Interview: The most dramatic changes at Masaryk University occurred after the revolution, says Professor Gloser

How many plant books do you have at home?

The whole library, I haven’t counted them, but it's definitely a few hundred. Even as a student, I went around second-hand bookshops and bought any interesting books I found, not just about plants but also animals and insects. Some of my finds turned out to be really valuable because the science books that were being published here were not nearly as good as those from before the war. Today, there is a flood of nice books once again, so I only choose the most interesting.

When did you decide to dedicate your life to plants?

When I went to high school, I was mainly interested in butterflies, beetles and minerals, with plants somewhere in the background. After admission to the Faculty of Science, I first wanted to devote myself to zoology, but after I began attending lectures and studying, I became more interested in plant experiments. The Department of Plant Physiology and Anatomy was very well equipped at that time, both in terms of instrumentation and literature, and people were friendly there too. So I anchored myself there.

What were the conditions during your studies at the faculty?

I cannot judge the situation for the whole faculty, only at the Department of Plant Physiology. The main figure in the department was Professor Rypáček, who had worked with Professor Úlehla, the founder of the department, before the war. He adopted many of his habits, gave perfect lectures and took students on excursions to other biological workplaces and the countryside. But as new employees gradually gained weight, often according to criteria other than professional fitness, the situation began to deteriorate. Other changes for the worse came with the onset of normalisation after 1968, when, following political screening, personnel changes began once again. But I know this only from hearsay because I left the faculty in 1964.

Was the study itself different?

I have the impression that, during my studies, the relationship between students and teachers was much closer, sometimes almost family-like. Among other things, good scholarships contributed to greater motivation to undertake the studies. Today, students often have many other interests and, as a result, less than half may attend lectures. In my day, almost everyone used to go, and those doing diploma work would stay in the department between classes every day. The diploma could not be finished in a year as it was necessary to devote at least two years to experimental work and study of the recommended literature before evaluating the results and writing.

After graduation, you joined one of the institutes of the Academy of Sciences. How did the “academic” environment differ from that at the university? Also, you travelled to Cuba four times during the 1970s and 80s while at the Academy; what did you get from this?

Ever since my student years, it had been a desire of mine to go to warm, tropical areas and explore the rich vegetation there. Traveling to countries where there was no communist regime was only for the elect. Communist Cuba, on the other hand, was relatively easily accessible. I spent two years at the Cuban Academy of Sciences, where I helped with ecophysiological research on the remains of the original savannah vegetation. I chose suitable permanent areas for field research, which were then used for regular measurements. I helped improve their laboratory equipment and led some doctoral students as an external expert.

My stay in Cuba enriched me with a lot of knowledge about the functioning of plants under tropical conditions, where there is a much wider range of adaptation strategies. I still use this knowledge in lectures on physiological ecology.

How did you get back to the faculty?

After 1989, the Academy of Sciences underwent major reforms. It was seen as an overwhelming institution that needed to be reduced. In addition, our Brno office, which I headed at that time, was forced to move out of the building, which the state had to return to the original owner as part of the restitution. Unsatisfactory workspace and a reduction in the number of staff in the environmental department led me to the decision to look for another workplace. At that time, a position had become vacant at my “hometown” Department of Plant Physiology and Anatomy and the management and staff were interested in me joining.

How was it for you?

On the one hand, it gave me pleasant sentimental memories of my student years, but on the other, I was greatly disappointed with the state the department was in, not only in comparison with the current academic workplace but also in comparison with other departments. There were hardly any modern analytical instruments, personal computers or climate-controlled cabinets for plant experiments. The greenhouses were in a desolate condition and there were no study books or textbooks for the students. It took me several years to raise the department to a satisfactory level. First, I prepared innovative lectures and wrote scripts for teaching the basic course of plant physiology.

You then led the Department of Plant Physiology and Anatomy for several years. What else did you focus on?

Previously, many experiments were done with wood-decaying fungi and the effect of humic substances on plant growth, but after I started, research in this field was closed. Now, the study of plant mineral nutrition, research into growth regulation by phytohormones and research into the effects of toxic substances on plants are more prominent. From the Academy of Sciences, I also transferred research into the influence of strongly acidic soils on plant processes, which was to contribute to the explanation of mass forest decay in mountainous areas. A lot of work has been done, both in the Beskydy landscape and in many laboratory experiments

I also devoted a lot of effort to creating conditions for the establishment of a plant molecular-physiology working group within the department, though this was never completed despite a promising start. Among other things, this was due to the unfortunate move to the new campus in Bohunice.

Part of the Faculty of Science moved to the university campus in 2010. Why do you refer to the move as unfortunate?

