like Trinity, is that an element. And there's another little tiny projection style map of the world up on the upper border so tiny that most people don't even notice it. But oddly enough, the the continents appear backwards. Like we're seeing them from behind. So that painting fascinates me when I do it with people for the first time, because it looks like such a simple image like a cartoon image. But it has so many things that could be visually discovered about it, the time period, probably the 40s, or the 50s. The sense that there's some kind of instruction going on, or at least a demonstration between an older generation and a younger one, the reference to the elements that make up the earth. And the fact that with this kind of violent hand position. The world is being cut into carved up in a sense, like a Jack O' Lantern, and yet it's not carving a face. And so people often spend time trying to think, why are the cutouts in the places that they are. And they're all the two that we can see are in the Pacific Ocean, maybe near the bottom of Japan, maybe out in the bikini at all. And I say that because I know more about this artist's work most people don't never heard of him. But he did a whole series of work about the nuclear weapons that were tested in the bikini Islands, which left them so polluted that they're still on inhabitable.

One of the sites was called Trinity. Actually.

See it just goes on and on. So Jimmy, and the fact that the style of the illustration kind of dates it, but it dates it to the period when that was going on. But it also kind of coalesces into some questions about plundering the earth or using the earth, what's being taught to the next generation. So there are dozens of things that people could discover about that image. If they looked at it long enough for thought about it. We usually don't you know, we usually look quickly and maybe we would notice one of those things about it. And I don't know if that answers your question. But what I like about the VTS process is mostly just that it slows people down.

Yeah, I was gonna ask exactly that, right? Because you said a lot of times, we're just looking quickly, right. And a lot of people experience museums this way too, right? Through and boom, boom, boom, boom, right, but so say more about the value of actually just sitting and looking and experiencing?

Well, I think it's, if you're not used to it, if you haven't, sort of exercise those mental or intellectual muscles, it's not so easy to do on your own. And that's the other good thing about this process, I think it uses a group process to model something that we could each do on our own. So people hear the comments from others in the class or whatever the group is. And many times they're like, oh, my gosh, I never I didn't even notice that, or I wouldn't have thought of it that way. But that's interesting. And so it kind of the group process kind of demonstrates a critical thinking and observation process. That's, I think, very valuable. And again, the fact that people are asked to find words for what they think and now and the facilitator repeatedly asks them, what did you see that made you say that? What's the evidence, not, not out of doubt. But to keep prompting that process to make someone more conscious of their own thought process? I knew it when I looked. But now I have to go back and tell you how I knew it. So it's an unpacking kind of process.

More and more, we see museums that offer you the chance to have an audio guide, and stick something in your ears or put like, and that tends to be very just straightforward and descriptive, and then move on. And do you think that that works against the kind of process that you're talking about? Well, do we fool ourselves by thinking that enough?

I do in the sense that I think it's, it's easy to be in a passive mode and just listen to that and have someone tell you, what you're seeing and what's important about it. They're not going to tell you what, why it should matter to you. You're the only one who can do that. Yeah. So yeah, I am not wild about that. Although we do know, we do offer smart Wi Fi in the museum, people can download an app where if they want more information about something, they can just point their phone at it and get it. But at least it's not on a droning tour that it's there has to be more choice and action involved.

So one of the things that we talked about a little bit as far as taking some time to experience you know what you're doing in the moment, I noticed this while I was actually getting ready for this interview today, I was eating my lunch. And I was reading the description you gave about the aesthetics of food and how we often don't necessarily pay attention to everything. And I realized that as I was eating my salad, I wasn't even tasting myself because I was concentrating on my on the reading, right. And then I wanted to get into the aesthetics of food and how important that is not only for enjoying the food itself, but for appreciating where food comes from, and all of that and the connections that we can make. So I'll let you take it from here about your thoughts on that.

Yeah, no, thanks. That's a huge topic. I feel like you know, I think I told you in an email Jay, that I see the art museum and to some extent, my role as being one of connector. I think the arts are a big enough tent that a lot of disciplines can benefit from participating in the arts. And I feel the same way about food, I feel that it is such a squandered or under utilize resource for education period at all levels. Because I think, you know, just like we were talking about BTS and bringing to consciousness bringing to language, and that that's really what you were talking about bringing thought to language, if it wasn't originally language. Bringing that sensory experience to language can be a really important thing for people to be fluent at. And I think we could start in early childhood, kids eat snack at school, they lunch at school, and there are people like Alice Waters, of course with her Edible Schoolyard project and all that who have known that for years and kids grow gardens and cook food together at school and talk about it and write a bout it and measure it and, and all of that. But I think it's just as true at university. I mean, what do we teach here at K State that couldn't in some way be related to food. And maybe if we could do a better job of making people more conscious of that, maybe it would also change the status of food in our culture, because I feel like well, from my travels abroad, I feel like Americans sometimes don't demand or expect the food that they're served to be as good as people in other cultures often do. That, you know, if we travel, we expect that we might have to eat something subpar in a bus station or an airport. And that's not always true. Every place in the world. I feel like in our culture, we, we think about nutrition, and we think about weight and, and diet, and, and that kind of thing. But I think our aesthetic appreciation of food is only recently kind of beginning to be given more importance. And I think that's a really important thing to happen. But it's only one of the things I mean, there's the science, there's all of this, that needs to be better appreciated and better understood.

Yeah, I mean, we really will at least historically have focused on the the quantification of things right, when we have been sort of neglected the more qualitative aspects of food and things like that way. So what do you think, you know, if you were going to be delving into a college course or something like that, or teaching a college course? What do you what would you change? How would you, how would you, how would you start to integrate some of these ideas into, you know, into practice?

Well, I mean, it would depend on what you were teaching. I think this is a topic that needs the leadership of the university as an organization, I think, because I think faculty have to be given the support they need and, and the sense of the importance of teaching in ways that connect with other disciplines and helping students think in that way. So I don't know, there are, there are a lot of ways and I think some of them do involve just this issue of science communication or communication period, the relationship between experience and knowledge and language, and being better, better at using language. I brought something in case it seemed like it would be worth it. It's a footnote or an end note from one of the articles I sent to you, Jay, I think I told you that I had an opportunity a few years ago to spend a month at the American Academy in Rome, which is a site that's dedicated to interdisciplinary conversation and stimulation. And I had not long before that I had been, I had gotten to do a little project with Alice Waters, the the chef I mentioned, and she had recently helped the American Academy completely redo their food program. Because to save money, they had started getting cheaper and cheaper food, and putting less money into paying their kitchen staff and all of that. And the food got bad to the point where a lot of the fallows and Rome prize winners and all the creative people who were staying in residence there started eating at the local restaurants instead of and that's when they realized that the heart of the academy was the table. It was that shared experience of eating food together and the kinds of ideas people talked about over meals. And they brought Alice in to help them reinvent the whole Academy really, in a sense, because that was the heart of it. And I was so impressed by what she told me about that. I decided when I went to the academy that I would interview people about their aesthetic experiences with food but with the more standard aesthetic experiences that people think of like paintings or architecture or music, or whatever. And so that's what I did, I spent a month with a little digital recorder. And I got, you know, these famous writers and artists and musicians, and the kitchen staff and the gardeners, I would just interview anybody who would talk to me about aesthetic experience. And I was really impressed by how many of them chose to talk about food. I really was struck by that.

And you just asked about the set experience in general exactly started talking about…

Yes, yes, they could pick anything.

Well, there's this entire literature of, of people talking about food in different ways. There's a writer named AJ Liebling who was famous in the New Yorker, quite a while he wrote an entire book that was based on a year that he spends a student in Paris, and it was all around eating all around food.

And it's really quite telling you this idea of the aesthetics of food being important is a little more advanced than we have had here. I think that's,

Is it because we've always just focused on price. And like what happened at the institute you're describing, you know, because, you know, they wanted to cut costs, because low budget isn't unless they cut a little bit out and a little bit out a little bit before there's nothing left? Or why do you think that that is why do other cultures value at so much more than that? Maybe we do?

I mean, I think there are probably a lot of reasons, but but maybe one of them is that it's a sensory experience. And, and as I said, I think our culture tends a little toward the puritanical and, and doesn't value things that we know, through the senses as much as things that we know, through language.

And there's a utilitarian aspect to that too. pragmatic, like sort of, right, so that right, so you want the thing to serve a certain purpose, right? Yes, is like free nourish

exactly energy, you know, freshing my heart and that's all Exactly. Yeah. And you know, I mean, there are other things, there's the rush of something that's very sweet, or the addictiveness of something that's salty. I mean, we have those two, but backing off and taking the time to really cherish food and value is I don't think it's been a real strong theme in our culture. But I feel like it's starting to come up now. And I think that's a good thing.

Do you think it has something to do too, with, with how our culture has has framed health in the, you know, things that are really sweet and really, really full of fat or something like that it really savory have often been considered unhealthy, even though the science now is, you know, kind of debates that and some are suppose especially considering fast, do you think that's why we've shied away from some of that kind of stuff? Or what do you think about that?

Well, I mean, I guess, again, I would say we've, we've explored the issue through words, rather than through experience, you know, through received knowledge received information about what our bodies need, and been maybe less attuned to how food feels when we eat it. I don't know. I think there's a lot I think it's complicated.

Sure. Yeah. I mean, that's interesting, right? And rather than trusting yourself to dictate, you know, what you should be eating and what tastes good, and what feels good and all that kind of stuff. We've relied on an outside source.

I think there's even been some really interesting research more recently about how different diets, you know, with different ratios of fat and protein and carbohydrates, how there's quite a variation in terms of how an individual person thrives on one diet or another, that it's not a one size fits all thing.

I think what it's interesting now what we're seeing, I mean, with a lot of these diets, there's a lot of still looking at how much protein are you getting versus how many carbs and right gluten insert in there's it's very much not how you're thinking about food at all right, in terms of the sensory experience, right, but but at the same time, we have this birth of all kinds of fancy coffee shops and microbreweries and you know, better restaurants that this is happening at the same time. Right. What? So there's like a little bit of maybe we're going in both directions at once. Yeah, right.

Yeah. And I'm certainly not saying that nutrition studies aren't important. I think that's hugely important and interesting. I'm just pointing out that I think we haven't. As a popular culture, we haven't been in touch with our bodies when it comes to food.

So what do you want? I mean, what do you think we need? And how do you serve? What would you want? Like, maybe just Jay mentioned college students, but like, kids, what would you tell younger kids sort of in terms of how they're thinking about food or how they're approaching? Eating?

I don't think it's so much a matter of telling them as what kinds of experiences you create for them. And, you know, I mean, I, as I said, I think Alice Waters in the Edible Schoolyard program has been thinking about that, you know, kids sharing food experiences and talking about it and writing about it. I, you know, I mean, just getting way off topic, maybe it's just talking with someone the other day about parents having battles with their children about food, where, you know, and I experienced that as a child myself, you can't leave the table until you finish that glass of milk or whatever. And I don't know, I mean, I feel like young children need to get the message that they that we do respect how they feel about food in their bodies, and that they should never have to eat or drink something that they don't want to. If they're picky eaters, when they're little, I guess my own experience, as a parent tells me it takes care of itself. I had one adventurous eater and two picky eaters, and they're all adventurous eaters now, so it didn't matter.

Yeah. And it's also been hypothesized that children's ability to discriminate different flavors and intensities changes. Yeah, so they go through a period where everything is just way too. Yeah, everything. So that's why they want macaroni and cheese and

Exactly like, and so what's gained by forcing them to eat something that they don't don't enjoy? And yeah.

Firstly, takes care of itself. We took some friends to a restaurant with a French was a very nice French restaurant. And they took their seven year old along and we thought this is going to be quite the battle. And he ordered the mussels and the snails. And we didn't get one of them. So yeah. Just they've children very quiet. Yeah,

and a lot of that. I mean, there's a lot of factors there. But I think one thing that you mentioned is, you know, giving them experiences too, right? And I was wondering if you say more about that, that notion you were talking about before with with VTS with visual thinking, putting words to sort of what you're experiencing? Because that's that's a major challenge in all aesthetic experience. Yes. I think it's a challenge people have with food, too, right. Sort of our there's a, there's a taste you like, but like, how would you describe exactly doing to you? So like, what do you have to say about like that?

Yeah. And so one of the things that tea ceremony ingrained in people is this sense of being present in the moment. In fact, there's a scene that often is hung as a calligraphy scroll in the tea practice room that reads Ichi go eta, which kind of means one time, one chance, sort of like this moment will never come again. So that that sense that the tea ceremony as an art practice, is trying to give people a moment to really notice what's happening right now, right this minute. And, and one of the rules, if you will, of tea ceremony is that you don't discuss anything while you're in the tea ceremony that doesn't have to do with what's happening right now. You're not going to talk about politics or the weather, but you can talk about the taste the texture The sound of the bamboo scoop, hitting on the side of the table, those sensory things that are happening right now. And so the it's a kind of, again, a mental exercise for being in the present, which is probably the most difficult, uncomfortable place for our attention to stay. We're always going backwards or forwards, but to be right here. I think rom das wrote a book called Be here now.

And to some extent, I guess our culture, tries to do things like that being served wine.

That's what I was saying that

he would be watching your carving carving the turkey haggis, the ceremony of the haggis and Scotland in the like,

yes, and people. That's why I was thinking of my tea teacher, when you asked me about language, it's the language of wine, or the language of tea. If any of you have ever been to a Chinese tea shop, I had the experience of going there with two T experts one time. And so the tea house was this was Chinese tea, pour the water over the tea and a little cup. And my friend would taste it. And then he would say something like, you know, I'm thinking it's the such and such farm in Assam. And I'm thinking it was the spring before last, and the west side of the hill. And I was like, Are you kidding me? But that's how wine people are too. But that's like a super intense version of being able to bring this stuff to language.

And that actually can have the opposite effect sometimes for people trying to get into this, right, because it's sort of there's all this elite knowledge. Right, exactly. And right. So I think it's important, easy to make fun of that. Right. And it's easy to be that gets put off. Right. Yeah, challenge by Right. Right. But But when you're talking, I mean, I think something you've said something about is, you know, how much you want the aesthetics, right, the the art experience, whether it's food, or whether it's visual art or whatever else to be open. Right? And, and not to not have these barriers, right? Yes. And I can say more about like, what what it takes to sort of, you know, get in enter into a museum and you know, experience

That's very, very relevant, because I think, in, in this country in the US, we've kind of made our history knowledge be the qualification for enjoying visual art. We've made people unintentionally, maybe, but we've made people feel like if they don't know very much about art and art history, they probably should keep their mouths shut in the museum. And then we've tried to make them feel better, but also shut them up by giving them an idea. And telling them what they ought to know about what they're looking at what they should have thought. And so we haven't respected beginner experiences with esthetics. But everybody has aesthetic experiences, and it's not like beginners is less valuable than experts. And yet, we've we've belittled that, or we haven't paid attention to it. And that was the other thing about the VTS research that really moved me when I first learned about it, that it, it totally blew that out of the water and, and said, This is worthwhile, you know, whatever people can do, if they stop and think and notice, is important. It has value. It's even deeply moving. And I know that as a facilitator, because when I hear people speak their own truths in front of works of art, I mean, sometimes it's very moving, and it can be such a simple thing that they noticed, but their effort to put it into words is more poetic than I could have ever made it and, um and that kind of brings us back around to teaching because you were asking about teaching about food. I think the VGS work absolutely promotes the idea that you as the teacher, need to take responsibility When your teaching doesn't work, and not blame the learner, I don't know, I think sometimes it's painful to hear someone who's burned out on teaching, and they're seeing as students nowadays, you know, you just can't get their attention and and VTS, the philosophy behind that doesn't give any credibility to that. It's, it's take responsibility, if you're the teacher, and what you're doing isn't working, find a way to meet them where they are, for some reason, you're not meeting them where they are. And so I think that principle of meeting the learner where they are, whether it's in the arts, or in some other subject.

Was it an emphasis on growth, mindset, teaching and learning as being in learning as being an experience rather than just trying to get to the right answer? Yes, right. I do think that's something that we need to focus on more is that not everybody is going to, you know, be at the same place and be able to get, you know, like all the biochemical pathways or something like that, right, but, but it's the experience of learning that, that is really what's going to serve a lot of students rather than, you know, what they remember from from x class.

And the thing is the biochemical pathways, they might be difficult or even impossible to learn, if you don't have your own reason for wanting to know them. And so it's more about when you give people information than it is about giving them information. Of course, we want to give them information, but we sometimes dump it on people, and then we complain that they couldn't remember it, or they mixed it up. But we didn't create a situation where they needed it.

So speaking of visual and learning, I listened to a podcast on Sean Carroll's MindScape the other day, and I gonna forget the lady's name, but she was talking about how mythology has been passed down in oral traditions. And some of the ways in which some of these really long stories were remembered and passed down was that the person responsible for curating that knowledge actually associated certain ideas with certain places, I think they called it a something Palace, mental palace, or something like that. And they associated, you know, this aspect of the story with this part of a building, and then they would walk around the building to help them remember each part of the story, rather than just the cornice the book in the corner. Yes, yeah. Do you? Are you familiar with that sort of literature? Or, or that sort of teaching style? And what do you think about that?

