Council of Canadian Academies

CCA appoints expert panel on enhancing national research infrastructure

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

Canada’s research infrastructure is essential to the future of science and innovation, economic prosperity, and well-being throughout the country. At the request of Innovation, Science, and Economic Development Canada, the CCA has formed an expert panel to support the federal government in optimizing Canada’s research infrastructure—from its national-scale scientific facilities to its digital platforms and collaborative networks—through evidence synthesis and strategic insights. Janet King, Chair of Polar Knowledge Canada’s Board of Directors and Vice-Chair of the Canadian Light Source’s Board of Directors, will serve as panel chair.

“A strategic understanding of Canada’s national research infrastructure is critical to meeting future challenges and opportunities,” said King. “With my fellow panelists, I look forward to assessing the strengths and weaknesses of Canada’s current research infrastructure portfolio, and international best practices in research infrastructure planning and development.”

King will lead a multidisciplinary panel of experts in economic development, science and innovation policy, intergovernmental and interdisciplinary collaboration, organizational psychology, research and development funding, research infrastructure and impacts, data governance, and more. Together, panelists will answer the following question:

How can Canada optimize its national-scale research infrastructure, encompassing large-scale facilities, digital platforms, and collaborative networks, to effectively support current and future needs?

Learn more about the CCA’s national research infrastructure assessment.

The Expert Panel on Enhancing Canada’s National Research Infrastructure:

• Janet King (chair) Chair, Board of Directors, Polar Knowledge Canada; Vice-Chair, Board of Directors, Canadian Light Source (Ottawa, ON)
• Andrew Applejohn, Executive Director, Programs, Polar Knowledge Canada (Yellowknife, NT)
• Frédéric Bouchard, C.Q., FRSC, Dean, Faculty of Arts and Sciences, University of Montréal (Montréal, QC)
• Marcela Carena, Executive Director, Perimeter Institute (Waterloo, ON)
• Jodi Cooley, Executive Director, SNOLAB; Professor of Physics, Department of Physics, Engineering Physics & Astronomy, Queen’s University (Lively, ON)
• Kathryn Graham, FCAHS, Professor of Research Impact Assessment, University of Calgary (Calgary, AB)
• Janet E. Halliwell, FRSC, Principal, J.E. Halliwell Associates Inc. (Salt Spring Island, BC)
• Natalie Harrower, Executive Director, Canadian Research Data Centre Network (CRDCN); McMaster University (Hamilton, ON)
• Gwen Phillips, Governance Strategist, Ktunaxa Nation, BC Data Champion (Ktunaxa Nation, BC)
• Eric Siegel, Chief Innovation Officer, Ocean Frontier Institute, Dalhousie University (Halifax, NS)
• Guillame St-Onge, Director, Institut des sciences de la mer – Université du Québec à Rimouski; Tier I Canada Research Chair in Marine Geology (Rimouski, Québec)
• John Womersley, Special Advisor, University of Edinburgh (Edinburgh, United Kingdom)

Expert panel members serve as individuals and do not represent the views of their organizations of affiliation or employment.

To stay up to date on the progress of this and other CCA projects, sign up for our mailing list.

 

SwRI provides rapid response to address critical aging aircraft issue

Institute researchers worked with U.S. Air Force after discovery of unexpected crack

Southwest Research Institute

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

Southwest Research Institute collaborated with the U.S. Air Force to ensure fleet safety when a large crack was unexpectedly found near the cockpit of a T-38 Talon. The Institute has been working to sustain the T-38, which was first introduced in 1961, for more than 40 years.

view more 

Credit: United States Air Force

SAN ANTONIO — March 18, 2025 — Southwest Research Institute (SwRI) collaborated with the U.S. Air Force to ensure fleet safety after a large crack was unexpectedly found near the cockpit of a T-38 Talon. A new study describes how SwRI’s risk and damage tolerance analyses helped determine a more effective inspection schedule, allowing the Air Force to find cracks before they grow to critical size.

For several decades, SwRI has provided engineering support to the Air Force to extend the life of aircraft that have exceeded their original design life. The Institute has been working to sustain the T-38, first introduced in 1961, for more than 40 years. This activity includes using SwRI-developed models to predict crack growth to determine optimal inspection and maintenance schedules. The Air Force also uses finite element models to help predict the potential crack locations of the aircraft.

