The Next Six Months

Published:January 2026

The next six months of the Three Lakes palaeoecology project will focus on developing fieldwork, sediment analysis and environmental reconstruction, building on the initial stages of research.

Planning the next stage of the project

One of the useful things about a four-year PhD project is the rhythm it imposes. Every six months there is a project team meeting, a chance to stop, take stock, and ask two simple questions: what have we achieved? and what comes next?

Research rarely moves forward in a straight line. Some parts take longer than expected. Some methods prove less useful than hoped. New opportunities appear unexpectedly. What matters is that, step by step, the project continues to move forward — and that is very much where we are now.

Looking Back on the First Year

Overall, the project is moving ahead well. Although there has been a certain amount of juggling of timescales to fit around other people’s schedules and the realities of laboratory and fieldwork, the major goals of the first year have been achieved.

The two biggest tasks were:

• the scoping review
• the recovery of the main sediment core

Both of these turned out to be larger undertakings than originally expected, but both are now well advanced or completed.

The Scoping Review Grew into Something Bigger

The scoping review began as an attempt to assess the use of six biological proxies across Ireland:

• sedimentary ancient DNA
• pollen
• chironomids
• cladocera
• testate amoebae
• diatoms

The aim was not to analyse the results of those studies in detail, but to examine their metadata — where work had been done, what time periods had been studied, and where clear geographical or chronological gaps remained.

During the year, this work expanded significantly when I came into contact with similar research being carried out by Nick Scroxton. By combining datasets, what had begun as a focused scoping review became part of the development of the Danu database, a much larger and more useful resource for Irish palaeoecology.

This broadened the scope of the work and lengthened the timescale, but it also made the final result far more valuable. A second draft of the review has now been completed and handed on to Michelle and Aaron.

Some Things Worked Better Than Others

Not every line of investigation progressed as hoped. Early in the project I worked on extracting and identifying testate amoebae from older sediment cores collected in 2018 and 2021. Unfortunately, whether through storage conditions or the nature of the sediments themselves, very few usable tests were found, and none at all in the deeper layers.

That was disappointing, but not disastrous. Since the project is centred mainly on lake sediments and sedimentary ancient DNA, it does not stop the broader work from moving forward.

Alongside this, I also completed postgraduate training modules in statistics and data analysis and spatial ecology and GIS, both of which have already proved useful to the project.

Building the Surface Record

As part of the groundwork for the main analysis, we collected surface sediment cores from three locations:

• Glandart Lake — a small, higher-elevation lake at about 350 m, with relatively little human influence
• Three Lakes, Middle Lake margin
• Three Lakes, Middle Lake basin centre

These surface cores are important because they give us a modern or near-modern reference point. One of the useful questions emerging from the meeting was how the biological signal from a relatively undisturbed upland lake compares with that from the main project site at Three Lakes.

This comparison may itself become a paper in due course.

The Core — At Last

The biggest fieldwork achievement of the year was the successful recovery of the main sediment core from Middle Lake at Three Lakes in November.

After several postponements, the core was finally recovered over two days of remarkably good weather. In total, we obtained a sequence of about 5.5 metres of sediment, with visible changes in colour and texture strongly suggesting that the record spans from the Late Glacial through the Younger Dryas and into the Holocene.

This is the backbone of the project.

Very soon after the core was recovered, around 100 small subsamples were taken, especially at points where visible sediment changes occurred. These have now been stored safely at -80°C for future sedimentary ancient DNA analysis.

A Bonus from the Fieldwork: The Drone Survey

At the same time as the coring, we were also able to carry out an aerial drone survey of the lake basin.

This was a major bonus. The drone data will help refine our understanding of:

• the catchment draining into the basin
• the present drainage channels and hydrology
• the geomorphology of the basin
• the possibility that the site was once a single larger lake

This work links directly to my interest in the landscape history of the site, and should allow much more detailed GIS modelling than had previously been possible.

So What Comes Next?

The next six months are not simply about “doing more work.” They are about targeting.

The most expensive part of the project is the sedimentary ancient DNA analysis. That means we need to use the next phase wisely: gathering enough supporting evidence from other methods to decide exactly which parts of the core are most informative and worth sequencing.

Several tasks now come into focus.

1. Chironomid Analysis

The first major strand of work is chironomid analysis. I have already made good progress with the surface sediments and improved greatly in both extraction and slide preparation. The next step is to continue with the surface samples and then move into targeted sampling of the main core.

The chironomids should help identify major environmental shifts, especially cooling and warming phases, and may be particularly useful in refining the interpretation of the Late Glacial and early Holocene parts of the sequence.

2. Loss on Ignition and Particle Size Analysis

We will also begin loss on ignition (LOI) and particle size analysis. These will help distinguish between more organic and more minerogenic layers, clarify the sediment structure, and help identify the most important transitions in the core.

This is the kind of background work that is not always visible from the outside, but it is essential. These methods help turn a long sequence of sediment into a readable environmental history.

3. Tephra and Other Chronological Markers

Another line of investigation now moving to the fore is tephra — microscopic volcanic ash layers that may provide valuable chronological control.

If tephra can be identified in the core, it may allow us to tie parts of the sequence to known volcanic events, reducing the need for some radiocarbon dates and helping refine the age model.

There was also discussion of using XRF and other scanning approaches to help identify unusual layers before committing to more detailed analysis.

4. Radiocarbon Dating

Radiocarbon dating will also be important, but the meeting made it clear that dates need to be chosen carefully. The goal is not simply to date as much as possible, but to date the most informative points in the core.

That means using the sedimentology, the chironomids, and any tephra evidence first, so that the dates can be placed where they are most useful.

5. Choosing the sedaDNA Samples

Perhaps the most important decision over the coming months will be deciding which samples should be prioritised for sedaDNA extraction and sequencing.

The discussion strongly suggested that the lowest metre to metre and a half of the core may be the most scientifically valuable part. This section appears to cover the Late Glacial, the Younger Dryas transition, and the beginning of the Holocene — a period of major environmental change, and one that is still poorly studied in Ireland.

At the same time, there was also agreement that a small number of carefully chosen samples from further up the core may be worthwhile, so that the record does not focus exclusively on the earliest part of the sequence.

Step by Step

What came through most clearly in the meeting was that this phase of the project is about building a chain of reasoning.

We cannot sensibly choose the most important DNA samples until we know more about the structure of the core.

We cannot build a strong age model until we know where the key transitions are.

And we cannot answer the bigger ecological questions until these smaller, careful steps have been taken.

That is how a project like this moves forward: not in one dramatic leap, but by linking one piece of evidence to the next.

The Bigger Picture

The first year was about groundwork: learning methods, building collaborations, collecting material, and establishing the main record. The next six months will be about refining that record and deciding where to focus effort, time, and funding.

If all goes well, by the end of this next phase we should be in a much stronger position to decide:

• which parts of the core deserve detailed sedaDNA analysis
• where dates should be placed
• how the major environmental changes are structured through time

In other words, the first year was about gathering the evidence. The next six months will be about finding where, within that evidence, the most important story lies.