Well, I'm only familiar with it that I know that in indigenous cultures in this country, but probably in others as well, often had stories associated with land features. And so there was a sense of history and mythology and origin stories, and all of that being very tied to geographic features and places. So it seems very similar.

Yeah, it made me wonder about more as a memory

As a memory as a memory tool, but also as a way of learning things as a system to write, write, rather than just remembering this follows. This follows this, you know, in pure abstraction that you could sort of walk around your house, and then you'll visit that when you needed to recall. Yeah, and a certain port part of me, or I associated this with the drain or whatever, right, which sounds kind of crazy if you haven't experienced it, but it made a lot of sense. When she when she explained to us I thought it was really interesting. Getting back to some of the work you did with the food aesthetics and things. Were there any favorite descriptions that you had? I want to I want to try to capture you, because you brought some of the notes from

Well, I had a short quote that I pulled out from one of those interviews, and it really struck me because this woman is an award winning art historian and scholar. And when I asked her to talk about an aesthetic experience, she not only chose food, but she chose to talk about the beans that had been served lunch. And I just thought I'd read this short. I was quite amazed. So she said, I'm going to talk about my aesthetic experiences with food here, beginning with today's lunch, in particular, the beans. I feel a little bit like when I talk about food. Food is something that I'm very interested in. But it's a different sort of aesthetic experience from what I'm used to with visual aesthetics. And sometimes I feel like words fail me. But I'm not willing to let them fail me because talking about this stuff is what I do in aesthetic terms. So let's see what we can get. I think the key to the bean dish today was the contrast in texture between the sort of smooth and creamy beans, which were, I mean, with the bean is some sort of grain to it, especially when you're cooking from dried beans. As you bite into it, you can sense different gradations of that. But in these, it was so perfectly cooked that there was no gradient or real texture, it really had this consistent smoothness to it. There was like a balance going on there, in terms of not just texture, but you have that kind of mellow almost a nuttiness to the sort of mellow buttery nutty bean flavor. And the same thing with the bread, which is another mellow flavor, contrasted with the sharpness and bitterness and acidity of the tomato on the chart. So it's like the entire dish is about contrasts. It was fun.

Let's, let's enter amazing quote. If people who know me know I love being so I really appreciate it, though.

So yeah, we don't think about our food that often it that kind of level. Right? So yeah,

yeah. And it could feel silly, you know, she felt a little embarrassed almost to launch into this. But it was her truth. She didn't know those things about the lunch.

Sure, and cooking, right, sort of some, you know, good cooking shows, or try to talk you through some of these things, too, right. And so this is something you think about, right? If you try to learn the art of cooking, or to learn to try to create experiences like that.

I came across the quote, from Dwight furrow, he does a blog called edible arts. And are you familiar with that? Yeah. But he said, You know, when he was referring to preparing a meal and things he said, the idea is not merely to create a fantastic concoction or to add a new flavor note to a dish, it is to capture the essence of something that has hitherto gone unnoticed and to impress upon the diner that there is something here to be explored and understood. Great. Yeah. That was a really interesting way to capture you know, everything that goes along with Yeah, food.

Yeah. Yeah. And you could almost say the same thing about a visual art experience.

So what do you have to say about art and food? So we've been talking about sort of the art of food, right, but how about the combination of like visual art and food or other things like that? Do you have any thoughts about how they how food has shown up in visual art or how it's showing up today and works?

Yeah. Well, like I said, in history, tea ceremony has been a practice that has involved a tea ceremony meal and all the cookie darts that go with it. There are some artists who have done really interesting work, like I'm thinking, trying to remember his name. There's a West Coast artists Leeming way, I think is his name, who did a whole series of hospitality projects. And I remember one of them was he had a little miniature efficiency apartment, set up in the gallery of an art museum. It might have been the Whitney. And visitors could sign up to spend the night in that little efficiency apartment with Leeming way and he would prepare dinner for them. And so there were two little beds in their eating area kitchen, and he would fix this food for them.

Could people watch them interacting and him preparing food? I can't remember.

Well, that tradition comes into the US in the Chef's Table, where for a little more money, you can actually get a table in the kitchen. Uh huh. And watch Alice Waters or whoever do that. And you're and they will come over and they will talk about the food in those terms. They will, uh huh. Share their aesthetic with it. It's quite fun.

That's interesting. Have you ever experienced that? Yeah. Really?

Yeah. How? Not to? Not with not a cheap a nice, but yeah, that's another Yeah, I'm kind of a foodie. Oh, wow.

Oh, good. I think we've been touching on several times throughout this discussion. And we're talking about the tea ceremonies, or the chef's table or anything like that is just how profoundly social food is, as an art, right, how all of these things always come back to and sitting, how important it is to enjoy other things. If you're sitting at a table with a bunch of people talking, talking about it and that sort of thing. And maybe, you know, today, although I do think that that's it's changing along with the appreciation of higher quality food and things like that when people are going back to just having dinner together at a table. Yeah, right. Yeah. As opposed to like me today eating my lunch and not tasting myself, right. So yeah, I think that's it. importantly, I don't know if anybody has anything more to say about that. But it's just something that it's seems very deeply human to have to share food is a social experience.

It very much is. And there have been studies that have been conducted, that have been funded by food companies actually looking at outcomes where families are made, it's made easier for them to eat as a group as a family. And then, you know, further on down the line, they would look at other sorts of outcomes from that. It's very clear that that's positive, not negative.

Interesting. Well, and then we want to be respectful of your time. Is there anything that we haven't covered today that you'd like to talk about? You'd like to touch on?

Like we've covered a lot of Meat.

John Scott, do you have anything?

No, it's fascinating, fascinating.

Well, hey, Linda, we really appreciate it.

Thanks for having me. I really enjoyed talking to you.

Look forward to checking in again. If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

Dr. Jim Stack is a professor of plant pathology at Kansas State University and director of the Great Plains Diagnostic Network. His areas of research emphasis include detection and diagnosis of diseases in natural and agricultural plant systems, threat identification, vulnerability assessments, and risk analyses for natural, accidental, and intentional threats to plant systems, as well as epidemiology and management of field crop diseases in the Northern Great Plains. Additionally, he is a great thinker about the food system in general. This conversation largely centers around the more "wicked" problems that humans face, and how we may need to rethink our approaches in future. We definitely do not have all of the solutions, but only by talking through ideas are we going to make progress. Dr. Maureen Olewnik, the Global Food Systems Initiative Coordinator, joined Scott, Jim, and Jay for the talk as well. Enjoy!

For more information about Dr. Stack check out: https://www.plantpath.kstate.edu/people/faculty/stack/

Transcript:

Rethinking Current Approaches to Food Security with Dr. Jim Stack – Food Systems/Plant Pathology

What is a reasonable population that the earth can sustain without maximizing the pressure on the systems that we need for survival. So that's what I mean by we've got it backwards. Instead of chasing population, we should be asking ourselves what's a reasonable population for the world so that we can develop systems that can meet that demand?

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of global food systems. It's produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Jay Weeks PhD candidate in the Department of Agronomy, my co host is Scott Tanona, an Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy who specializes in the Philosophy of Science. Sometimes, with large, complicated endeavors, we need to take a step back and ask whether our current approaches and underlying assumptions are truly serving our end goals. Given our ever globalizing food system, it's important to take inventory of what we've learned and consider where things could be improved, or go horribly, horribly wrong. Our guest today is Dr. Jim Stack. Jim is a professor of plant pathology here at Kansas State University, and the director of the Great Plains plant diagnostic network. His areas of research emphasis include detection and diagnosis of diseases in natural and agricultural plant systems, threat identification, vulnerability assessments, and risk analysis for natural, accidental and intentional threats to plant systems, as well as epidemiology and management of field crop diseases in the northern Great Plains. But as you'll hear, he was a great thinker about the food system in general, our conversation largely centered around the more quote unquote, wicked problems that humans face. And we definitely don't have all the solutions. But this was a really great and constructive discussion to have. Only by talking through ideas, are we going to make progress. Dr. Maureen Olewnik, the Global Food Systems Initiative coordinator, join Scott, Jim, and I for the talk as well. So we hope you enjoy Dr. Jim Stack. Welcome to the podcast.

Thank you very much. It's good to be here.

Been looking forward to this for a few weeks now. But before we get into the discussion that I hope all four of us are going to get to have. We always like to get your perspective on your background. So you tell us a little bit about yourself and how you got to be where you are today.

How did I get to be? Um, good fortune. I mean, I've been pretty blessed to have a series of great jobs throughout my career. Interests, interest and in are stemmed from probably having an Irish heritage. My folks from Ireland, so the topic of the day being hunger, and there's a lot of ties to Ireland. I tell the story often, you know, how bright my family is, they stayed in Ireland for the famine, and came over to the US for the Great Depression.

Good timing. Yeah

That's right. Yeah. But I think during the years when I was trying to figure out what I was gonna do with my life, I always, always been a news junkie. So at the time we were talking about famines in Ethiopia, we're talking about famines in Bangladesh, we're talking about famines, and Biafra. These are headlines, these are pictures on the evening news. So I think that leaves an impression on people when you see at some place in the world, there's a true shortage of food, either through war through production failures through climate impacts, oh, the these are real. We don't see that much in the United States, certainly not to that level. But these are very real events that happen up to this day. The, you know, World Food Program, World Bank, are projecting that in Yemen, Ethiopia, Southern Sudan, that it would be approximately a million deaths to food inadequacies over this two or three year period we're in right now. So this is a complex issue that we have not solved yet. And so I think that had a major bearing on the direction I took.

So when you know before we ever started the podcast, we always like to ask the guests what you know what they would like to talk about and sort of get a map for the conversation a little but had a time, when I asked you you said, you know, my interests are in food security. And they're broad, ranging from policy to production and distribution, said, as you know, there are many scientific issues embedded within the food security challenge, but equally important are the policy and philosophical considerations for all the science that is dedicated to addressing food security, perhaps we have not done enough thinking. Uh, so, you know, what was behind that? That response? And in, you know, given all these issues and things like that, well, you know, what do you think?

Well, so I'm guessing the podcast has a finite period of time. That question within, but I think people have called this a wicked problem, meaning that it's complex to the extent where one issue impacts the other. And this is clearly in that realm, this food security issue. But we automatically make assumptions about the solutions. Well, if there isn't enough food, it means we need to produce more. If there isn't enough food, it means we need to ship it from this location to that location. And I would argue that that thinking will ultimately exacerbate this problem, not solve it. And so that's what's behind that statement I made, I think, I think more thinking needs to go into this. So I don't know how to jump into this. But say, perhaps, our thinking backwards, is the way I like to explain it that we keep saying that the population is going to be this level. So we've been doing this for decades, say the population is going to be 4 billion, it's going to be 5 billion, it's going to be 6 billion, it's going to be 7 billion. And in order to feed six, 7 billion people, we need to produce more food. And we need to create the systems that get food to people who need food. So production and distribution. And that for those times when there is a natural disaster, famine, drought, whatever the natural catastrophe might be that we need to be able to move food to those people. So it's always about feeding the next population target. And right now we're saying and the puppet actually, the population models are pretty good. They've been very accurate over the last 20 to 30 years. So looking ahead, we have no reason to doubt that they're not too far off the mark. So we're going to have 9 billion people on the planet by 2043, quite likely to have 10 billion somewhere between 2055 and 2060. And now they're saying that that's not going to plateau, that we may in fact, have 11 billion people by the end of the century. And so what we need to produce more food, and we need better distribution systems, and we need better food aid systems so that we can produce more and and get it to the people who need it. Well, let's take that apart, and say, Well, what does that actually mean? Well, let's look at the challenges we have right now. Which are many, some of them are significant, the climate issues real, the climate is changing, there's ample data to support that. And that will have an impact on our ability to produce food. I would argue, okay, there are many issues in the food security, one of the most important water, and that doesn't get as much attention as it deserves approximately 70%, somewhere between 65 and 75% of the freshwater on the planet goes to agriculture. The last figures I saw were only about 24-25% of the agricultural lands are irrigated, but they provide 40% of our food. So there's no scenario under which we're going to feed the world's population without irrigated agriculture. That's off the table. And so we need to figure out a way if we're going to amp up our production systems that are going to require more water. Where's that coming from? At the same time, if you look at the original Millennium Development Goals of 1999, and now the Sustainable Development Goals of just a few years ago, if we look at those, what are they calling for? Well, they're calling for food security. No one should be food insecure, no one on the planet. Okay, so we're talking about 9 billion people are going to be food completely food secure. We're talking about enhancing public health to the level where People don't suffer from the chronic diseases that are plaguing us right now. As well as emerging infectious diseases, which have sudden and real impacts. And we're talking about raising standards of living. So if we do all those things, that means more energy, it means more water. And these are the very things that are challenging us in order to meet our food demands. So if we start, if we look at it from the perspective, we're always going to ramp up our systems to meet the advancing population, we never solve the problem, because the population will increase until it crashes. What I'm suggesting is we turn that around, that we learn from the biological systems that we study. And we know without exception, at least exception that I'm aware of, we know without exception, biological organisms stabilize according to the available nutrients. So I can predict how many bacterial cells there will be in a culture by the amount of carbon and nitrogen I put into that culture. I can predict predator and prey populations based on the relationships that have been long identified. And and that again, almost without exception, the exceptions come in when you haven't introduced infectious disease, or some other major climatic perturbation. But, you know, in general, predator prey populations follow certain behavioral patterns that we've been able to predict. Right now, we actually calculate how many cattle per hectare based on the productivity of the hectare. So the composition of the pasture grasses or whatever the the plant composition is, we can actually predict how many cattle or sheep that hectare can sustain. We have formulas for that. So my question is, why can't we do that for humans? Why can't we actually determine what is it reasonable population that the earth can sustain, without maximizing the pressure on the systems that we need for survival? So that's what I mean by we've got it backwards. instead of chasing population, we should be asking ourselves what's a reasonable population for the world so that we can develop systems that can meet that demand? And it doesn't mean withholding food from people who are hungry? It does not.

I was going to say this is going to be highly controversial.

Of course, it will be because that's our immediate thought is that it means withholding food does not mean that at all, it means basing the the the calculations on the productivity, the reasonable productivity of those systems, and letting our population stabilize around that mean, yes, it change, it means changing our thinking. But what's the alternative? The alternative is to accept the unspoken assumption that everything else is limitless. Now, is that a reasonable assumption I asked you are all these systems without limits? If they are all good, let's go.

Okay. So I've got a lot of questions. But I want to jump in first with a comparison to like mid late 20th century, right where 1970s, where people are worried about the population explosion. So there's no way the planet can sustain, you know, whatever, 6 billion people, right. And then we have the Green Revolution, right sort of things change. And in fact, we have technological solutions to actually ramp up productions in ways that people hadn't foreseen. So how do you compare that to the current situation?

Yeah, so it's a good question. And I haven't always thought the way I do now, you know, there's, it's been an evolution. But I've been working on this issue for probably about 20 years in terms of my thinking. And so how this is different. One of the people who referenced was Paul Ehrlich, from Stanford, used to have a title like, I think it's one of his books, Population Bomb, right? You know, so the implication being, that the world's population is going to increase to a point and then there'll be a major crash. I don't see that at all. I don't see anything that's going to cause that. So what I'm talking about is constantly doing the same thing over and over again, and not achieving the goal. So our goal is food security for everybody. It's public health for everybody. It's a reasonable standard of living for everybody. That's what I'm talking about. If we always look ahead to what the population is going to be and keep ramping up, knowing that what we've been doing for the last 50 years hasn't achieved the goal. Perhaps we need to think about that a little bit differently. So what I'm suggesting is developing systems developing the technologies doing the science necessary. To get to a point where the vast majority of people, the overwhelming majority of people are, in fact food secure, we don't have abject poverty. Will we have income inequality? Always, but not to the point where people are starving? Or or people are dying because they lack access to the medicines and the health care they need. I think we can do that part. So when I look at this hunger challenge, the title of one of the manuscripts and developing is feeding a growing population in a shrinking world. Well, that question really comes down to three types of questions. The first one is can we feed 9 billion 10 billion 11 billion? Yes, I think we can. We can do the science and we can develop the technologies necessary to feed an increasing population. But I think the outcomes the same, where we always have starving people, we always have people that need health care, because of the way we're approaching the problems. So I just look at it in that respect. So the first question is, can we Yes, we can do the science, we can develop the technologies necessary. We're already doing now. Amazing developments are going on? The world is populated with a lot of very bright people. So yes, we can do the science to get to where we want to be. The second type of question is, will we feed 9-10-11 billion people? Oh, those are questions of policy. And our track record and policy is awful. It's just abysmal. And we haven't demonstrated an ability to learn from the failures in policy. And so I look at that and say, you know, will we? I think, yes, eventually, but not before a lot of people suffer unnecessarily, because we didn't do what needed to be done in a timeframe to affect the outcome in a meaningful way. So I think, you know, that's the second question, will we? The third questions more difficult? It's the one we dealt with to start. And that question is, should we? So the first two questions are scientific in nature, you can have a reasonable discussion, and maintain it being intellectual in nature. But the third one is become it's more philosophical, and so quickly, transitions into emotion. And it's very difficult to have that conversation. And again, I reiterate, the goal is actually the same. It's to ensure that we don't have a disproportionate number of people without access to health care and food. That doesn't even make sense in today's world. We already have the technologies, we've already done the science necessary to feed our current population, yet, hunger persists, we should be challenging ourselves on why that is. Right.