“Typically, our role involves predicting structural life and providing analysis used to help determine an inspection or repair schedule,” said SwRI Lead Engineer Laura Hunt. “In the spring of 2017, when a large, unexpected crack was found by a crew chief in a longeron, a key structural component along the aircraft’s fuselage, we were equipped for a rapid response.”

This discovery resulted in the immediate grounding of the entire T-38 fleet for visual inspections, which were completed within four days. SwRI assisted with performing risk, damage tolerance, and failure analyses.

While the crack appeared in a location that full scale fatigue tests and finite element models did not predict, SwRI responded swiftly, minimizing downtime and maintaining safety, resulting from the Institute’s prior analysis work with the T-38 and other aging aircraft.

“A new problem was identified and the entire team supporting the T-38 reacted quickly to ensure the safety of the T-38 and return it to service in a manner of days,” said David Wieland, who oversees SwRI’s Aerospace Structures Section.

Senior Research Engineer Mirella Vargas led the destructive failure analysis for the cracked T-38 longeron. This entailed photographing the as-received component at the macro scale and examining specific areas with optical and electron microscopes at the micro scale, as well as identifying factors that contributed to the cracking. This analysis uncovered an additional crack in the longeron and determined that structural fatigue, the gradual weakening and eventual failure of a material due to cyclic stresses, caused both cracks.

“With this new information, we updated the model to improve the risk analyses,” Vargas said. “Consequently, the frequency of inspections was adjusted, though not drastically changed. To maintain aircraft structural integrity, models may need periodic updates to ensure the safety and functionality of the aircraft components.”

The updated inspection schedule ensured any risk remained low, balancing safety and efficiency until the remaining longerons could be replaced.

“This experience demonstrated our ability to quickly respond to unexpected issues,” Hunt said. “It has reinforced the importance of being prepared and the need for robust analysis methods.”

The paper “T-38 failure analysis of an upper cockpit longeron for safety of flight and sustainment,” appears in the Engineering Failure Analysis journal and can be accessed at https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1350630725001220.

For more information, visit https://www.swri.org/markets/defense-security/defense-aerospace-aircraft/aerospace-structures/aircraft-structural-integrity-program-asip.

---

Journal

Engineering Failure Analysis

DOI

10.1016/j.engfailanal.2025.109381 

Method of Research

Computational simulation/modeling

Subject of Research

Not applicable

Article Title

T-38 failure analysis of an upper cockpit longeron for safety of flight and sustainmen

 

Leafcutter ants recognize and fight pathogen even 30 days after initial contamination, study shows

Characteristics of social immune memory were observed in colonies of Atta sexdens exposed to four different pathogenic fungi. The insects increased their cleaning behavior one week and one month after initial contact, but not after 60 days.

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

Leafcutter ants recognize the pathogen even a month after first contact. In the photo, a lemon leafcutter cleans fungus cultivated by the species

view more 

Credit: Quimi Vidaurre Montoya/IB-UNESP

A study conducted by researchers from São Paulo State University (UNESP), in Brazil, and collaborators shows that lemon leafcutter ants (Atta sexdens) exhibit behaviors that go beyond so-called social immunity, i.e. the ability to detect pathogens and try to get rid of them for the benefit of the colony.

In an article published in the journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B, scientists report that these insects are able to recognize a pathogenic fungus they have already been exposed to – even 30 days after the initial contamination – and fight it even more intensely. To do this, they increase their cleaning behavior and recruit more workers for the activity, indicating what could be called “social immune memory”.
 
“If we think of the colony as a superorganism, these behaviors would be like the immune system. In the same way that our defense cells attack invaders, such as viruses and bacteria, the workers fight infections that could harm the colony,” explains Aryel Goes, first author of the study, carried out as part of his FAPESP master’s degree at the Institute of Biosciences (IB) of UNESP, in Rio Claro, with the support of FAPESP.
 
“What we’re showing is that the social immune system of ants can store information about previous infections with the same pathogen, a phenomenon seen in our immune cells, but which occurs at a behavioral level in ant colonies,” he adds.
 
In one of the experiments, the colonies were exposed to the same pathogen for the first time, then again after seven days, and finally after a month. This last exposure had the most intense and rapid response, with more ants involved in both cleaning themselves and the fungus they cultivate to eat.
 
