"Where do I even start?" Recommendations for faculty diversifying syllabi in ecology, evolution, and the life sciences.

Diversifying curricula is of increasing interest in higher education, including in ecology and evolution and allied fields. Yet, many educators may not know where to start. Here we provide a framework for meeting standard curriculum goals while enacting anti-racist and anti-colonial syllabi that is grounded in the development of a sustainable network of educators. In addition to highlighting this professional learning process and sharing the list of resources our group has developed, we provide suggestions to help educators highlight contributions of minoritized groups, explore multiple ways of knowing, and perform critical assessments of foundational views of life and environmental science fields. We further discuss the key classroom dynamics that affect the success of such anti-racist and anti-colonial initiatives. The retention and success of minoritized students in ecology and evolution depends on whether we address injustices in our fields. Our hope is that our fellow educators will use this paper to catalyze their own efforts to diversify their courses.

What drives private landowner decisions? Exploring non-native grass management in the eastern Great Plains.

Non-native grasses used as forage for domestic livestock can negatively impact ecosystem services provided by grasslands. In the U.S., most grazed grasslands are privately owned so the introduction and reduction of non-native grasses are both driven by landowner behavior. Yet, the social factors that shape non-native grass management are rarely explored. To address this knowledge gap, we evaluated how decisions to reduce these grasses through practices such as herbicide application, prescribed fire, and physical removal are influenced by attitudes, norms, and perceived ability. We administered a mixed mode (mailback and online) survey in 2017 to landowners in the eastern Great Plains of the U.S., in a region where cattle production remains the predominant land-use. Using structural equation modeling with parceling, we tested hypotheses related to management decisions derived from a model integrating two theories - the Theory of Planned Behavior and the Norm Activation Model. In this analysis, we identified perceived ability (i.e., access to time, skills, or other necessary resources) as a barrier to adoption for landowners who were already willing to manage non-native grasses. Positive attitudes toward management and increased social norm pressures were both associated with increased sentiments of moral responsibility to reduce non-native grasses. These personal norms, together with attitudes, positively influenced willingness to control non-native grasses. Further, we observed that social norms related to expectations of neighbors had more influence on personal norms than the social norms from natural resource agencies. The power of norms to explain individual management decisions suggests that landowners could be engaged in landscape-scale initiatives by leveraging moral responsibility and influential social groups.

Do habitat preferences improve fitness? Context-specific adaptive habitat selection by a grassland songbird.

Animals are predicted to prefer high-quality over low-quality habitats, but adaptive habitat selection is less straightforward than often assumed. Preferences may improve only specific fitness metrics at particular spatial scales, with variation across time or between sexes. Preferences sometimes even reduce fitness. We investigated the context specificity of adaptive habitat selection, studying dickcissels (Spiza americana)-a polygynous songbird-as a model. From 2014 to 2015, we measured male and female habitat preferences at two scales (territories and landscape patches) on 21 grassland patches in Ringgold County, Iowa, USA. We tested whether preferences improved four fitness metrics-polygyny, avoidance of brood parasitism by brown-headed cowbirds (Molothrus ater), fledgling productivity, and offspring condition. Both sexes preferred territories where offspring attained superior condition and patches where parasitism was infrequent. Females preferred patches where nests produced more fledglings, and in 2014, males on preferred (i.e., early-established) territories attracted more mates and produced more fledglings. However, males on non-preferred (i.e., late-established) territories were more successful in 2015. This inconsistency may have arisen because females were abundant and nest-predation rates were low in May-June 2014, allowing early-settling males to produce many young. In 2015, however, females were more abundant and nests more successful later in the breeding season. Our results show that habitat preferences do not uniformly improve fitness, and some benefits differ between sexes. Moreover, preference-fitness relationships only manifest at specific scales, and annual variation in population and predation dynamics can limit consistency. Detecting adaptive habitat selection thus requires multi-year measurements and careful consideration of relevant scales.