Good. So So then to be clear, then I think at least one different and there's a lot. We're all I'm sure gonna start jumping in on but one of the differences here as I was reading some of what you're saying a little pessimistically to start with, right through, right, oh, we're, and it's pessimistic on some views, right, in terms of like, sort of our policy and other things. But in terms of our ability to feed people, it's not pessimistic there, right. So so so what, what I was hearing for a moment was, Oh, we're not going to be able, there's limited resources, water, etc. We're not going to be able to feed all these people, we have to figure out how to limit the population. But what you just said wasn't that was right. Yeah.

It's a matter of fact, I'm an optimist by nature. Yeah. So we are going to solve these. The question is the timeframe. So if I was a young person, looking at a career, I'd be excited to jump into this arena. Because your career would be meaningful, you'd be solving some problems that have been intractable for as long as we've been walking upright. And so I, I think we have in place the educational systems that are necessary to generate the people that are going to solve these prompts. All that's going to play out, the question is, does it play out by 2050? Or does it play out by 2150? And that's what I'm saying is, is if we can change our thinking now, we can shorten that timeframe till we get to where we need to be. And I go back to what's our real thinking on limits? Are there any limits in this world? Is there a limit to freshwater? Well, no, we can desalinate the oceans. So now we have a lot of water. Is there a limit to land area? Well, yes, kind of but we keep ramping up yield per hectare. So you know, what is that limit? I don't think people don't it's actually a really good book. Charles man's the author. Oh, the wizard and the Prophet. It's very good book about that. And it's basically a profile I'll have Norman Borlaug and just went blank another person that they kind of had a co evolutionary pathway. But they looked at the world differently. One was a pessimist. One was an optimist. One was a technologist, one was a philosopher, you know, the, you know, they are social scientists, I should say, rather than philosopher, but, you know, they looked at the same situations from different perspectives and drew different conclusions. But it's an excellent read, and it deals with this, do we believe there are limits? And the problem I think we have is nobody's even asking that question in a meaningful way. We talk about sustainability, we talk about resilience. But those terms get tossed around so much. Now, they actually don't have any meaning whatsoever, because they're applied to everything. So I don't know if that answered your question or not. But..

so a couple of things. The first being, you know, a lot of people seem to think that the as conditions improve, and especially women have access to education in the developing world, and things like that, that the the population in those areas actually starts to decrease, right? Families have fewer, fewer children, things like that. So the idea is sort of that, you know, once we reach that 10 or 11, in the Senate, a living comes up that it'll sort of plateau. I mean, that's, that's the argument that I've heard. Second question is, you know, if we, if we all intellectually agree that, you know, there's a carrying capacity, and we need to, you know, slow the population down and things like that. You mentioned the emotional part, if we start putting that out there and saying, you know, maybe people should be having fewer children or something like that to slow population growth. How do you even How do you even start to approach that problem, because it's so emotional, and people want to have their own ability to make their own decisions, right?

Again, it's about how you frame this issue. The goal is not to control population. The goal is to create a system, an ecosystem, a planet Earth, that is appropriate for a certain population level. So it's not focusing on the population, it's focusing on the systems that support people. And so you, you identified a few things which are right on the mark, we already know how to do this. When you increase public health, when you increase education, birth rates decline. So we already know how to do this, we're just not doing it very effectively. Sometimes it's very difficult. If you just look at what's going on in the Congo, right now, with the Ebola outbreak, you have rebel groups, and you have populations that are attacking health care providers, because they believe that the vaccine is going to cause AIDS. And so education is, is absolutely critical illness, everywhere. So we already know how to do this, we're just we've just focused on the wrong thing. We're focusing on food production, we're focusing on being able to supply enough to a future population without focusing on the needs of the current population to the level necessary to affect the trajectory. Now people say, Oh, well, if the population gets too big a disease is going to come along, like avian influenza or something. And it's going to take out the population. I've run some numbers, we have some models who play with run some numbers, even if you go back to this Spanish Influenza of 1918. And use those numbers, which vary somewhere between 30 and 100 million people dead globally.

Let's take which as a percentage was really significant, right?

Yes, absolutely. But even if you take that number, and you adjust it, it's not going to change the fact that if we continue to do what we're doing, at some point, we're going to hit 10 or 11 billion people. Because nothing's changed. All it's done is affected the it displaces the curve. But the curve still continues when that's resolved. And right now we have in place mitigation measures and response protocols that are going to minimize the number impacted. Well, what about war? Well, if you look at war, I mean, okay, this is gonna sound really awful. Not enough people die from wars anymore. You know, you go back 100 years and we talked about millions dying in a world war, but war has become technology oriented and strategic in nature. And so we spent a decade in Iraq, and 4000. People thought that's awful. But it didn't really impact the population. And that's I think you look at what are the major factors that could change that trajectory, they don't have the same level of impact anymore.

So in other words, I mean, these things are just the population is gonna keep on increasing, and even some things that slowed down even if we had a major disease or right sort of it's not, it's not changing the trajectory that we're on. It's just pushing, pushing the date further down,

Barring the zombie apocalypse. Yeah.

When you say that, we need to think we need to change the way we think. Who's the we and how do you impact? How do you move that needle on the we?

Yeah, so it's a good question. We have national, we have international organizations that have accepted some responsibility for food security, and for public health. Off wow, this guy, I don't mean this to be too critical. But the nature of international organizations is it's difficult to actually do what needs to get done. So you only have to look at the Ebola outbreak of was it 13 or 14, to see that it was clear to a lot of epidemiologists with a group now that predicted the trajectory of that, back in March of that year, World Health Organization stepped in in August. By that time, it was far too late to affect the outcome. And you did so you look at the Food and Agricultural Organization, the United Nations and the World Food Program. They've rallied around the notion that to solve this food security problem, we need further intensification of agricultural production systems. And we need better global trade systems. We need to bring more developing nations into the global economy to global marketplace. Well, there are consequences to that they're being realized right now. One of the consequences of intensification, of course, is more inputs to get more output. And there are implications for that. With respect to trade networks, we're already seeing the massive global mixing of path pests and pathogens that are having major impacts on our ability to produce enough food. Just look what happened in Bangladesh in 2016. And that was a consequence of the global trade system of moving wheat seed. Well, grain from one location to another.

For the listeners that wouldn't know what that is. Can you explain sorry.

So in 1985, a new disease of wheat emerged in Brazil. And it it stayed in Brazil for almost a decade, causing increasing impacts, like a lot of diseases, very weather dependent. So when the weather conditions and it's been linked to El Nino, when an El Nino comes in, you have epidemics. And this is a very impressive disease. So we've seen 500 1000, hectare fields, all debt. So it's very quick. It's very impressive. In the mid 90s 95, or so it was introduced to Bolivia, probably trade farmers bringing seed across the border. And then one or two years later into Paraguay, same route of entry. It stayed in South America until February of 2016, when there was a massive epidemic in Bangladesh, a Bongo we it's the second most important provider of calories in Bangladesh. And they but they don't produce enough so they historically imported from the Ukraine. Ukraine had two political problems, unable to make that meet the demand for Bangladesh, Bangladesh on the open marketplace, this is the suspicion you can never fully Prove these things. Week gets imported from South America and the genomics and genetics have been done on this. It's clear that the outbreak in Bangladesh was the population that came from South America. That's very clear. And so it was introduced. We is a very important prompt grown on more acres globally than any other crop. It provides 17% of the protein in the human diet. So it is the crop we have to protect, but we have a system or pathogen that moves in seed. And we have a global distribution system that's moving seed across the planet. That's just one example that's happening in every commodity it's happening. It's everywhere. That's the way we do business. now. So again, you go and say, Well, what should we be doing? Well, instead of focusing on prevention, which is overrated, we should be focusing on surveillance in early detection. So we can hit these things when they're small, and not wait until we have a flaming epidemic to respond. So there are a lot of things we can be doing better than we are doing currently. But it does take a change in thinking.

So what about the trade itself? Right, and, and the general approach of increasing production in certain areas, and then distribution, right, sort of, because there's, there's concern about sort of the global network and a whole range of issues. It's not just sort of the possibilities of transfer of pests and pathogens, but also, sort of further instability, like when prices change, and you have to, you know, get your food from other places rather than sort of local autonomy, right, or producing your food. And, you know, this is my area. So I know there's a lot of questions that come up when, when we're talking about this model of increasing production in certain areas and delivering.

So it's a very complicated issue. Imagine, I don't even know where to begin on this one. But let me begin here. A few years ago, a group published a paper, recommending that we create global committees to regulate the production of food, so that if we do an analysis, we would determine that it's more environmentally friendly, it's more energy efficient to produce maize corn in Iowa, than it is in Kenya. So Kenya should not be allowed to produce corn. We should grow it in Iowa and ship it to Kenya. The same with water, we should be deciding that we should not be irrigating crops in western Kansas. That's dryland rain fed agriculture. So they should not be allowed to irrigate there. So there's, they actually published a paper on this, and they believe that I can't think of a worse model for achieving sustainability than what they propose us. So say, why just say, What could possibly go wrong?

Well, yeah, I mean, not to mention all the people who are going to be left behind in systems like that, right. I mean, okay.

It's a disaster in thinking I just, at least, that's my opinion. So you look at the trade issue, you know, we're moving so many problems with this, I think our our eagerness to bring some of these countries into the global marketplace, superseded our thinking on what was necessary for them to do that safely. So we should have been simultaneously investing in their infrastructure to ensure in this a double edge, we to ensure that what they were putting in the marketplace was clean material. The other is that what was being shipped in they were prepared to handle. And there is a long list of pests and pathogens that have been introduced into Africa on food aid. Because you have to move quickly. There's an economist Charles parings, from Arizona, who, who's he dedicated his career to studying the impacts from invasive species. And he said once that a cargo container has a sampling of the organisms every place it's been. And there's wisdom in that because that's, in fact, what we find hitchhikers. on everything. We're moving organisms in wooden wooden furniture. I have a couple of slides our use of electric guitars manufactured in China. When they arrived at the port in Australia, there was a hole in the assumption was it was a quality issue that they had drilled too many holes for the faceplate on this electric guitar. When they pulled the faceplate off, it was an exit hole, there were galleries, inset galleries all throughout this wooden guitar, we're moving insects and everything. The same with pathogens and pests. It's just there, there are consequences to the global movement of people and goods. If you look at what we know about evolution, their evolutionary consequences to this as well, if you look at what how we studied evolution, when I was going through the system, we learned about island biogeography geography that you know that if you had two islands separated by a certain distance, that the species would grow away from each other would evolve away from each other and genetic differences would take so we all know that the Galapagos a great place for having studied that. Okay, but those geographic boundaries now are irrelevant. We're putting plants and plant products on airplanes and flying them over mountains, or putting plants and plant products on ships and transporting them across the seas. So the geographic boundaries that once kept organisms confined to certain areas are irrelevant. The consequences of that are we're finding that our concepts of taxonomic separation, don't actually hold up. So an example being in the UK, they imported plants from South America, they ended up in a greenhouse, in a nursery, on a bench with local plants, to different species, that should not be able to interact, actually hybridized and created a new species, a hybrid species, we would, if you do your pest risk assessment, that wouldn't have been one of the options. So these two things hybridized. And the scary part is the phenotype of the hybrid would not have been predictable, based on the phenotype of the two parents. So how do you do a risk assessment, you can't sit that's just one example. There are others. So there are consequences to this global trade that we haven't fully grasped. We're making so much money, and it's solving so much problem. I don't think anybody wants to grapple with it right now. But the investment and the research necessary to deal with those problems, is wildly inadequate. The investment in the infrastructure we need for early detection and surveillance is wildly inadequate for what we're doing.

So, you know, I think part of what I get out of what you're saying is that a lot of these issues are consequences of incentive structures that are not well aligned to they're aligned to certain groups, but but not others. Right. In, you know, we we tend to focus on, you know, trying to find solutions through technology, and you know, hard science, when some of these might be, you know, social science issues and that sort of stuff. So you've laid out a whole bunch of, you know, areas that we need to think about, what do you what do you think about as far as solutions?

Well, yeah, let me let me follow up first, sure. happening, internet link, follow up. Something you said there about the social side. The social implications are staggering. And we already have examples of this. So if we look at the Arab Spring, we all remember the Arab Spring, okay. 2010, spread across North Africa into the Middle East, and we are still suffering, the ramifications of that Arab Spring. So what was the cause of that? Well, there were many underlying cultural problems, social problems, and political problems, lots of those. But the proverbial last straw was the sudden increase in the price of wheat, that the government jacked up the price of wheat sent the food vendor into the street, he ml itself emulates. And pretty soon you have massive protests in Tunisia that spread across the region, the proverbial last straw was food. Now fast forward, what's going on right now in the Mediterranean area, in Italy, and 2013, there was an outbreak of a disease in olives. In southern Italy. It's called Quick decline of Hollows, and it's caused by a bacterium. So it started to spread. And the government came in and does what phytosanitary agencies do, they slapped a quarantine on it. And then they decided to do an eradication zone. So they went in and started cutting down the trees. But this isn't like cutting down a field of corn. These trees are over 1000 years old. And these trees weren't just planted by the current generation. They've been in my family for 14 generations. This is a major issue, you had people climbing up in the trees and tying themselves to the trees to prevent the government from cutting them down. This, the local populations blame the scientists for bringing that in, because they were studying this organism at the local Experiment Station. Now, ultimate genetic analyses proved it wasn't the same organism, they the scientists weren't really responsible, but the scientists are actually facing charges and potential jail time for not reporting it in a timely manner. And so there were these massive social upheavals. Were This is present tense, this is still playing out. And social scientists are doing a really nice job of documenting it, give them a lot of kudos, they jumped right in and said, Okay, how do we sort this out? And the problem is scientists don't talk to the public very well, or very often, and we need to deal with that. But the social implications are massive. The Bangladesh story I told you earlier with the week PLAs pathogen, so the government came in and knowing the history in South America, they decided to eradicate, the only way to eradicate was they burn the fields. The problem was a lot of the acreage in Bangladesh is farmed by people who don't own the land. So they grow the wheat, to sell to the market, to get the money to pay the lease on the land, and what's left buys the food for their family. Now the government comes in and burns all that they have nothing and it drives them deeper into poverty is a bad too, the social implications of what I'm talking about are enormous. So I just want to toss that in based on your comment there.

And that's just a really important thing to pay attention to, you know, when we're talking about food security issues, right? It's not just sort of how many people are, are starving, or how many people are hungry, right, or sort of order and poor health due to not having sufficient nutrition, right, sort of it's, it's it's huge, as you just said, in sort of, there's a lot of stories that I think are like this, right?

So, there's the Yeah, the poverty hunger cycle. So people who are hungry, become malnourished, they earn less in the market, there's lots of data on this, they earn less in the marketplace. And they drop into poverty. Those in poverty, can't afford to buy enough food, or the right kinds of food become further malnourished. And that system, that cycle just continues. So we need to alleviate poverty, in order to eradicate hunger, but we need to eradicate hunger in order to alleviate poverty. So how do you break into that?

So do you think that these are things that we know some Mike, so you said, Well, we already know, we already have technological solutions to, you know, increasing production, and at least in some ways, and we'll find more, right? Some of the social science on this is seems to be pretty good, too. I mean, sort of this is similar, you know, on trade issues, you know, if you just open up trade, it's gonna hurt some people, right? And so, you know, it might lower cost overall, right, you know, but somebody who was producing the thing, right is now not going to be able to compete, right? And sort of similarly, like you want to go and sort of for, for the population as a whole for the country as a whole, eradicate this disease, stop it right and stop a greater disaster. Right? If you do that, without dealing with the repercussions on this, and the people who are growing that land, right, growing on that land, right, then often there's this, you know, a lot of damage that has now been done, right? So do our, is it something that people just overlook? In general, when we would jump in and do this? Or is there something we don't understand about some of these repercussions?