Atta sexdens is a leafcutter ant, a group that has a mutualistic relationship with fungi, which they cultivate inside their colonies. The fungi, in turn, provide the ants with nutrients (read more at: agencia.fapesp.br/52936).
 
Of the four pathogens tested, two were harmful to the ants and two to the cultivated fungi. The study is part of a project supported by FAPESP and coordinated by André Rodrigues, professor at IB-UNESP.
 
In a second experiment, the researchers exposed other colonies to the pathogen, repeated the contamination after seven days, and then a third time only 60 days after the initial contact. The responses were much less intense than in the colonies re-exposed after 30 days.
 
“Unlike our immune system, which in some cases responds expressively to a specific pathogen even many years after initial exposure, ants’ social immune memory has a shorter time frame, so they need to be constantly exposed to the pathogen for the information to persist,” adds Goes, who is currently a PhD student at Ohio State University in the United States.

Specific response

In the third experiment, the researchers tested the specificity of the ants’ response. Seven days after contamination with one pathogen, they exposed the ants to another. Cleaning behavior and recruitment of other workers were less intense when this second pathogen was introduced.

The following week, the first pathogen was reapplied to the colony. The return elicited a moderate response, similar to that of the first infection, but much less intense than that of the ants that had a third contact 30 days after the first.

“One hypothesis is that the lemon leafcutter reduced its hygienic response to avoid spreading the new pathogen to the rest of the colony. This is because cleaning altruism, in which ants lick each other to get rid of pathogens, can also spread new contaminants. That’s why they would have been more careful with a second infection that was completely new to the colony,” says Rodrigues, a researcher associated with the Center for Research on Biodiversity Dynamics and Climate Change (CBioClima), one of the Research, Innovation and Dissemination Centers (RIDCs) supported by FAPESP.

One question that the experiments may raise is whether the hygienic behavior is simply the ants’ response to an unknown substance that is not necessarily pathogenic.

To test this possibility, the researchers applied a solution that does not harm ants or fungi to five colonies as a control. The hygienic responses were the least intense of all the experiments in the 80 colonies analyzed throughout the study, showing that the ants do indeed recognize pathogens and different exposures.

One hypothesis put forward by the researchers is that the social immunity observed in the study may indicate an improvement in the efficiency of contaminant removal, with a positive effect on group survival.

Because there is no information on how these variable responses affect the ants’ survival, it is not yet possible to determine whether they actually constitute a social immune memory, but further experiments could test this possibility.

“Lemon leafcutters are adapted to open areas, so they benefit from monocultures and are a pest. Their cleaning behavior is one of the obstacles to effective biological control without the use of chemical insecticides. Understanding the social immunity of leafcutters can help to develop more effective and ecologically correct controls,” concludes Rodrigues.

About FAPESP

The São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) is a public institution with the mission of supporting scientific research in all fields of knowledge by awarding scholarships, fellowships and grants to investigators linked with higher education and research institutions in the state of São Paulo, Brazil. FAPESP is aware that the very best research can only be done by working with the best researchers internationally. Therefore, it has established partnerships with funding agencies, higher education, private companies, and research organizations in other countries known for the quality of their research and has been encouraging scientists funded by its grants to further develop their international collaboration.

 

---

Journal

Proceedings of the Royal Society of London B Biological Sciences

DOI

10.1098/rspb.2024.1097 

Article Title

Exploring immune memory traits in the social immunity of a fungus-growing ant

 

Terrorists time their attacks during periods of security or financial crisis

New research from Binghamton University political scientists explores why reputation matters in the timing of violent acts

Binghamton University

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

 

image: 

The remains of a building following an al-Shabaab attack in Mogadishu, Somalia, on October 14th, 2017.

view more 

Credit: AMISOM Public Information

BINGHAMTON, N.Y. -- Terrorists time their attacks during periods of security or financial crisis, according to new research from political scientists at Binghamton University, State University of New York.

To a bystander, a terrorist attack may seem an indiscriminate act of violence, timed solely to inflict maximum damage on its victims.

But the timing of such attacks is strategic, involving a series of tradeoffs to strike vulnerable targets while preserving the group’s reputation, according to research by Binghamton University Professor of Political Science Seden Akcinaroglu and doctoral candidate Yusuf Evirgen. Published in the journal Conflict Management and Peace Science, their article “Ripe moments for terror attacks: Opportunity benefits-reputation tradeoff” explores this dynamic.

