Search

Measurement literacy is required for strong scientific reasoning, effective experimental design, conceptual and empirical validation of measurement quantities, and the intelligible interpretation of error in theory construction. This discourse examines how issues in measurement are posed and resolved and addresses potential misunderstandings. Examples drawn from across the sciences are used to show that measurement literacy promotes the goals of scientific discourse and provides the necessary foundation for carving out perspectives and carrying out interventions in science., Competing Interests: Competing interests statement:The authors declare no competing interest.

Coinfection of a host by more than 1 parasite is more common than single infection in wild environments and can have differing impacts, although coinfections have relatively rarely been quantified. Host immune responses to coinfection can contribute to infection costs but are often harder to predict than those associated with single infection, due to the influence of within-host parasite–parasite interactions on infection virulence. To first quantify coinfection in a common bird species, and then to test for immune-related impacts of coinfection, we investigated the prevalence and immune response to avian haemosporidian (genera: Plasmodium , Haemoproteus and Leucocytozoon ) coinfection in wild blackbirds. Coinfection status was diagnosed using a 1-step multiplex polymerase chain reaction, immune response was quantified through white blood cell counts and heterophil: lymphocyte ratios, and parasitaemia was quantified for each infected sample. We detected high rates of haemosporidian infection and coinfection, although neither impacted immune activity, despite a significantly higher parasitaemia in individuals experiencing double vs single infection. This suggests that immune-related costs of haemosporidian single and coinfection are low in this system. This could be due to long-term host–parasite coevolution, which has decreased infection virulence, or a consequence of reduced costs associated with chronic infections compared to acute infections. Alternatively, our results may obscure immune-related costs associated with specific combinations of coinfecting haemosporidian genera, species or lineages. Future research should investigate interactions that occur between haemosporidian parasites within hosts, as well as the ways in which these interactions and resulting impacts may vary depending on parasite identity.

Community science can provide crucial insights into population dynamics and demography. To date, its effectiveness for understanding human-wildlife interactions has not been tested. This is vital for designing effective wildlife management plans. We used a case study of an individually marked population of mute swans Cygnus olor, to test the reliability of community scientist data for quantifying self-reported interactions. We compared 5,251 community scientist sightings of individually marked birds with 317 observations recorded through systematic recording methods, to test the reliability of sightings, and of self-reported human-swan interactions. 98.86% of ring readings were correctly reported; sighting reliability increased with experience and was higher when the observer fed the birds. Community scientist observations were reliable for quantifying family group size, but not clutch size. Self-reported data for assessing feeding interactions with wildlife were not comparable with systematic recording methods. 22% of standardised observations recorded supplementary feeding of swans by people. This is the first systematic quantification of the frequency of interaction of wild waterfowl with humans through supplementary feeding in the Northern hemisphere; we highlight potential impacts of this common human-wildlife interaction for both birds and people. We provide new insights into using community science methods as potential alternatives to more time-consuming systematic methods. Community science methods may be useful across a range of systems where humans and wildlife interact, but we highlight the need for validation of the reliability of community scientist data, particularly self-reported behaviours, before being used to inform management and conservation practices., Competing Interests: Declarations. Competing interests: The authors declare no competing interests., (© 2025. The Author(s).)