So one of the challenges we have for all of these issues, the bottom line, is the bottom line. And so it's about money. I think what we're seeing and I don't know the number, but if you look at then the number of countries that made that transition from poor and underdeveloped or lesser developed whatever terminology we'd like to use into that middle tier of countries that are, you know, becoming economically sound, and players in the marketplace. If you look at those almost without exception, that proportion of the population involved in agriculture plummet, and the viability of sustainability or just like the word of ice, but people who live off the land plummets, they can't that's not economically viable. In in the economic systems that are surviving, that are thriving. And so that's where we need social scientists integrated into these decisions were making to help in the transition from a sustenance based existence to having a place in the market. And that involves education, again, involves a different way of looking at the market. The United States, the biggest mistake we could make is believing none of this can happen here. That would be a horrific, none of that. None of what that we could have hunger than we could have a declining public health. We're already seeing a couple cities. Yeah, right. And so, but we act as though that can't happen here. Because we have such an advanced economy, it only 100 years ago, and that's just five generations, where we had food riots in Minnesota and Wisconsin, and it has happened here in the past, it can happen now. I think we're not paying attention to the things that are going to ultimately matter in my opinion.

How do we pay more attention to these things right as policy issues do we need? Do we need to get people in government? That's it You know, pay attention to these things or at least know who to who to listen to, or, you know what I mean? What do you think right now, you know, we've talked about these these wicked problems, right? There's a lot of implications. There's a lot of potential for, you know, positive things and a lot of potential for disaster. Right. You know, right here right now, you know, where do we need to go? What do you think?

Yeah, so a lot again, in that, but let me try to condense that. But right now, because and I don't remember the exact number. So I'm gonna throw a number I don't remember it is 80% of the population, the United States lives within 15 miles of a grocery store that sells whatever you want seven days a week, 24 hours a day. So foods on anyone's agenda. It's just not because it's available. And so far, it's affordable by most people.

Okay, so only, even relatively, right. So most people, right, yeah.

Only a very small proportion of the population is actually impacted by the cost of food. We do have certain issues. There are exceptions. Yeah. Food deserts. Yeah.

And I thought the numbers of people who are food insecure, even in like Manhattan are pretty high. But yeah.

Well, so some of that goes to definition. Yeah, right. What's food insecurity? Is anybody starving in Manhattan? No, do they have the so what is food security, it's about access. And it's about affordability in our access. It's available and affordable. And it's also about culturally relevant food. So not everybody eats everything. So it's, there are a lot of things tied up in food security. But going back to what do we do, I think we need to address the things that could impact. So this issue of pests and pathogens, we're not going to get out of the way, the only thing you need to know about trade rules is that trade rules. And if it gets down to a decision between taking a risk, based on the health of a system verse is the economics of the system, the decision almost always goes to the economics. So we will import things at a risk. If it means a potential economic impact. That's just the way we do business. So if that's the way we need to be overt about this, if that's the way we want to do business, let's put in place the systems that minimize the impacts of those decisions. I don't think those conversations are we avoid having those conversations, rather than having them and putting in place what we need to have to protect us. So I think some of this is just having the open discussions of about identifying what the real issues are associated with the way we do business now.

So So is detection sufficient? How much you have to deal because a lot of this issue is sort of production sort of in the in places where, you know, trade is occurring in the infrastructure and policies, right in places where they introduce greater risk to the people who are then right, or the place that we're importing, right? The food or whatever it is that we're talking about, right. So do you think detections enough or sort of we have to somehow impact policies sort of everywhere? What do you look at it?

We have simultaneously two issues being bantered about by FAO Food and Agricultural Organization. One is further intensification. And they indicated 90% of the increase food that we need will come from further intensification of the lands that are already under cultivation. That's a big ask. At the same time, they're saying we need to move to to low input sustainability that's coming out of the same organization. Kind of ought to be talking. So I look at it. Let's expand that out. We have a lot of academic institutions, government agencies, nongovernmental organizations have bought into the concept that we need intense, further intensification of existing agricultural systems. That's the agricultural community. If you go to the environmental community, they're publishing papers saying the worst thing that ever happened to the planet was intensified agriculture. Perhaps we ought to put them in the same room at the same time and hash this out. The same is true with the invasive species and the the biodiversity decline group. They look at agriculture as causing species loss as causing species decline. And they're recommending doing what we do for risk assessment. What do we do? We I look at where an organism occurs and the environmental conditions that allow it to flourish at that location. And then we do climate matching around the planet. And Harrington probably talks about this, but you do climate matching around the planet and say, the same conditions exists here and here. So let's not move stuff from here to those locations, because if it gets introduced, it may flourish. So that's kind of how we do a pest risk assessment. Well, the, the environmental group is looking at it and using the same technology and saying, Well, these species are threatened in this environment. So let's look around the planet and see where they would do well, and we'll move that whole community there. Well, that's kind of inconsistent and thinking, because that creating the opportunity for them to become invasive, because our ability to predict how organisms are going to behave in new environments is limited at best. And so again, these people ought to be in the same room. At the same time we go to meetings, we go to conferences that are theme oriented. So the cross fertilization of these ideas, is not taking place, at a level adequate to actually come up with the solutions you're looking for. We, in my opinion,

Yeah. On campus, as you know, the global food systems, that's you and I have had this conversation several times. So what we're trying to do is figure out how to get people just within our little university or at K State into a room get that diverse population. How do you do that? You know, you mentioned earlier that you were doing presentations around the world on this? How do you tackle that huge problem of getting that sociology group with the agronomy group with the plant pathology group with the political? How do you do that?

So it's like any other enterprise, in the in the Human Sphere, it's about relationships, I think you have to seek out people and trying to do that, get a grant that would allow you to hold a workshop first, to bring people of different perspectives together, and say, let's let's have a conversation has to be the right people, because not everybody can have these conversations without feeling threatened. So you have to put these people in the room and at least identify the issues in a clear manner that you can have a larger meeting on, and then get those perspectives erred in front of everyone in front of the different perspectives, so that you can at least understand the opposing viewpoint on what you're doing it until the understandings there, you can't get to a point of identifying potential solutions. So I think the start is start developing relationships across these disciplinary boundaries that we have.

I was gonna say, I mean, there's some of this, you know, is that we as a, as a society need to think more about how we have we instill values into, you know, children, so that they grow up, you know, being more willing to engage in these sorts of things, right? Because I mean, a lot of this, I mean, a lot of this is human issues, and human relation issues and human values issues as far as what incentivizes humans, that sort of some of its evolutionarily driven, obviously. But I mean, do we need to be thinking about how we, how the next generations should be approaching these things, and talking to much younger people about this to solve them in the future?

So absolutely, yes, we need to do that. It's not enough. I think we need a lot more interaction between scientists and policymakers in a more meaningful way. So please, let me clarify, everything I said we need to do is going on at some level. So I didn't mean to imply in any sense that none of this is happening. This is all happening. But from my perspective, I have a sense of urgency about it right now. I think we are crossing into territory, that is going to make it more different. No. That's wrong, not more difficult. I think we're crossing into territory where the impacts are going to be greater. So for example, that issue I brought up Do you believe in limits? You know, at some point, there are limits. And if we look at our ability to produce food, right now we can produce far more than we need. Okay, we know that based on loss estimates, which I think are over estimated, but even if they're half correct, we can produce far more food than is necessary to feed the current population. We can do that. But if we keep adding people without change During the way we're doing business, the surplus is going to narrow, so our margin for error narrows. Now when we have a prolonged drought in Australia that affects wheat exports or a prolonged drought in the Ukraine that affects exports, both of which we have experienced in the previous 15 years, the impacts are going to be greater because there's just not enough to satisfy that demand. And then you look at the, again, the redistribution of pests and pathogens at increasing rates. So we have this tendency to think we should focus on catastrophes. So I will ask you this, you know, we're worried about that avian influenza strain the h five and one that's going to come around, and that one strain of virus is going to take out 20% of the world's population, we worry about another SARS we worry about FMD coming in, because it alone, even though it it as a disease, it's not going to do that. But as a market effect, it's going to devastate the cattle industry, we worry about those one organisms. So in some of the food security models that we play with, for a variety of reasons I won't go into we've identified 30% displacement in the mean as catastrophic. So for any population, that would be catastrophic if there was a 30%. So the question I have is, what's the difference between a single organism causing a 30% displacement, or five organisms, each causing a 6%, displacement, still have 30% loss. That's what I see is changing right now, because of the magnitude of change. And we know from a lot of experience, that there's a delay, from the time of introduction of these organisms to when they realize their full impacts. And China's seeing that right now in a big way. They, they opened up the doors in the 90s. And right now, they're just stomping out fires from invasives. Well, that's going on globally. At some point, we have to pay for that decision, or, in fact, lack of a decision. So I think we can do all of this. It's a matter of the timing. And I think what happens now as we go from the 7.3, or 4 billion that we're at now, up to 10 billion, our margin for error shrinks, because we're not going to be producing that much more food, that we maintain the margin for error. I don't see that.

So I know you don't have all the solutions. You don't you know, you're not saying that at all right. But but I know it's on your view, not just food intensification, delivery, right? Sort of just production, right and better delivery. So I'm What do you want to have happen. And I asked this, because I've heard you say education several times, right. And I'm very, in general skeptical about our ability just to sort of have information out there and sort of even talk to people and sort of have things improve, I mean, a lot of what you're talking about needs policy decisions that are, you know, going to change the way we interact, right change, you know, shift money or shift resources to, to places that need their infrastructure improved, tried to sort of make them better able to handle invasives coming in, or less, less likely to send them out. And you know, that these kinds of things, right, so this isn't just sort of, if we let the dollar determine where we're gonna buy our produce from. Nothing's gonna change, right? We run all these risks. So so like, how do we just in general, like what what do we look? What are you looking for, to kind of come up on top right to sort of start to address these issues besides just like us sitting here, and our dollar is gonna determine where we're buying produce from, and then we'll have some detection mechanisms. Right. So what do you what do you want overall, like the picture to look like?

So I know you don't have all the solutions. You don't you know, you're not saying that at all right. But but I know it's on your view, not just food intensification, delivery, right? Sort of just production, right and better delivery. So I'm What do you want to have happen. And I asked this, because I've heard you say education several times, right. And I'm very, in general skeptical about our ability just to sort of have information out there and sort of even talk to people and sort of have things improve, I mean, a lot of what you're talking about needs policy decisions that are, you know, going to change the way we interact, right change, you know, shift money or shift resources to, to places that need their infrastructure improved, tried to sort of make them better able to handle invasives coming in, or less, less likely to send them out. And you know, that these kinds of things, right, so this isn't just sort of, if we let the dollar determine where we're gonna buy our produce from. Nothing's gonna change, right? We run all these risks. So so like, how do we just in general, like what what do we look? What are you looking for, to kind of come up on top right to sort of start to address these issues besides just like us sitting here, and our dollar is gonna determine where we're buying produce from, and then we'll have some detection mechanisms. Right. So what do you what do you want overall, like the picture to look like?

Yeah, to go to that education issue? To me, it's not about providing information. It's about building the educational infrastructure in these countries to self serve. Okay. Yeah, this distinction between just providing information, because when you do that, when they educate themselves, their solutions will be centric, so that the solutions won't be imposed by some World Organization, or by another country that's providing them aid, which we do if you look at what's going on in Africa, with respect to investment from China, Africa is is got a lot of issues right now. So because some of those countries have been so poor for so long, they have little, they don't have as many options as we do. So for example, agreeing to allow another country to fund a port in their country that allows them to tie in into the global marketplace. So that's a good thing. But in exchange for land. So you look at Saudi Arabia, look at South Korea, you look at several countries are buying land in Africa, China big time, lots of land, keeping it in agriculture, but to export to their countries. That's China's food security strategy, is have Africa produce the food. Now, you could argue that, well, Africans can get paid for that food. And with that money, they'll buy the food they need. But if we look at that strategy, it hasn't worked so far for everyone. And so I think there are challenges to that model. And if there's a political difference, I mean, just look at what's going on. Now, with respect to tariffs. There was a political disagreement between the United States and Mexico. And we said, we're going to impose tariffs on what's coming in, that would affect the price of food in a big way. So I think you're never fully secure. And most people look at countries in Africa and southern Asia as that's where the food security problem is. But Japan's not food secure with respect to food production, they buy a lot of their food, their populations much greater than what they produce. And that's true of multiple countries, that they have the financial means to buy food. So with the current model of letting the global marketplace solve food security, what that means is you have to have enough resource to buy that food. And almost without exception, if commodity independent, it goes to the person who pays the most. So your poor, stay poor, and food insecure, while you're rich, get the food and the increasing economic well being. So I don't think this global distribution system is a long term solution for the planet, I just don't see it. And let's think what are the consequences of global marketplace, we've talked about challenges of climate change of water, if these things, when you move food, it takes energy takes seldom more food movement, because we're going to add 28% more people to the planet. That means moving more and more food that takes more and more energy to do that. And when you move food, you move water. So even our grains that are somewhere between nine and 14%, moisture, when you're talking about millions of metric tons, you're moving water from one location to you're taking it out of some of these places. But now imagine tomatoes that are 80% Water, most of what you're moving is water. So the two problems that we really need to get our hands around water and energy are exacerbated by this model for food security.

Yeah, along with the various nutrients and things like that, that are at least this point considered non renewable, and that sort of thing. Absolutely.

So I mean, so yeah, we're going to solve all these issues. It's the timeframe that I'm really trying to draw attention to. We're going to fix all of this.

Yeah, so I'm way more skeptical about Yeah, I was gonna say, how do we solve these things? Right?

So because if you just look back through history, there are times when challenges look insurmountable. But it's a question of how long are we willing to wait until we do what needs to be done. And our history is, we're willing to wait pretty long, you know, we have to be dragged kicking and screaming into meaningful change. But we always get there. And it was Winston Churchill who said, you know, he loved Americans, because they always did the right thing, after they tried every other alternatives. So it's, you know, change is hard. Some of these things are hard, because people benefit by one direction or another. And so you're pitting who's going to benefit most by making any management decision or any policy change. So, you know, right now, the World Trade Organization is completely on board with trade as a solution to the economy. There's not a single country that I can think of that hasn't identified increased exports, as a solution to their economic woes. Everybody says that, well, there are consequences to that. And there's a limit to how many of the problems that that actually can solve without creating new problems. What I tell my students is, every generation solves a few problems and creates a few more and these are the ones who are leaving to the next generation. And so we will solve these, it's just a matter of the sense of urgency that's appropriate to the magnitude of the problem. And, and we all see that the same way.

Right? So I guess, I guess one of the main issues here, though, and you've highlighted very, very well, how much the issues are about, you know, international cooperation, right, and recognition of how interconnected, so many of the issues are, right. But the solutions are gonna have to be along the lines of, you know, if we want to solve the food security issues, and we want to sort of addressed our own biosecurity here, like in the US, we have to think about investing more in other countries, right, sort of their basic instance, infrastructure in their education. Right. And so, I mean, this, this seems like, right, and maybe in their, their agricultural systems, and sort of a whole variety of I mean, this seems like the kind of thing that would, you know, begin to start to address what you're talking about. But then we have to figure out, like, how and who, and you know, what way? And are we really willing to do this? And do we really see this and coordination problems are really, really hard, right, sort of, like, from our own point of view, it's really hard to see the long term implications of sort of a certain way of doing things that are right, you know, where we're given what how the system works now, right. It's in our own best interest to do something else.

Yeah, I agree. So really good point. And Maureen, and I've actually had several conversations about this. It's, there are issues of scale involved here. And I'm not a fan, I might have been clear in some of my comments. I'm not a fan of top down. I do not believe there's a solution to global food security, or insecurity, that doesn't even make sense to me. Because the problems not the same everywhere, that the limitations are not the same everywhere. And this is why I was saying before, we need to build the like the educational and public health infrastructure locally. And we're I mean, I've talked about is, you know, perhaps what we need to do is get a teams of people involved, scientists have different disciplines, both the social and in the hard science side, and look at an area. So whether that's a village or a region, or Guapa, but identify an area and say, Let's improve the quality of life in this area, how do we what what's missing? What do we need to do? What do they need to do? Help them build the systems they need to improve their quality of life, food security, public health, education, those types of systems, we can do that. And then you replicate that until it doesn't work. And then you find out what, why it doesn't work here. And you create the solutions for that location. If enough of us do that. We can address all these things. Because to me, it's a series of local problems. It's not a global problem.

And do you think it's a series of local scientific problems, like problems that science can address? Or is because I mean, you said social science too, but sort of but we know a lot of you know, what is needed? Right? And but worse, actually, there's a tension between sort of what, what's going to be good for, you know, one group of people and what's going to be good for another group of people looking at that group of people? Right?