“Reputation is crucial for terrorist groups because it affects their ability to gain public support, attract recruits, and negotiate with governments,” Evirgen and Akcinaroglu explained. “A negative reputation can alienate potential supporters and invite harsher counterterrorism measures.”

For terrorists, the purpose of violence goes beyond just instilling fear. Terrorist groups engage in violence to achieve strategic goals, such as undermining government legitimacy, achieving policy changes through coercion, and demonstrating the group’s resolve, Akcinaroglu and Evirgen said. Violence can also communicate strength to rivals, supporters or potential recruits.

“The choice of timing and target often conveys a specific message about the group’s objectives,” they explained​.

On the other hand, indiscriminate violence can harm a group’s reputation, particularly when it results in civilian casualties that alienate the larger public. Terrorist groups will sometimes avoid claiming responsibility for particularly brutal attacks to avoid this backlash, they said.

What differentiates indiscriminate and deliberate violence is targeting; while the former affects random people, the latter focuses on perceived enemies, such as government officials or military targets.

Humanitarian, security and financial crises

Acts of violence often occur during periods of crisis when state resources are stretched thin. But not all crises are created equal.

Akcinaroglu and Evirgen analyze three types of crises in connection with terrorist attacks: security crises, which involve war or the threat of war; financial crises, such as recessions or economic downturns; and humanitarian crises, such as natural disasters.

While security or financial crises represent targets of opportunity, terrorists are less likely to strike during humanitarian crises, they found; the shared human suffering during humanitarian crises creates an environment in which violence is particularly condemned. In these situations, terrorist groups will often participate in relief efforts to improve their public image. Examples include the PKK after the 1999 earthquake in Izmit, Turkey, and the Free Aceh Movement in Indonesia following a 2005 tsunami.

In humanitarian crises, tensions across ethnic and social divides are subsumed by a larger compassion. Security and financial crises, on the other hand, exacerbate these divides, eroding empathy as groups compete for resources or political power.

For terrorist groups, financial crises provide the best opportunity to strike.

Threats of war can trigger a “rally around the flag” effect, boosting the perception of government legitimacy and reducing support for terrorist groups, although persistent ethnic or political divisions can still provide them with an opening.

“There is also evidence that some governments may exaggerate or manufacture security threats to unify the population and justify repressive measures​,” Akcinaroglu and Evirgen said.

Economic downturns, on the other hand, can weaken state legitimacy and public trust. Reforms intended to address the crisis often lead to mass layoffs, the collapse of social safety nets and widespread bankruptcies, which deepen divisions in society.

Terrorist groups can exploit the fragmented public response at little reputational cost. The researchers point to the Indonesian financial crisis of 1997 to 1998, which not only destabilized that country’s economy, but fueled widespread violence against ethnic Chinese.

“Understanding these patterns can help policymakers anticipate and mitigate attacks more effectively,” the researchers said. “The research also challenges the notion that terrorists act purely opportunistically—reputation matters, and their decisions reflect careful cost-benefit calculations​.”

---

Journal

Conflict Management and Peace Science

DOI

10.1177/0738894225131711 

Method of Research

Data/statistical analysis

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

Ripe moments for terror attacks: Opportunity benefits–reputation tradeoff

 

Kansas, Missouri farmers avoid discussing climate change regardless of opinions, study finds

Wether they believe or are skeptical, farmers don't discuss climate change to avoid arguments, violence, harm to livelihood

Peer-Reviewed Publication

University of Kansas

Facebook

XLinkedInWeChatBlueskyMessageWhatsAppEmail

LAWRENCE — We have all avoided having conversations if the topic is controversial or may lead to an argument. Farmers, who are on the front lines of climate change, avoid talking about it with their neighbors, community members, elected officials and even their own families because of potential conflict and harm to their livelihood, new research from the University of Kansas has found.

Researchers conducted interviews with more than 20 farmers in Kansas and Missouri to understand their communication about climate change. Results showed respondents had a range of views on climate change from being convinced of its effects and taking action in their farming operations to skepticism — but all avoided discussing it to varying extents.

“People were worried about a variety of reactions. Some said they couldn’t even talk about it with their families because they would give them a weird look if they brought it up,” said Hong Tien Vu, associate professor of journalism & mass communications at KU and lead author of the study. “That was a low-level worry, but others said they had heard people laughing at them or were concerned about their neighbors not working with them if they had different opinions.”