Yeah. So it's not just about science. To me, science is not the limiting part about this is policy. Okay, here's how I describe it. Maybe this was the image we're talking about. So describe it. If you want to be successful, you need to make good decisions. And in order to make good decisions, you need information. And what controls the flow through that process is, is certainly the beginning. part about that, from information to decisions is experience. Experience allows you to, to sort out relevant from irrelevant information. It allows you to look at past decisions to know which ones were successful and which ones weren't. So the beginning part of that from information to decisions is largely influenced by experience. While we're rich and experience of hunger, we've got millennia of experience in hunger and famines. But when we look at the second half of that equation, from decisions to success, what guides that part is policy, because policy provides the framework for decision making. So it steers your decisions in a certain direction. If you don't have the policy, right, you don't end up where you want to end up. So we need to put more thought into the policy. And we haven't been successful in doing that. And again, I think some of that goes back to the thinking that we have a global problem. We don't have a global problem, we have a network of problems that don't have the same issues involved. So we need to change how we look at this hunger problem, this food security problem, it's not the same everywhere. It's not the water issues, not the same everywhere. The land availability issues, not the same everywhere, none of these things, the corruption in government, the wars, the history of any given country, are not the same. And it will and you know, the all you have to do is look at Europe, we have the European Union. But yet they struggle at times to make progress in a given area. And it's not for lack of desire. It's because we're talking about different countries, we're not talking about different states of the same country, we're talking about different countries that have different institutional cultures, they have different cultures, they have different languages, oftentimes, they don't have the same bureaucratic structure. So the agencies that are tasked with doing different things, they're not even the same. So it becomes more difficult to look at this as an aggregate problem, instead of an individual problem.

Is part of the some of the issue that that some of the people that need to put in resources, whether that be money would be one of them are not the people who are experiencing the problem. And there needs to be more sacrifice on the parts of some people to as inputs to help these other groups to get going. Right? It's sort of like a slap in my backyard. But like, you know, if you want to help the food security of another country or another part of even the United States, that's gonna take a sacrifice in resources from somebody else in the United States to do that. Right? And is there not the not necessarily the Will there to do it in some cases?

Yeah. So if I understood your point, I think this goes to that scale issue. And the scale is not even going to be the same in different places. Sometimes it's going to be very local, sometimes it'll be regional. And so the ability to cooperate, is absolutely critical. And that'll be defined by their history. And you only have to look at different regions of the world where conflict has been going on for 1000 years, to know that that's easier said than done to solve. So scale becomes an important issue in this. And again, that's why I'm kind of going to, it's not a single issue. And if you want to make real progress, we have to kind of back off from that. You know, there's a the old adage, this is when you can tell how old I'm getting to kind of remember these things, but you know, teach someone or give someone a fish, you feed him for a day, teach him how to fish you feed him for life. I think we need to incorporate that thinking into how we're approaching this problem. I don't think the solution is let's figure out a way to ship them enough food. I don't like that as the solution, because it exacerbates so many other issues.

I mean, I don't I don't I don't think so either. But what I'm just saying is that there there needs to be resources for somebody to do the teaching. Right?

Sure. And that's not always the case. You know, what we can find it, just look at the impact Bill and Melinda Gates are having. That's real impact, what they're doing. It's impressive that they've dedicated their lives now and their resources to making real change for folks, it can be done. And there probably many people like them, maybe not with as much resource. But we need to kind of reorient the thinking of some of our government agencies that do these things, to look at the world a little bit differently.

Yeah, and so I think it's super important to recognize that that ever, like very much is hit. It's not one problem, right. There's not a single issue, there's a whole bunch of different issues. I think that's great. And we need to recognize that and, you know, I probably have, there's a lot more we could probably talk about, of course, right about sort of what that might look like down the end. But the main thing that I think that I that I want to take away from right here, from what you're saying is the shift to paying attention to these issues, not so much what the what the policies are going to look like, right, or sort of whether we can actually do it right, but just sort of look the food security, the global food security issue, right, and how we make the planet sustainable for, you know, however many billion people that will be at whatever, you know, point is an issue very much not just in production and distribution, right, sort of, there's no way we address that problem without hitting all sorts of policy, all sorts Economic all sorts of education and all sorts of infrastructure issues, right? So, so you've been going around talking to different people? How successful have you been in sort of convincing people to be paying more attention to this?

Well, as you might imagine, I get mixed reaction. You know, it takes time to influence someone's thinking, I'm okay with that. I'm okay with people identifying where I need to fix my thing. I don't pretend to have this all sorted out. All I'm trying to do is get a discussion going in an area, which I think is deficient in enough thinking. So, you know, no, one person is going to have this sorted out. But I believe that the more thinking that we do, and the more exchanging of thinking, the better chance we have of getting to a better place. And I you know, so look at what our options, okay, let's just keep pushing the sample up, let it go. Let it go. And we and we can support 25 billion people on the planet. The consequence is that we're going to nourish them through manufactured protein tablets, synthetic food, we could do that. Is that really a desirable outcome? No, I like fresh food. I don't want to end up I wouldn't wish that on my children and grandchildren just wouldn't do that. I mean, so we have some decisions to make about what we think is a good vision for the world of the future. And and the decisions we make now will affect that.

And the critical importance of bringing diverse groups together, I think absolutely. Is the central portion of what I'm hearing you say? Yeah, absolutely.

Well, Jim, we want to be respectful of your time. This has been a really great conversation. Does you have anything else you'd like to say? Or Scott, Maureen? Do you have any further questions?

Well, thank you for not laughing or throwing anything.

No, I mean, I think you make a really good point. It's, it's, you know, the point of this podcast is to have discussions like this, and I hope anybody out there that's listening, you know, has appreciated, you know, kicking around some of these ideas. I mean, we don't have necessarily all the right answers, but the only way we're going to get to them is through discussion and collaboration and that sort of thing.

Right. So lots of room for contribution to this.

Clearly, young people out there starting their careers. You have a bright future ahead, right. Yeah. Well, thanks, Jim. We really appreciate it. Thank you so much. Thank you. Thank you. If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.

Dr. Jeremy Marshall is an associate professor in the Department of Entomology and the new Office of Undergraduate Research & Creative Inquiry faculty director at Kansas State University. He has training and degrees in biology, chemistry, environmental and evolutionary biology, genetics, genomics, and philosophy, and teaches courses on insect biology, behavior, genetics, and evolution, as well as interdisciplinary courses like Art and Insects and Bees, Plato, and Who Knows What. In 2016, Dr. Marshall developed a new model of undergraduate research experience capable of providing research education opportunities for more students than most traditional approaches. Scott, Jon, and Jay had a really great conversation with Jeremy about a number of factors that can make or break learning for students. This conversation is a little lighter in regards to food, but it does come up throughout the conversation.

For more about Dr. Marshall check out: https://entomology.k-state.edu/people/faculty/Marshall-Jeremy.html

Transcript:

A Fresh Look at Science Education with Dr. Jeremy Marshall – Undergraduate Research

Something to Chew On is a podcast devoted to the exploration and discussion of global food systems. It's produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University. I'm Jay Weeks PhD candidate in the Department of Agronomy. My co host is Scott Tanona, an Associate Professor in the Department of Philosophy who specializes in the Philosophy of Science. What makes information knowledge? If a teacher stands in front of a class and tells you to remember something, and you get the right answer on the test, did you know it? Why do you remember a lot from some classes and nothing from another? Today, we are sort of taking a break from directly food focused topics to explore science, education, something that we feel can be of interest to anybody that enjoys learning. And we assume that if you're listening to this that applies to you. Whatever your opinion on whether we live in a post truth or post normal science, society or something else entirely, there is no doubt that the ability to understand assess and meaningfully incorporate information into our lives, especially for the youngest among us, is important in some capacity. Our guest is Dr. Jeremy Marshall. Dr. Marshall is an Associate Professor in the Department of Entomology, and the new Office of Undergraduate Research and Creative Inquiry faculty director. He joined case day in 2006, and has training in degrees in Biology, Chemistry, Environmental and Evolutionary Biology, Genetics, Genomics, and Philosophy. He teaches courses on insect Biology, Behavior, Genetics, and Evolution, as well as interdisciplinary courses like art and insects and bees. playdough. And who knows what, which we dig into into the discussion over his passion, his undergraduate research. In 2016, Dr. Marshall developed a new model of undergraduate research experience capable of providing research education opportunities for more students than most traditional approaches. Scott, John and I had a really great conversation with Jeremy about a number of factors that can make or break learning for students. Like I said, this conversation is a little lighter in regards to food specifically, we do touch on some related topics. But if you have any interest in education as an activity, I have no doubts that you will find this interview worth your time. Enjoy. Dr. Jeremy Marshall, welcome to the podcast.

Thanks for having me. I'm excited to see where this goes today.

So, but excited to talk to you. We talked a little bit briefly before and we'll do an intro before the podcast starts. But we always like to get everybody's perspective on their background. So when you tell us a little bit about yourself.

Okay, so I like to actually back up to when I was a kid, when I normally talk about this, because, for me, it's sort of the big Y in terms of everything that I've done in my career. And what I'm doing now, starts there. So I grew up in Mississippi, and then in Georgia, my parents didn't go to college. When I went through school, I actually had pretty bad speech problems. So I stuttered really badly all the way through elementary and, and middle school. So it took a lot of work to try to get past those sorts of things. My parents tried as best they could, but they were. They didn't know how to help, basically. And so when I went to college, I just went to a small school that offered the most money, right? That's all I really looked for when I was looking for a place to go to school. And I was completely lost it know what I was doing. I didn't know how to study I never really studied going through high school. You know, my parents in elementary school focused on things like hey, you need to do well on the spelling test. Because, you know, that's the thing, get memorize the words and you can check it, it's easy to check, right? Oh, you got it made 100 on your spelling test. That's great, but really didn't have anything else. And so, turns out the first year of college wasn't tough even though I still wasn't studying and didn't know how to do that. It wasn't till the second year hit that I realized I need to to learn how to study so I started bombing classes also I started dating my, my wife then so I like to blame to blame her little bit district cheated. She does not like she does not like that story. So I had a whopping 1.9 that semester, and it was on scholarship. I was in danger of potentially losing it. I went to my professors and talked To them, they said, Well, what are your study habits and I went, I don't study. And so they sort of started from there, right? These are the things you need to be doing, stop worrying about the grades, that you're getting focused on learning the material. And it really was that sort of undergraduate mentor that really made a difference for me, and the kind of person that I've become, and how did I go about learning how to think right, and so it sort of started there. And then my master's was kind of the same way I was at least more confident. The area I was focusing on was life history evolution. So how was it that I actually worked for my Master's and PhD both on amphibians and reptiles, I wasn't working on insects at the time, and going out sampling, just trying to be a good scientist and trying to figure out how to think and it really wasn't until my PhD, that my advisor was very old school, he actually required all of his PhD students to do two languages, which was was not a requirement of the university and get a doctoral minor in philosophy, which was a six core sequence and write in defend a paper. Once again, this was not a requirement of the university, it was his requirement. It was then that I essentially sort of broke down everything that I thought in terms of how I approached science and the kinds of questions I was interested in, and sort of built up a my own sort of personal philosophy of how to approach work. But through that entire process, even as a master student and as a PhD student, I always involved undergrads and the things that I was doing, because I thought reaching back and helping was the right thing to do. And my first job was at the University of Texas at Arlington. In a biology departments, I did the same sort of thing, right, from day one, I recruited at eight undergrad start my first week, they helped me set up my lab, we help you get going. And that's what I built from, and then going from there to here, our department doesn't have a long history, or didn't have a long history of recruiting undergrads to be involved in research, but I did. So I started with five and then recruited five, basically, every year, you know, three of them, or four of them would go away, and there's only be one or two sort of left to keep going, but then just bring in the next crop and, and just keep building. And so that's sort of my background of struggling, not having a lot of direction early on, having someone helped me that's been sort of the drive for me to want to give back and, and help others. And that's those moments when you have those students in your office and they're in the same boat that you were they're struggling there. It's common that students end up my office crying at some point. I mean, I thought it was a bad thing at one point, but just having them being willing to talk and discuss the issues or going through is actually helped them. And so those are the things that sort of really drives me every day. So that's hopefully that wasn't too much background. But that's

no, yeah, I mean, that's great. You bring up some really interesting points, and it's something that I don't think it's highlighted enough is sort of people think about the struggles of first generation students. And there's not a lot of discussion about some of those very specifics, right about No, you don't know what you don't know, going into these things. So what are some, what are some of the ways that you tried to help those undergrads, what do you think is most fundamental or foundational? To get them out on the right foot?

So this is gonna sort of sound a bit odd to a lot of a lot of people. But what I actually tried to emphasize is failure. Right? So it seems like an odd thing to sort of emphasize, but it's okay to fail, right? There's not this sort of magical thing that you always have to be perfect, right? The way that we succeed in life is by failing and learning from it. And so we reframe it a bit. We talk about productive failure. So you're doing this, you're not successful, right? And most most students think, Hey, I've, I've prepared all this time for this particular exam, and I bombed it. Well, then what do you do with the exam? Well, I just put it my backpack. I haven't looked at it again. Well, that's not what you need to be doing. Right? You need to go back look at every single question that you missed. And ask the question, why was it because I, oh, I just made a stupid mistake. Was it just because I, I wasn't actually prepared for that particular kind of question. What was it? If you figured that out? Then you go back and try to figure out okay, well, I was a stupid thing. That's easy enough, but I didn't know the material go back and relearn the material. And so Students aren't forced to do that. And so oftentimes, they'll never do it right. And so what I, what I do in my classes is, we give them an exam, they get to see what they what they missed. And then then they have the chance to go back and actually correct those things. And the other thing I do is what's called the worst three. And so basically every exam, the three questions that you did the the worst on, or the ones that you skipped, because I actually provide choice on my exams, as well. And this is sort of a curious thing, right? It turns out that students oftentimes know, let's say, they know 70 80% of the material, but you might ask, right, questions that don't fall within that 80%. Right. So students know a different 80% of the material. So you provide some choice. But that's actually really good for me too, because the questions that they choose, and more importantly, the questions that they don't use, let me know what I did a poor job of, of teaching and explaining. And so when I say do your worst three, it's usually the three questions that they didn't pick. And so now, I provide more material, they get to go back and review those and answer those and learn that material. And then when they get the corrector exam, they're now focusing in a very invalid, individualized sort of way, the things that were tough for them, right. And so now they get a chance to learn from that and move forward to the next one. And when we started doing these, these kinds of things in our classes, the difference between how they did, obviously, their grades will go up, we give them half credit back and things like that. But what ends up happening is when we get to the final, right, when things are cumulative, and everything's built upon each other, they now know it, right? Because they've had this chance to see it again and go back over it. So yeah, so what I really try to focus on is that it's okay to fail. And we need to build on those to try to be successful or more successful the next time.

So yeah, the failure stuffs great. And I think that's, we don't emphasize that nearly enough, right? I like tell my kids, my students, my kids to my own kids, right. And then the students I have right sort of that yes, failure is good, right? We learned from failure. And if you actually, if you're not failing at something you're trying at, it might mean you're not pushing yourself hard enough. Right. So I think that's super important. I love what you're doing. One question, I was wondering what you thought about was, how much about that whole process? Are you talking about do you think one of the that's important, what's important is like, the psychological attitude towards failure, and how much of it is the actual process of going and learning stuff, right? Because the sort of the comfort with making mistakes and or trying something and failing is like, super important for you just ability to do that. And even how well you're going to do right, you know, this is part of the focus on like, the growth mentality versus like a fixed rate knowledge mentality or whatever, right? Sort of, then you had sort of some time where you don't know something and you're like, oh, it's, oh, that's has to do with me, rather than just like, oh, there's something I need to learn, right? So some of its like, psychological, right? Like the state of mind, you have, right, exactly. How important is that component to it versus just doing stuff?

And sorry, to end to build on that? Do you communicate the stakes, right? Like, you know, we're often teaching students the eye test or something is like, some, like it's the end of the world, right? If they fail, one test, when now in school is probably when you should be failing the most, because the stakes really aren't that huge. Right?

Right. Compared to lots of Yes, that's right.

And so we've actually done two things, to sort of address these points. In terms of the stakes of individual exams. We still have, you know, loads of classes on campus that are essentially set up as high stakes courses, right, where, there are one or two exams for the semester, or they have one big paper or something like that, you know, in one big paper is fine. If you've built the structure, right? Throughout the course, they've done many parts, they've gotten a lot of feedback, so they're very comfortable with that in product is going to be I am not a fan of having high stakes, just a couple of exams within a class. So we while we still have, you know, three or four exams, percentage wise, they don't make up, you know, maybe they make up 20% instead of 80% of a class or something like that. We really focus on learning that day, right? So I rather you show up to class, and we do something and you're involved with it. And then we use that and we build we move on to the next thing, as opposed to I don't care if you show up to my class, which is kind of what I went through. When I went through college. It was we don't care if you show up. We're going to teach what we teach. People are going to know instructors and faculty Just gonna list off all the things they think you need to know, you have to somehow keep up. And then you have an exam. I don't, I am sort of at the other end of the spectrum, I rather engage them, I want them there. And so that we lower the stakes. But even if it's a low stakes test that's worth 10% of your grade or whatever, each individual exam or 20%, whatever, whatever it might be, they're still going to be nervous, right? They're still going to have that anxiety. And so, why then, is it important to have the kind of mindset that you're talking about Scott, when it's, is it this sort of psychological state? You know, what, if? What's curious if you let students know that it's okay to fail, and you're going to have the opportunity to go back and look at those things that you do poorly on, they actually study more for the exams, going into it, it's not the other way around, you always say, Oh, well, if you give them too much, too much leeway, they're not going to prepare at all, I do not see that phenomenon at all, it's actually the other way around. Because they know you care about them. Everything that I do in my career is built around one simple word care, right? I want to care about the student as much as I possibly can. And as long as they know that, they're going to respond to you wonderfully, and they do they respond in class. When we do our undergraduate research program, they respond beautifully. In know, we've grown our miners program, and entomology over the last three years, we had five students, now we're at 16, technically, we've done that over two years. And the we have students joining the program, who, who may be getting a minor in entomology might be tangential to the things that they're going to do within their life, but they know that we care, and they want to do it. And that's how we're actually we don't have a major, so we just have minor so. But they're drawn to us, because we care, like, Oh, my home department, we don't we don't do these things, you know, you care so much you do. And that's what we really go for. And so there is the psychological part. And honestly, that's what I'm, that's what I'm hoping for, right? I want to connect with you emotionally, right? Not reasonably or rationally, not as a scientist, I want to connect with you as a human first and then build.

So there's a, like, very, you mentioned totally different views about what education is about, right, you know, in some sense, right. And so you shared your story about how you came to, to become teaching and what you care about, and what you're motivated by. What are your views about sort of what universities are here for, like, what are we supposed to be doing? Because we don't always serve, especially first generation students? Well, there's a lot of, you know, the, at least a lot of what university teaching is about is, seems to be oriented around this idea that here's this knowledge, right, and sort of come and get the knowledge if you can, and if you can manage to do it, right. And then, you know, there's some help provided for you, but, but at least at a big research university, like Kansas State, there's a lot of us who focus a lot on teaching, right. But the kind of attitude that you just described in the kind of attention that you just described is not as typical, partly because, you know, a lot of us we spend a lot of time on research to, and that's a major focus of what professors do. Right? So, so, so just put this what you're talking about, just in the context of, you know, a research university like Kansas State in general.

That's right. And so I would, I would suggest, sort of first and foremost, that just because you are a large research, one university, and that may be your primary focus, it doesn't mean that you can't be a caring, quality teacher, right. It's just how, you know, you may have a, you may have classes that have a few 100 students in them, you can still do those things well, and do them differently than just standing up there and reciting a bunch of information. I do not think that a university's primary responsibility is just to essentially deliver information and then whatever the students are, pick up, they pick up.

And I mean, I don't want to characterize like things. I mean, so like, yeah, yeah, most teaching is not like this. I mean, most of us No, I mean, so there's phenomenal teaching can stay right out of, you know, throughout all the departments everywhere. There's a lot of focus. There's a lot of great classes. There's a lot of innovative stuff going on, right yeah, but there is you know, oh he's right. There's a little bit in the background. There's an old model that like a lot of us have picked up a long time ago that's been around it's just kind of like a here is the source of information.

Yeah, yeah. And that's how I that's actually how I started when I started teaching. I did the same thing because that was the model I actually didn't, the things that we do now I never had as a student, I mean, in some lab classes, maybe. But it was mostly sort of this idea of sort of stand and stand and deliver.

Do you get a lot of people saying that there just isn't time to dedicate to the sort of stuff that like you're doing?

So there are, there are always going to be they're always gonna be sort of faculty that sort of that say, this worked for me, I'm gonna stick with this, it seems to be working fine. You know, we've had really successful students. And all that is, is perfectly true. But the question becomes, who is that true for? Right? And so is it? What kinds of students are these approaches working for? And in what kinds of students are they not working for? And it turns out, it's the students that were probably a lot like me that didn't know what they were doing that you maybe you're, you're a little bit lost are. So for first generation students, students that have different kinds of backgrounds, and we have we pull from students from all over the world. Right? So where's here's a, here's sort of the great story that I like to use. So there, when I teach a genetics class, I like to use Legos to model protein structure, right? We use it for protein synthesis, and then how it works. It works out beautifully. And so they get to learn how DNA is put together, and then how that might work to make proteins by just using Lego bricks. It's a really cool lab. In teaching this one particular course there were roughly 15 students in the class 12 of them. Yeah, 12 of them. were originally born and educated outside of the United States. Okay, I said, Okay, we're gonna, we're gonna play with Legos and do this. Essentially, none of those students had ever played with or experienced Legos before. And so when I, when I said, here's the little bag of Legos, they just started moving them around on the table. They weren't, they weren't locking together or building something in it. And that was really one of the first times that happened here. Not actually that long ago, maybe six or seven years ago. Right went, Oh, everyone didn't play with Legos when they were growing up as a kid. And it's that sort of just drove home that point of, you know, what, not everyone has the same background, we need to be structuring, structuring things in a different way. So we had to have an hour, we made an hour session to play with Legos and learn how to build with them. So the lab would actually make sense. Sure. Right. So yeah, it's a Let's Play. You know, it sounds ridiculous, right? But it was necessary, and it made the lesson work well, and then they would understand the concepts.

And there's preconditions for everything, right, sort of, you know, you're always building on something else, right? So you're always sort of in you give some you given an assignment, or whatever it is, and you're kind of assuming, here's what everybody knows, right? And yeah, here's the note don't know how to manipulate and sort of don't know, naturally do that. I wanted to say about the first generation thing, too, which was interesting, because we didn't define it here. And it just occurred to me, I was at a meeting not too long ago, where somebody, we were talking about students and first generation students, and one of the faculty members said, you know, there was this moment when we were having this discussion. And I sat back and I realized, oh, yeah, wait, I'm first generation and wasn't, wasn't even like thinking of that. Right? So first generation, you know, your parents, you're the first one in your family to have gone to college. Right? And sort of like this. It's funny, number one, how sort of even people have then sort of gotten there into college, not necessarily identifying that way. But that also means that they're not thinking about what they don't have that everybody else does have that right. And certainly, since faculty have gone, your teachers or professors, right, your instructors have gone through college and gone through a lot of QA. Yeah, there's all these things that we just, you know, sort of they're in our blood almost at this point, right. And we it's easy for us to forget right about where everybody's coming from. Right.

That's right. And so what's curious is there's even a difference between sort of my generation going through college, right, so our generation is going through college and current generations that are first generation students. And so it turns out that the populations there, there were a much higher percentage of quote unquote, first gen, we didn't use that word, right. A lot of us were first generation students that we were the first in our families to go just because that's kind of how it was working out. Whereas now, because there are so many more that have actually gone to college when you're a first generation student in today's world, it actually puts you further behind than you word so I actually hadn't thought about this but but One of our assistant Dean's, and in the College of Ag had actually talked about this and I went, you know what? You're right. Because my kids now going to college, they we've, we've talked about everything that they need to be doing and who they need to be talking with what resources to use, they're taking advantage of everything they possibly can. And all it took was one Chino, it just took one generation to go through to sort of understand a lot of these sort of simple kinds of things. And it puts them at such an advantage, right, my daughter is a junior right now. And you know, she's advanced so much relative, to those around her. So she tries to help those around her that are first generation, but she's certainly doing all the things that she needs to do for herself as well. And she knows, right, she knows who to go talk to she can look through websites of information and say, Ah, these are the, these are the important players, this is what I need to go to. And that's critical. Those are skills that you only gain with experience.

So and that starts even before you step foot through the door, right? I mean, even selecting a college and knowing you know what to do in high school to get prepared and all that kind of stuff right?

They were right, right, they were building out their resumes in an elementary and middle school, right, you're gonna, you're gonna have to have something you're passionate about, right? It's not necessarily about doing 1000 things, it's, it's doing those few things that you're really passionate about, to be able to tell a good story. I mean, you're thinking about, it's a little ridiculous that you're, you know, you're talking to your 12 year old about thinking about what your story is going to be when you write an essay when you're 18 years old.

But anyway, the other end of the you know, the other end of that, I didn't think about that at all in high school, I'm somewhat older than the rest of you, folks. And at that point, at least for some people, the expectation of their parents are you will go to college someplace. And in even fewer, well, in a significant proportion, you will go in this particular major, because that's the way it's going to be. So I didn't have the advantage of that or more. I'm, I'm not an abject failure, because but it was viewed somewhat differently. I think, because my parents generation, many of them went to school as first generation students on the GI Bill. Yep, yep. Yep. So there's that little blip, that sort of pre baby boom blip, that did that. So it was a bit different. I was gonna go back to your exam theory back about 15 years ago, I moved to a here are 20 questions, answer 15. And what I found, and I don't know if this works for you as well, is that it changed the way students structured their test taking, rather than just putting their heads down and doing here's number one, number two, number three, and doing them in numerical order, and maybe getting stuck, and not distributing time appropriately related to the difficulty of the problem. If they had to do that first and decide which of the questions they weren't going to answer, it actually improves their scores in the long run, because it made them think what they were think about how they want to approach the test.

Yeah, no. So, there are students that that clearly go through the entire exam, just just read, read over it, make marks by them, right, you can see that here are their marks, these are ones that they're, they're going to target. And do that there are some that still work through it, just straights. But they're answering every question. And so what happens is that they actually go about answering everything. And then the ones that they feel the most comfortable about are the ones that they go back and circle that they want, that they want to have counted. And so there are some, it's, it's been really curious. You know, and maybe it's maybe it's sort of a group of sort of high achieving students, they want to answer they want to show me that they know all of it. Right. And they're actually interested in the ones that they didn't circle, they really still want to know how well they did on those. So it's, it's, it's kind of fun, right? And those are the students that usually sort of rise to the top in any class that they're in. And so it's not really designed for them, but there's a there's a there's a part of it, that's actually for them. But I don't think we actually fully gotten to your original question of how does this sort of fit sort of the university model? And I think there's actually a big push across the university. I know there is within the College of Agriculture to have all of us become better teachers in the classroom and that It doing the right things doesn't necessarily take that much more time if we think about how we might restructure things. And there's always you're entirely right. I mean, most of us have appointments that are really heavy research and just a little bit of teaching. And you know, honestly, if you do well on the research parts, as long as you're not just the most horrible person in the world, returning to teaching, it doesn't really matter. There's sort of the sort of historic incentive structures are very much focused on republishing. That's right, in the way that we're restructuring our university budget model. You know, there's a, hey, we need to be good at doing teaching and doing these kinds of things. But yet, you know, so we talk about that in faculty meetings. And then we have faculty go, but I thought we were a research university, why are we? Why do we need to care about doing this? Why are we so focused on teaching right now, we do great stuff with research, why aren't we focusing on that I don't understand what's going on. So we do have, we do have a lot of faculty that are still confused in a way, right, they don't really sort of know where they, where they fit, they're, they're sort of fine with what the sort of the old idea is. And when we talk about these new teaching approaches, they're a little resistant to try them. But ultimately, we're training our graduate students to be the best possible teachers that they can be. And there are faculty that, you know, older faculty that are willing to sort of change and do these things in our, in our younger faculty are, for the most part already. They feel that it's, it's, it's their role, it's the thing that they're doing to give back. And so I do think that the old model will change, regardless of sort of what budgetary structures are, because they want to give back, right, they want to do the best thing they can for their students, even if, and this is the part that has been really curious. Over the last, you know, half years, I've been interacting with a lot of faculty and even upper administrative types across campus. There are people that want to do the right thing, regardless of whether or not they're going to be rewarded for it. Right to go ahead and just do it. And let's see what happens. Because the worst thing that you can do is fail. Right? So why not take a chance, do it. And if you're not reward, I mean, none of these individuals are ever going to be at a point to where they're worried about their job in some particular way. Right? It's just how are you spinning your energy? And it's, and it's that culture that's going to make and makes K State great, right? It really isn't sort of this, let's just sit back and do the things that we've been doing it is, let's actually try to do what's right and what's best. And that's the thing that's gonna carry us forward.

I would, I would argue, this critical thing that has to occur is there has to be some kind of recognition doesn't have to be monetary, or anything like that. But somebody has to tell you, you have to be reinforced positively in the end. I'm in the College of Agriculture as well. Yep. And if department heads don't do that, yeah, then you've broken that link of confidence.

Yep. Yep. No, I actually, I think I actually agree with that. So my, I've been lucky and what within entomology, we had a wonderful department head that just left and John Roberson and our current interim department head prime McCormack is is equally wonderful. And they're just really supportive. And they'd say, look, where's your passion? What is it, you want to do focus on it and run. Even if that means you're, you're doing things that aren't exactly the things that you'd been doing for the 10 years before. But if this is the thing that's actually going to help you be excited about what you're doing every day, it's actually helping the art department be better. It's actually helping our college and the university better, we need to be doing those things. So you're right, that little bit of reward. And support is important, because we do have faculty in other departments where the department heads don't support them. But what's curious is that those faculty are still doing the things that they think are right, even if they're not rewarded. And now the The important thing to do is when we have the opportunity to get into positions of power or leadership on on campus is that we make sure that that, that the higher ups rights know that these are the kinds of things that are going on, and we need to we need to be changing the way that we do these things. And that's gonna that's happening, but I think it's gonna happen very slowly, because there's gonna be a lot of pushback and in some places, but…

Yeah, I feel like we're getting a lot into the weeds of sort of what the internal life of a department or university our serve a lot of public doesn't really understand how much of sort of how, of course, is actually going to be taught right, or what professors actually going to do. In a classroom is actually, you know, it's either influence or dictated right by a lot of these things, right. So that which is sort of what's rewarded what's recognize, what are you going to get your promotions for. And these things are really important, I think, for everybody to understand at least a little bit of and we've been talking a lot about that. I was curious whether, when you think about your teaching, and you think about what Kansas State needs to do, to be as good as a candidate, educating its students, why don't you think about the land grant mission, right?

When you do that, so being in entomology, and so I'm actually gonna back up just a little bit. So for me, my undergraduate degree was I double majored in Biology and Chemistry. My master's was in biology, my PhD was in environmental and evolutionary biology. My postdoc was in genetics and genomics, I did not start doing anything insect related until my postdoc, although actually my first undergrad project, I did identify insects, but I was focused on the little frogs that eat them. So but it ultimately the project was an intimate, intimate, logical type of project. But I was just excited about these little teeny tiny frogs I was working on. And so for me, it was really about sort of basic science was sort of the thing that I was was doing and really focused on during all of my training, and in my first position, and it wasn't until I actually applied here to K State, that when they were looking for someone doing behavior, and genetics and genomics within insects, they didn't really sort of care what kind of background you had, as long as you were presumably good at those things. And we're using insects, and I started working on crickets, and we were really successful. And so I was lucky enough to sort of get that job. But it wasn't till I was here, that I really started thinking about the applied components and, and thinking well, is the land grant mission, something that's actually different than a regular university. And that's something that's developed over time, I've been here now 13 years. And now it's completely integrated into the things that we do. And once again, there's a story that sort of goes along with this for me, and teaching a class once again, about seven or eight years ago, and we have a diverse population of students. My sort of philosophy of science kind of training, and the way I thought about things was, you know, you don't have to have a reason necessarily to do science other than to answer and address the question, right, there doesn't have to be this sort of human element that sort of tied to it. But when I asked my students that question, most of them always said, Well, science only matters, if it's applied to the everyday life. So people think if it helps the world, um, and, you know, I look at the class and go, this, it just, it just makes sense. There's a perspective that needs to be added to what the background of what each individual goes through. And once again, that was a turning point for me. So, now, when we think about the science that we do, or think about the way that we go about teaching our courses, we build it around problem solving. And so how do we go about thinking, right? What's the role in job right back to that sort of one of those original questions, the role and job of university? It isn't to say, here's information, right? Because there's all different ways to get information now. It's really how do we take this information, and think about it and combine it and use it and novel ways to solve complex problems. And it's these, if they were easy problems, we'd already solved them, right? Complex problems are complex for a reason, you can't just be one kind of thing anymore. And the reason it's a problem is because it affects humanity in some particular way. Right? That's how we define it as a problem. And so we need to think differently in the courses that we we teach. So I do a, an art and insects class, and it sort of sounds you know, fluffy or something maybe, right? Well, we focus on insects and art, but it's really about their intersection. And how do we, how do we combine the tools and things that we think about in these disciplines and no longer think about them as, as I continue on one end, or the other are two separate things. It's that they're completely integrated and they overlap. And so when we're when we're doing science, the kinds of things we know. Art actually helps us do our science. And when we're doing art, the kinds of things that we do in science help us do our art in the night.

So say more about this because I do have a specific example that you talk about in that class.