The study was born from research Vu and students started during the COVID-19 pandemic. The group received private donor funding to study local climate change effects. Students interviewed scientists on campus and farmers in surrounding communities about climate change, their views on it and how it affects them. Farmers were reluctant to discuss the topic on camera.

“When we talk about climate change, we tend to look at broad effects like sea level rise. It can be difficult for people to find relevance in topics like that in their lives. We wanted to focus on factors that relate to people’s lives here in Kansas,” Vu said. “We wanted to interview farmers specifically because they are on the front lines of climate change impacts, both in terms of contributing to it through factors like emissions and feeling the effects of it.”

Given farmers’ reluctance to discuss the topic on camera, researchers decided to conduct interviews in which they could guarantee anonymity for respondents. Farmers then discussed their opinions on the topic, how it affects their lives and work, and why they avoid discussing it. 

The researchers examined the topic through the lens of spiral of silence theory, which posits that when discussing controversial topics, people judge the prevailing opinion of others before deciding whether to speak. If they feel they are in the minority, people will often choose not to discuss a topic, which can have long-term ramifications, including silencing people and exacerbating problems that people choose not to address.

The results confirmed the prevalence of a spiral of silence among Kansas and Missouri farmers. The respondents were both men and women, ranging in age from their 20s to 70s. When asked their thoughts on climate change, responses ranged from believing it is real, scientifically proven and having effects now, to being skeptical both of its prevalence and whether it is caused by humans. But across the board, respondents indicated they generally avoid discussing the topic.

The farmers gave a range of reasons why they avoid it. Many simply did not want a conflict that could result in violence or an argument with neighbors or community members. Some feared it could damage their business, as neighbors might be less likely to work with them and share equipment or people might give them a negative online review and tell people not to buy their products at farmers' markets and other locales if they disagreed with their views.

Farmers said they also tried to gauge a person’s opinions based on interpersonal cues before deciding whether to discuss climate change. For example, the type of vehicle a person drives, whether a large pickup or hybrid car, can provide clues about their opinions on the matter.

Spiral of silence theory holds that people traditionally used news media to gauge political opinion on a potentially controversial topic. However, respondents in the study indicated they felt news media only politicized the topic and therefore was not a trustworthy way of determining how people felt. Instead, many turned to social media where they could see if people posted on the topic or to find others to discuss it with, without fear of arguments or contentious conversations.

“The algorithm can allow you to choose who to talk to or who to exclude,” Vu said of social media. “People also often feel masked on social media. To me, that is a way of losing conversations and can give you a false sense of prevalence of opinions by eliminating cross examples.”

The study, co-written with Nhung Nguyen, lecturer; Nazra Izhar, doctoral candidate; and Vaibhav Diwanji, assistant professor of journalism and mass communications, all at KU, was published in the journal Environmental Communication.

When asked how they deal with the effects of climate change, several farmers reported taking measures such as switching to organic methods, fallowing fields to counter overuse of land and seeking information on more sustainable practices. Several also reported feeling isolated in general and given that they felt they could not discuss climate change, took to journaling as a way to process their thoughts.

Vu and colleagues, who have studied how climate change is viewed and reported globally, said understanding how the issue is viewed and discussed in more local settings is also important because people need to work together in day-to-day operations like farming as well as for policy solutions. If pressing issues are not discussed, it can negatively affect how they are dealt with on interpersonal levels and at local levels of government, they argue. 

As part of the larger research project, the group plans to use journalistic storytelling techniques to document how people are dealing with climate change locally and their opinions on the topic. They also plan to test the effects of different content elements such as psychological distance and modalities like text, video, podcast or virtual reality on public perceptions of and behaviors toward sustainability.

“In our conversations with farmers, we found they often felt excluded from other conversations on climate change,” Vu said. “It felt like they were picking their battles with everyone, because they are often blamed for things like emissions, while working on adjusting their farming practices for mitigation and adaptation purpose. We think not talking about climate change is a serious issue.”

---

Journal

Environmental Communication

DOI

10.1080/17524032.2025.2477260 

Method of Research

Survey

Subject of Research

People

Article Title

“Climate Change is Real, but I Don't Wanna Talk About It”: Unraveling Spiral of Silence Effects Regarding Climate Change Among Midwestern American Farmers

Article Publication Date

18-Mar-2025