So yeah, so here's a, here's a, so I teach, I co teach that normally with a faculty member in the, in the art department, and he focuses on color, right. And so just in our discussions, and these are examples that we end up using in class, and we build on them, thinking about how color is structured, and how you build a particular color. And so how a color might be perceived. Thinking about butterfly wings is sort of a classic model, you have a bunch of different colors and spots, and he would go, well, actually, this color is really this. And if you adjust the the the frequency of light at which you're actually viewing and insects have a very different sort of spectrum of seeing than humans do, you would actually see this pattern instead, you go, wow, like what I mean, it sort of opens up the the idea of that, that perception, we're so biased by sort of human perception, lots of times these problems are biased by the perception of other kinds of things. And so this is where art informed science. Now the other way around is that if you are depending on the kind of artists that you are writing, depending on the kind of point that you want to make, if you actually understand anatomy of things quite well, then you can actually, you're actually doing your art in a different way. And so we actually have a lot of artists on campus who love incorporating insects, and let's say if you really want to get across something that's a little bit more terrifying. Maybe you're emphasizing structures within the mouth and the eyes, and exaggerating those in a way that you can do it in a fake way. Right. But if you do it in a real way, it's actually often much more terrifying than the fake thing that you can think about. I mean, so insects are great sort of inspiration for that. And so they're sort of a long list of, sort of examples and things that we look at that sort of go in both directions. And I also do an honors seminar class, that's called BS, Plato, and who knows what, and it's actually built around the idea of what counts as perception in knowledge based on who's perceiving it, or not, right. And so we run through some of the classic things with the cave with Plato, and what counts, we also think about intelligent intelligence and perception within BS, we focus a lot on what they're able to do. Because it turns out, there's been some brilliant research over the last decade that shows their problem solving skills, and the fact that they actually have a recognition of a concept of zero, right, which is, it's a pretty dramatic sort of thing. They actually understand nothingness. And so there's sort of this higher level, which is a huge deal, which is a huge deal. It's the idea that any sort of organism, we've thought, you know, it was a big deal over the last G since the 70s, that other animals could count, right? And you go, and my PhD advisor was one of these people that actually focused on counting in lower kinds of…

Yeah, and so I don't, I don't want to get too much like but so what do you mean by account? Sort of, like, what does it mean for an animal to be able to count.

So it's able to recognize a difference between one to two, right?

So right, or three and four, it's not just measuring like the size of a pile, but they can actually sort of recognize that there's more of a particular thing there.

And this, if it's a resource, right, it all comes down to more resources, where you're where you're going to invest your time. And it turns out, lots of animals can distinguish between numbers up to about four or five or six, right. And so they're pretty good at the sort of low numbers. And it turns out, they're actually misses, sort of, really, in the weeds, there are neurons that are associated with numbers that fire. And so that's how the sort of the basic mechanism works, to sort of fires the two neuron and one fires the one neuron. But to build a use memory and higher level counting to know that this area, I'm going to remember I'm going to develop a mental map of counts. And this, these are things that bees and wasps can do. So imagine that right? You have a bee that's, that's, that's going over a landscape. And they're not just seeing sort of pretty colors that we see. They're actually envisioning this world. It's made up of sort of black white violets, red sort of coloration rights, because they're in the UV spectrum. And they've developed an idea of, oh, this is a good patch, right? There's a whole bunch of resource here that they've counted, and there's very little resource there. And so it's this really specific sort of thing. They have these very complex cognitive maps, that most people would never imagine that bees could be able to do. And students don't recognize this. So they're perceiving the world entirely different than you are and the information they have, does that count as knowledge, right? Is it just information? Or does it count as knowledge? And if you go back to our classic definitions of these things, they actually check off essentially, almost off the boxes of accounts is knowledge, which blows students minds that there are other organisms besides humans that actually can do thing know, things that know things?

Yeah. Yeah.

Has that be like those be concepts have they been? Is anybody tried to exploit them in the world of agriculture, right to attract more bees? Because they're so important to certain agricultural systems? You know?

Yeah. So it turns out, there are groups that are the reason that they're studying bees and looking at this is so they can apply it back to these these problems of how do you go about studying and understanding pollination patterns and those sorts of things, those that are those that are the one of the reasons that's going to end up being really important at some point, is not just sort of the protection of of bees and other pollinators. But if you want to design a system, right, if we screw up bad enough, and bees go away, we still have a job that needs to get done. How do we do that in potentially an artificial sort of way. And, the mechanisms are already in place in there, if you understand them. And so there's, there's a lot of sort of artificial intelligence that's being built off of these kinds of findings.

Oh, that's, that's fascinating. That is cool. And, and I just noticed, too, that we went from talking about sort of, I was gonna dig deeper into like, what's going on with those bees, just cuz I want to know, and then jays, like, Well, tell me how this is actually useful. Interesting things, like how you're talking about your students, right? You go anywhere. But, it was interesting. I do want to ask, though, about the thinking about bees having knowledge, what do you think? What do you think that does for for students? And what do you think that does, maybe also, for scientists, if they like, start thinking, doing interdisciplinary work in a way where you're kind of asking really different questions than you normally would have? Right, sort of it's, you know, the, does the B have knowledge or, you know, not, is not going to be a standard research question. I try in entomology? That's right. I try. So you're asking a kind of different question. You're integrating this with philosophy you're integrating with, and you're interacting, you know, the insects stuff with art, right? So that you're kind of looking at this a little bit differently, because you're thinking more about the, you know, how colors are piled up. So what do you think that does to students, and then to scientists, if they're going to go so far as to like, do some research or use science?

Yeah. And so the the intent of both of those classes and sort of that discussion, and then thinking about in terms of even the idea of complex problems, like, within food systems, and how do we feed the world really comes down to the idea that we can no longer sort of work as, as, as individuals and think that we can solve a particular problem we have to work across boundaries across disciplines in order to sort of gain their their particular perspective. And there's, obviously over the last couple of years been this question is, well, why does it matter so much to have diversity? In opinion, in perspective, when we're trying to solve problems? We know what I've already given two examples, right? Just in my own classroom, both with the Lego bricks and the importance of the direction of science. It's all about perspective, right? Because my background and perspective is different from someone else's. Now when we approach a complex problem, it's complex, and it's problematic for different reasons. Right. And if we're going to solve something that's that complex, we have to talk together, we have to work together. And that's, that's really all I'm trying to get across to the students. They're, they're freshmen, right, they're taking their first step in college, it's their, it's the seminar, it's a one hour thing we meet once a week, a lot of them think they're coming in, they're going to be dropped into one of the one of their lanes to do their major and to finish. But the idea is that you know what, along the way, if you want to do anything big, you're likely going to have to be working with somebody else. And you need to learn how to work with others. You need to learn how to appreciate what it is they bring to the table and not just automatically assume you know, everything. It's actually even change my approach in general, I go into most interactions, assuming I know almost nothing, right? So I know nothing. I fail at everything. What do you have let's build from your typical…

Well, that's fine.

Well, no, but that's how I approach things because I don't want to go in and make the assumption that this is what I know. And I'm going to lead or dominate from this particular position, I rather let you come to me, let's figure this out. Let me think a bit, and then we'll build a move forward, I want our students to be able to do the same kind of thing. That's what the university is about. It's not a, it's not about picking up things that if I gave you, you know, 20, textbooks, right, and 100 papers, there's your university degree, right? If you could do that, you could go pick it up for, you know, a few 100 bucks, what's the purpose of the university? Right, the university is more than that. It has to be and that's the way that we have to sell ourselves to the world, right? It's about how do we think it's not about just the information. Now, there's a lot of useful stuff when you're working on how things are done that are critical and important. But once again, it really is the thinking component that universities provide.

And plus in the non University world, the post graduation world, students aren't going to find themselves told to go lock themselves in the tower and work out a problem and come back in the next six months, they're going to be interacting with of necessity, that's right with people and it's not just even in your action piece is is shouldn't be assumed. Yep. So it I think you're addressing a really critical sort of thing. Yep.

How do students react when it's revealed that you know, things like BS or whatever see in different spectrums? Right. So that, you know, there's whole worlds out there that we our senses can't can't pick up, I'm always reminded of a was it Buckminster Fuller has the the quote, I'm gonna butcher but it's something like, you know, since the publication of the electromagnetic spectrum, we've come to realize that everything we see, taste, hear and feel is like 1,000,000th of reality or something like that, right? Is it really wild for them to have that realization?

So what's curious is, so because these are honor students, right, so they're bright kids that have been exposed to a good bit. And so in their heads, they have this idea that we don't perceive everything about the world, they sort of have that idea. We don't perceive everything. But I think it's rare that they actually see concrete examples. Right. And so providing that part, you know, the most common comment I'll get, other than, you know, hey, this was a great class or something. Not really, but you know, so is that, I still can't believe bees can do that. Right. So something built around that is, and that's only that's one day, that's, that's a day out of, you know, you know, 13 or 14 sort of lectures that we do, but that's the thing that sort of that they really remember. And so it is important. The other most frequent comment is I can't believe you wore that bee costume because I build off of right that I get them I introduced them to the bees by dressing up as a bee and doing the waggle dance and stuff. And you're famous. You're famous on Canvas for that's this is my thing, right? So dressing up in insect costumes. Yeah, it's important to me as a person to do these things.

So you, I mean, you do the costume thing. And you and you have the bunch of videos under the YouTube channel, insect fusion, right? In some of these things aren't even necessarily, you know, strictly educational. Right? What's your philosophy behind that? So first what what are those, the SEC fusion and then so…

Both on Twitter and YouTube. So I started I taught the art and insects class for the first time. Last summer, so summer 2018. And I sat down at my desk to do the standard, let's make a video with your little head in the corner sort of thing. It bored me to death, right? I couldn't even watch what I put together. I made it when I can't. Students can't watch this. This is horrible. And so I started just doing random things to incorporate into it and to try to be more engaging than just sort of a head in the box. And from there, it sort of developed into so for me, I like to say that apparently this little kid that's been repressed to me since I was you know, five or six or something just exploded out as soon as I put a video camera up and started dressing up. It turns out it's been really engaging, right? So students, like the fact that their professor is willing to do something that's that's, you know, sort of, you're trying to meet them where they are right, you're not in an ivory tower, you're not unapproachable and it trust me, you dress up in a costume, they will approach you write, they're no longer scared. You are not you aren't on a pedestal anymore. You are now ready for them to talk to and about a month before classes start and so I've already started it now. I send students a video about once a week. And it's not always necessarily educational, it might just be something silly, right. But once again, they're getting a little, a little piece of me and the way that I approach things. And so by the time class starts, they are on the edge of a walk in. So last last fall, I walked into general entomology, and students are on the edge of their seats. And they're just staring wide eyed, like, what's he going to do? And I thought, This is great. And then I had this just flood of, Oh, crap, they expect the person that's in those videos to be the thing that's teaching them all the time. And you realize it's really tough to be that all the time, right? You can't, it can't be silliness all the time. That's my avatar.

But figuring out a way to sort of make short videos that we use to engage before a class and every once in a while during the class. And we do a lot of active learning kinds of strategies within the class as well, we have will act out things. So if we're talking about predator prey interactions, probably a bad example. But let's say if it's predator prey stuff, we might act out how that might work. And so we actually have one day where, you know, we've talked about 10 Different kinds of topics. And we have examples. And we break them up into 10, small groups, and I co teach this with another faculty member, Dr. Tom Phillips, and entomology and he is a wonderfully gifted actor. So he also sing, so he has a lot of talents. And so what we do is we have him he has to improv with every group. So if the group does a little skit that represents the example that they have, they get X amount of points. But if they, if they include Tom, in the, in the skit, they get a few extra points, right? And so they all want to include him, and he has to basically learn it immediately. Like he gets a little script that they've written out and goes, Okay, I'll do this. And he's just awesome, right? It's fake dying all over the floor and doing it. I mean, it's just wonderful in students respond incredibly well to these things. Because not only is it sort of fun, it's not just, it's not just sitting there. But now there is another way to take an example that we've talked about and work with in class, another process. And now they have another way to sort of visualize it. And it's very easy in their heads. And so on exams. They are there, they're obviously using it as a skeletal structure. A lot of times, oh, this was this thing. And this was how this worked. And so anyway, there's a lot of benefits to doing that.

Yeah. So I wanted to ask, I mean, so I'm going to put on a curmudgeon II hat for a moment. And it's about this. And so I, I'm a super fan of active learning, right, sort of, as you know, we've talked before, and I do lots of things in my classrooms too, right? Sort of teaching over the summer, and tomorrow, we've got, as part of the final, we've got a classroom activity, right. So we're, they got to basically do a simulation sort of thing, they're competing against one another. And that's part of the final, right. And so, I'm a fan of all this stuff. But these things take time to write. And, you know, there's, you know, if it's just pure silliness, or if it's like playing with Legos, or it's like acting something out, right, in some sense, that's time away from, like, real learning, right, you know, or the, like, the actual content and digging in, right. So, so there's always a little bit of at least, I mean, there's a trade off, right. And sometimes it's a big trade off, right. And so I know there are skeptics who look at these activities, in general, and depending on how far how fluffy as you say, the word you use earlier, how fluffy they get, right? It's easy to be very skeptical of those, right? So they have I do think they have to have an educational purpose, they have to play some sort of, like scaffolding role, like in the sense that then you can use them later. And it didn't just engage you and make you excited and make you think about it, but has to do something still right. That's my view anyway. So what do you think about this?

So I love this question, by the way, because I get it a lot. And there are lots of sort of offshoots of it. But But fundamentally, research shows that the the sort of normal way that we would go about teaching, and we think there's this idea that we think if we stand up in front of a classroom, and if we say A through Z, that the students are going to learn and understand a through z, it doesn't quite happen that it doesn't work that way, right. Research suggests something entirely different. And so it actually suggests that they're only getting a teeny tiny small bit of information. And if you think about what do you want to have happen in a particular course? Write what information do you really want them to have? Not just for a particular exam, but six months out a year out five years out, what do you want them to carry with them the rest of their life, they're not going to carry all that material, right, they're not going to take all the things that they memorized and crammed and dumped out on the exam. They're just not going to write. So we need to think very differently about the way that we approach our classes and go, you know, what, these are actually the important bits of information, these are the things that we're going to repeat, and look at and use in different kinds of ways. Because this is the thing that we want them to take with them, and that they're gonna remember six months, a year in five years out. And if you think about your course, that way, you actually have plenty of time to engage in ways that are going to help them remember those critical things. And so we don't do things that are 100%. Silly, right? But there are times when I'm entirely willing to do something that's maybe 80%, silly, because I know that 80% silliness, is going to translate a lecture or two or three down the road, that all of a sudden they go, Oh, wow. Now that makes complete sense. And now they have an activity, right? It's all about how do you go about building better neural networks, right. And I encourage my students, we talk about these things all the time, when it comes to studying or, or how it is it we're going to learn things best? Well, neuroscience suggests that smell is really critical, right. And so if you're going to go about studying a particular subject, it's always good to actually have a particular kind of candy or gum that has a particular flavor and smell that's associated with it, that you use when you study that particular thing. Also, it's best to try and pristine. Also, if you have a chance to work in a different kind of room or space. So you can look around the room. This is how people that do memory speed competitions, this is how they work, you have a mental room or house that you can go into. But actually, what's really important is we have a physical space. So where we're at right now, right, this little small space where the walls are completely blank is a horrible place to study, right? You would not want to be in this room. But if you were in the library, right, that had a lot of books and shelves and things that were on the wall, when you study a particular subject, you have a particular scent or flavor, you're looking at things you now have, you have something to go back to. And that's all that these activities A lot of times provide is an anchor, right? Because you're now experiencing that not just with sight, right? But you're, you're hearing it, you're smelling it every once in a while, there's tastes because we do some disgusting sorts of things sometimes with but I won't say disgusting. I enjoy eating insects, but for lots of them. It's disgusting. I mean, right? And so, but we do those kinds of things for a reason, right? We want it to be an experience, so they can pull all these things together. And so I really, really, like those kinds of things that are gonna allow them to remember and I know that if we do something in week one, and then on the final, if they're still talking about it, right, it's worked, right, it served its purpose. And that's how we do it. So I don't mind saying, you know, what, in a typical class, maybe you cover topics, you know, one through 100, right? Maybe in my class, I really drive home, maybe topics one to 30. Right, but I picked those 30. And all the other stuff is there, right? It's there, it's sort of they can cover it, we go over it. But for the most part, we focus on the important points. So they can use that information later. So we restructure things very differently. And not everybody does this. Right. And there are a lot of people that will that do say Well, that's not the way you should be done.

I think that's important, important point too. And so you do make sure that even if you aren't harping on everything, right, that they are exposed to it to some extent, because I worry that when we're always saying, well, information is ubiquitous now with the internet, and all of that, and we should be scaling back to make sure they really learn the things we want. That one of the points of the courses is not necessarily that you remember everything but that you're exposed to that try all of these things. So you know that they exist. That's right.

That's right. And so you have all the tools at your fingertips to be able to dive deep into something. And so you know, the right question to ask, right? Just because you have a ton of information about one particular thing doesn't mean that you know how to ask the right question. But if you're if a course is structured in a way that you you have sort of the you understand the processes and some of the critical information and you know how to ask the right kind of question, then you know, exactly the information to go find you're not you're not lost, and we have actually a lot of a lot of courses that are designed to go about how do you how do you diagnose problems, right? Our department head does a class, the insect pest diagnosis course. And he's approached that class very differently than the way it's normally taught. He basically approached it as a problem solver, we're going to go out and collect data information, you're going to, you're going to basically build your own sort of book, write your own little guide on how it is you can find problems. It's not just giving them the information, right? They're experiencing it. And students have actually not necessarily been a fan of that approach. Because they want to be, they want to be told, they don't want to have to explore and solve, right? Because it's not as easy. But you know, what is the thing that's going to help them in the long run? And so whether it's a, whether it's an approach that is like mine, that maybe students want to be engaged with, because they think, Oh, this is fun, or it's an approach that is exploratory, and they're like, Oh, why can't you just tell us the information? Why do I have to discover it myself? Because you know, what, if you discover it yourself, you're gonna, you're gonna know it, and you're gonna be able to use it later. Both are trying to get it exactly the same thing, you're approaching a problem differently, you're not just giving them a bunch of information, right?

And it's the skills and the tools to try out are there too, that are developing those into one of the hardest things is being able to transfer like learning something in one context, and then being able to use that information somewhere else that's like, super, super hard trying to transfer questions really hard. So, you know, we've been talking a lot about teaching about educational experiences, I wonder how you think this might translate into how people use science, right? I mean, so this is, you know, we were talking about global food systems here in general. And so we don't have to focus on that in particular, but you know, that I want to frame a little bit like, you know, we've talked about basic science, right. And so basic science, a lot of a lot of applied questions, like to eventually get to the application, you know, you have to have some people just doing basic research to it right? Here, we're talking sort of about education and learning, right, and sort of a lot of the problems of the world sort of depend not just on some experts doing things, or some industry doing things, but sort of, you know, all of us in understanding the problems and doing what our part to try to fix them. Right. I wonder how you think about how people use science, right? So, you know, in a regular, like, just in general, right, sort of like the general population, sort of, you know, how they absorb science, how they use it, how they think about it, right, and whether some of what we're talking about here might translate out into, to not just a student, but sort of to somebody who's not right now.

And that's right. And so in terms of sort of the general public outreach of the kinds of things that maybe we're doing, or just how does sort of the everyday person, how do they interpret science and right now, if we're, you know, 100%, honest, science is sort of under attack, right? The idea of, of how science is being used day to day, you know, when you have those that just want to say, the science is fake, it's not real, don't listen to it. What are you supposed to do in that context? Right? We're, we're in a place where science is viewed as maybe not reality, right? The things that are actually observed. And we do study say this, well, you know, what, if, if enough money is given over here, another study can say this other thing. And I'm going to believe that one instead of you know, these 1000 people that say, this is our, you know, sponsored thing over here is going to say something different. And so it's a very difficult sort of space to exist in. And so how do you reach people in a way that they feel comfortable with what it is that you're saying? It's a pretty fundamental question, right? And it turns out, for me, it really wasn't until this past year, since I started, you know, the YouTube channel and Twitter. And so, Twitter's been something very different for me, I was never sort of a social media sort of person, but looking at how individuals are being successful at doing really good science communication, to get out information and how is that being used and absorbed? And it turns out the reason that the general public largely doesn't like academics is because they, think we all think that we're somehow in an ivory tower and where we know everything, you know, nothing just Listen to us, it's combative. We approach it with an intellectual sort of mindset and try to give you facts. The other side is using emotion. And so I saw this. This what was it? I guess it was maybe in March, we had our science communication. We even hear it here. We had a keynote speaker that talked about one of the reasons that we're having such a difficult time getting across our sort of ideas and the data, the things that are real, right. It's not an opinion how the reason that we're losing is because we're fighting with facts, and they're fighting with emotion. Right? We need to be connecting emotionally, not just with facts, because the facts actually don't matter in a lot of cases, right? They want to, they ultimately want to believe the thing that sort of matches themselves don't matter. You mean for for, for whether or not what not a person in the general public is going to decide whether or not what's real and what isn't? Right? What actually is real doesn't doesn't oftentimes matter, they want the thing that sort of matches them. And is the thing that's made the emotional connection, right? If I made the connection that said, hey, you know, what, this thing is dangerous, if you do it, you might die, right? They they're making that connection, as opposed to, well, this, we've done a lot of studies, and they said, there's there, they're no, none of these Nisour negative side effects that do this, and that you're you're not using the same language, you're not using the same parts of the brain. And we make emotional decisions very, very quickly. Whereas rational ones take time to process. And so we're losing sort of the public battle, because we're not actually fighting and, and communicating with emotion. And so and that's, that's actually one of the things that when I look at, who are those that are sort of on academic Twitter and trying to get their, their message out the those that are being the most successful, you know, it's the ones that are trying to connect emotionally. And so if you look at that particular lens, you go, there, the reason that this is working, and then you look at those that are basically only sort of successful among other scientists, in essence, don't matter that much, right? You're doing a thing, it might be fine, you're connecting with people, there are some professional benefits, but you're not reaching the public. It's those that are doing the emotional parts. And so we think about how should the general public what should they think about science? Right now they're being told what to think about science from people that don't have science as a priority, or something that actually matters. So if science is going to matter, we need to be reaching the general public, emotionally.

Not just with facts and logic question. I mean, sort of, you know, a farmer wants to know, right, sort of, don't just be too academic on me, right? Like, tell me actually how this is important how this is useful, right? And right. So emotion isn't always just I think I mean, sounds right. It's not always just like, let me get you riled up. Yeah, it's like, speak to the things that I care about, too.

Yeah. I mean, no. And I want to, and I also want to get across the fact that that, you know, when you're when you're doing these things, it's that you care about that other, you care about the other person, you're not you're not approaching them as somehow as an enemy or that something is wrong. It is approaching sort of the no matter who you interact with, as in a caring way. And you're using, you're utilizing your sort of emotional skillset to get across a set of information that's going to benefit them, their family, those are the ways that we actually communicate the best.

So one of the things that I wanted to make sure we covered here, and so I can kind of tie it in with this is you are focusing on undergraduate research, too, right? I mean, that's taking up more and more of your time these days. Are you talking about these sorts of things with students right at the very beginning of their science education, because so many of us have been inculcated with the remove the emotion from it as part of our education. Right? So is that something you guys cover and focus on that program? So?

No. So because when I really care about the kinds of programs that we've been, the kind of program that we've been building for the last three years is really an introduction to how science works. Right? And so we try to remove a lot of barriers for students. So it's a small amount of time, it's only 10 hours over the entire semester, or over about 10 weeks. There's no cost for they don't have to sign up for it as a class.

And so low time this is particular this is a program that you're talking about.

Yeah, yeah, this is a program that we've developed and it will be across campus this fall. And hopefully, it's something that we end up growing to where a few 1000 students a year are running through the program. And because of my new position now, in directing undergraduate research across the university, I think we'll be successful and, and doing it. But what ends up happening is, if you try to remove as many barriers as possible, you also don't ask students to think originally on their first experience with science, it's sort of ridiculous that we would say, Oh, we're gonna have you sort of work in lab for a bit. And then, you know, if you come up with an idea, you can explore that. We barely ask that of our graduate students, why would we ask that of a brand new, or random undergraduate who's had no experience. So, we give them the small kinds of projects. So, they learn how to do something, they learn how to analyze data, to do a little bit of research on the topic, put together a scientific poster, and then we have them present through a poster symposium. And what's great is that, it doesn't really matter what the project is, right? Does it just, it just, it just doesn't matter? It does, they just, it's just going through the process of how science works. And then it's the confidence that they gain giving that particular poster because the first time they give it, it's not going to be all that wonderful. So they get a chance here, once again, this idea of sort of productive failure, they get to screw up a little bit, learn from that, and then someone comes around immediately, and they get a chance to present it again. And then they screw up a little bit less. And then they get to learn from that and do it all over again. And by the time they've given it four or five or six times the confidence they have and the way that they give their poster is entirely different than that very first one. And they leave there that confidence that they gained now, for lots of students that are sort of scared to even approach how to do science or get involved with a lab. They think, oh, I can't do it. I don't know what that is. Now they've gained that they feel that once again, it's the experience has given them emotional value, right? It's given them a sense of I can do this, and they're ready to take the next step.

And you're talking about getting students into doing research undergraduate students into doing research who might not have been thinking about it at all at all. Yeah, yeah. That's it just because you talked about the barrier, right? Yeah. We've got we've got undergraduates who are already ready to go and sort of totally into right, you know, the idea, and they want to do some research, and they know that that's a possibility and are there and then we've got other students who sort of somehow get picked out in a class, right? Or something happened yet. And then he started getting engaged in research, maybe a professor notices that or something like that. Right? Yeah. But then for the, you know, so many other students, right? They don't come in knowing this, or they don't come in, you know, they don't happen to have that sort of opportunity where they get, you know, they get into it, right. So what you're trying to do is to open up to every possibility statics, right, right, we can all get engaged and get some research and they kind of, kind of get their feet wet, maybe is that kind of the way. It's there?

Yeah, it is a we don't exclude anyone, right, everyone's welcome across all and we've had students from every possible major on campus participate in this upcoming fall, it'll span from, you know, dance, and music and theater, to philosophy to English. And then, you know, all the physics and biology and chemistry, I mean, every discipline will be involved. And having students, and this is sort of the the great part that sort of adds into that, that the interdisciplinary sort of dynamic as well is you may have a student that's in, you know, a sort of a classic STEM field, but they might actually want to do a research project, right, a scholarship project in English, or philosophy, or art or something else. Great. Those are the things that we want. So it turns out, roughly half the students that are involved in the program, have a very clear idea of I kind of want to do something in this area, the other half, really just want to explore, and those are the ones that we really try to sort of cross pollinate, we try to give them experiences that are outside of their major. Because we want them to gain that. Because you're gonna interact with that faculty member in that lab or that group or that department, whatever the case might be in a different kind of way. So yeah, we really want to make it as open as possible, give them that first taste, and really give them the confidence to take that next step. Even if for most of them, that next step isn't going to necessarily be in a STEM field or career.

I think that's an important point, right, is that you know, we sort of talk about the quote unquote, public a lot of these students if they get this, this experience are going to become the public. So giving you know, if you eliminate the barriers, give them a small project that still highlights the scientific process right now. Now we have a whole bunch of people who aren't going into research that now have a better understanding of what that is exactly. You talk a little bit about the scalability of this sort of thing.

Yeah. So right now, the sort of the great part about a project like this is that normally what we do with students is we bring them in, we spend, you know, three months, six months a year, sort of training them, and they get good at something, we hope to keep them in lab for two or three years, it's a, it's a great model for those students. And it's, something that we have to sort of continue to do. But it's entirely impractical. If you have, you know, 1000 faculty and 23, or 24,000. Students, you just can't do that. And so there needs to be another way to sort of approach allowing students to sort of gain this undergrad research experience. And so because these are such small time, things, they don't have to be novel, original kinds of things. It's just about process. A faculty member is maybe only committing two or three hours, right, maybe of that entire 10 hour project, maybe two or three hours. And if you do it, right, so I did 26, myself last fall, just me, goodness, anything is my goal before this new position was to do 50, myself this fall, and I still might try it, because if you do it right, you actually can work in small groups. And they're all just doing slight little variants of the same kind of project, they get to work together. So there's some peer mentoring that's involved as well. They do their thing, you work with them on their parts. So they're still getting some individual attention. But they're also getting a little bit of group attention as well. And they're working through the process. And so if you think about it differently, you can act one faculty member can actually serve, a lot of students are not just thinking, Oh, I have to really, the mindset is different for the pie. The way that we do this is not thinking about what's best for the pie, it's thinking about what's best for the student. And so if you can commit just a handful of hours, right, that's really all you're asking a handful of hours, to participate in a program that you're going to train, maybe a lot more students, I'm mostly asking faculty, if they're willing to do two, right? If you can do two, and then some say, oh, I can, I can probably do three or four, great, I love you, right, you'll be at the top of my list all the time. But I'll take whoever right, I'm just, I just want them to be involved. And the great part is, if you do this, right, you actually are finding new great students for your lab and for your colleagues, labs. And there, they end up going on there that they're sort of the you know, end up being the best students in your department you're like, and they came out of nowhere. And so we've had students, you know, we've grown our minor program, because of this. We have almost half of our graduate students in our department now have come from this program. Because we have those that are coming from other other disciplines that go, this is great, like we can, this is actually a career I can do this. And so the benefits, you think, well, if everyone does that there's not a net change across all departments. True. But now you're getting our students that are really excited and motivated about the work that they're doing. They end up being better students within your, within your department. And so the benefits that we've seen have been astronomical, just by being willing, our faculty and all of our all of our faculty and entomology participate. And a lot of the research scientists at the USDA are also involved and more will be involved this upcoming year just in terms sort of our group, but within entomology. And so they all see the value the person who just won the Truman Scholarship, right, Claire Wycoff, she's a she's an Ag Economics major she did our program is an entomology minor, gained a little bit of research experience working in a lab at the USDA, and her entire proposal built, built around sustainable ag and dealing with these wicked problems was right. So it's aligned from the UN report is built around the insect experience that she had for 10 weeks. And so when they released the letter saying, Oh, this wonderful student doing this, you know, a nice quarter of the press release was about her experience in our program. And so that's, those are the kinds of things that can happen, right? So we might think that they're small, and it may not be the same value as a larger sort of year or two long, sort of year experience, but they actually can be very transformative.

So what's an example of just a small project a student might do?

So, they are all over the place, right? So let's say that For me, I have had. So I will do this caveat, because I recruit from all over not everyone necessarily wants to do an entomology kind of project. I'm sort of the oddball in my department and the oddball in the college, my background is all over the place. So I've had a simple things where we've gone out with students and just surveyed insects on different kinds of plants to see sort of looking at Habitat usage done that a few afternoons, I've had students that really liked, you know, big cats at the zoo. And so we set up projects where they went to the zoo, and they observe big cat behavior. Three or four times over a couple of months, I've had education students that were interested in how videos how effective videos might be, or something like that. So we've had students do those sorts of things. We had a student who is a, in one of the majors in what was human ecology. I don't remember the name, its new name, but within human ecology, who was also an athlete, and so she did a survey on how sleep deprived athletes were versus non athletes, and how successful they thought they were in classes or something like that. I've had psychology students, because I'm, I enjoyed doing game theory, things like that. So we had two psychology students do a project where they were, we did a simple game, to look at cooperation versus cheating. And they basically tested some of their colleagues, they played the game, and some college students play the game. And then one of them worked at a nursing home. And they had they had this they had the, the residents there play the game, they their apothem, their hypothesis going into it was that the those that the nursing home would actually cooperate with each other much more. And it turns out, it was exactly the opposite, right? College students cooperate with each other wonderfully, and those in the nursing homes were just cheating each other left and right. And they thought it was the greatest thing in the world. And so it's, it's, these are things so what I like to do is I meet with every student individually, talk to him for 1530 minutes an hour, just depending on sort of what it needs to try to figure out. You know, who they are, what they're interested in what they want to do with their life, and then try to match them up with a faculty member. And then if I can match them up with somebody else, great. If not, I just take them myself. And then once I filled all the slots, because I don't turn anybody away, whoever keeps showing up, I just keep taking them, which is why I ended up with 26. Last year, it was only going to be like 10, I thought Well, 10 is petitions a breeze, and then it just kept growing. And so what I had them do in that case, so I had a lot of students, how do I actually handle so many at once, but I'm doing all these other things as well, is one of our labs, they have a ton of different strains of different species of, of little beetle, right, the little red flower beetle, right, which is a significant pest out of Tom Phillips lab. And so what we would do is say, so, doesn't do genetics, or environment matter, and how beetles grouped together. And so we basically had them use two different strains. And we set had them set them up to where they would either be associated with things that were their genetic, same type, or things that were genetically different, right, we had all sorts of possible combinations. And then we bring them we leave them like that for a couple of weeks. And we bring them all back together and look at how they associate and build groups. Do genetics matter? Does the environment matter? And it turns out, it's strain specific, right. So some strains will call up more with their own strain. And then other strains really like hanging out with other beetles. The year before, we tried this with actually different species. And there was one string that like the ride on the back of a weevil and we couldn't get it to stop in our little in our experiments and be like, Well, what do we call that? I mean, I don't they like to hang out for sure. I don't know what's going on. But it's it's it can really be anything right? None of that is are none of those are things that I normally do in my research, right? I've never been sort of my focus. But there are things that I know a little bit about, and it's enough to set up a small project that they're interested in. And then what's awesome is they then dig deeper themselves and they get a chance to really own that particular project. So that's how I approach those things.

That's awesome. That's really great. I'm glad you're doing that and you're scaling that up here on the university. We want to be respectful of your time we've been talking for a while now. Scott, John, do you have anything else you'd like to add?

No other than just it's fascinating and super valuable.

Is there anything we haven't covered or anything you'd like to say, before we sign off?

No, I think I've rambled pretty good. So no, I'm good.

Well, Hey Jeremy. We really appreciate it. This is great work. We look forward to chatting again. Awesome, thanks. I appreciate it.

Great stuff.

If you have any questions or comments you would like to share check out our website at https://www.k-state.edu/research/global-food/ and drop us an email.

Our music was adapted from Dr. Wayne Goins's album Chronicles of Carmela. Special thanks to him for providing that to us. Something to Chew On is produced by the Office of Research Development at Kansas State University.