When I arrived at the faculty, I was looking for money for everything. Not only for instruments, but also to modernise a large practical laboratory, lecture halls and fully climate-controlled greenhouses. It was not easy; it cost over five million to renovate the greenhouses. But then the decision to relocate some of the biological fields to the new campus was made. As the construction work was prolonged, however, we spent several years in a makeshift building in a former barracks in Řečkovice. It was not a happy time as we had less than ideal conditions for cultivating experimental plants and so on. Now we are at the campus, but I personally liked the area at Kotlářská more.

What period of change, apart from the aforementioned relocation to the campus, was the most important for the faculty over its history?

I am not a historian, but if you look at the changes in the operation of the faculty from its founding to the present, the first turning point was certainly the closure of universities during World War II. After the war and the advent of the communist regime, the traditions of the First Republic continued briefly. Then normalisation came; while this was also a turning point it didn’t result in any revolutionary changes in terms of the organisation of study and research at the faculty.

The staffing of departments is always changing. The most significant changes, in my opinion, occurred after 1989, when the criteria for allocating funds from the state budget to universities, and subsequently faculties and departments, changed. Since then, most research money has had to be raised through competing with grant agencies, which often complicates long-term research. Heads of institutes and departments have limited possibilities to survive even short periods without grant success. Moreover, coordination and communication between different working groups dealing with similar issues is not always optimal, often due to rivalry for financial resources. I know something about this because I was a member of the Czech Grant Agency Commission for several years.

What was the mood in the department shortly after the revolution?

The department has already changed in terms of staffing. After 1968, “political reliability” was screened, and the employment of a number of otherwise professionally skilled workers was terminated. After the revolution, these people had the right to go back, and so they returned. At the same time, those who had thrown them out remained at the faculty. Hence, the two camps came into contact, and this also became obvious in our own department. Since I knew almost nothing about those past events, both sides came to me to complain about who did what to whom. It did not contribute to unity and a good atmosphere. Today, however, most of them are no longer here, so it is quiet.

How has plant physiology changed over the last half century?

In my student years, traditional physiology was predominantly aimed at investigating individual internal processes in plants using laboratory methods. Ecological physiology, which examines the relationship between physiological processes and the external environment, most often directly in the field, was much less developed. It was very difficult in terms of methodology. Nowadays, there are instruments that enable one to perform long-term measurements of internal changes in plants under natural conditions without disturbing them. This represents a radical change, and is why ecological and stress physiology is now experiencing unprecedented development worldwide. Most of our department's work now contributes to this field. Another sub-discipline that has grown enormously is plant molecular physiology.

Why is there such a worldwide interest in developing research in these two directions?

Generally speaking, there is increasing emphasis on the practical use of scientific results. When possible applications of research results look promising it generates more generous financial subsidies, conditional on further development of the applications. New and more detailed knowledge about the regulation of physiological processes in plants and the possibilities for deliberately influencing such properties are nowadays obtained mainly through molecular biology techniques. These methods also allow for targeted breeding of new field crop varieties, ensuring not only higher productivity but also resistance to stress factors such as drought or soil salinity.

Ecological and stress physiology, in turn, is needed to determine the significance of individual environmental factors on plant growth and to understand their mechanisms of action. This enables, among other things, the prediction of possible changes in naturally growing vegetation under the influence of long-term changes in the external environment.

Your department is also active in the polar regions, where you study terrestrial ecosystems focussing primarily on the stress physiology of lichens and mosses. You yourself have participated in five international expeditions to different Antarctic regions. How did your research in the polar regions start?

The idea of ​​a joint project focused on Antarctic research came to me via Professor Prošek from the Institute of Geography in our Faculty, who had previously conducted climatological research in both Antarctica and the Arctic. He was looking for someone willing to investigate the effects of climate change on vegetation under polar conditions. Thus, in 1998, we jointly submitted a proposal for a research project entitled ‘Ecology of Coastal the Antarctic Oasis’, which was adopted. Initially, we made joint expeditions with countries that already had research stations in Antarctica; however, since 2006, we have had our own Czech station. A large group of researchers and Doctoral students from various fields, not only from our university, are regularly stationed there. We also cooperate with the University of South Bohemia on Arctic research in the Spitsbergen archipelago, where I also participated in two expeditions.

How do you actually work in such freezing conditions?

In the polar regions, the climatic conditions are not excessively demanding when working over the short summer. Biological research is mostly carried out in marginal, coastal areas, where average summer temperatures mostly range from zero to -5 to -10 degrees. Very strong winds and snowing completely only prevent fieldwork on some days, so the samples are then processed in the station laboratories.

What results can you boast of so far?

Among other things, we have established long-term experiments on changes in Antarctic vegetation cover due to the effects of warming, utilising special semi-covered chambers located around the station, where all necessary data are automatically registered all year round. Our research into the unique algal flora growing below the surface of a number of lakes has provided a number of surprises. The results of these studies are gradually being published in professional journals, and some have already been used while writing a large book on Antarctica. It should be noted, however, that polar research is not the main focus of our department's work.

Looking at your resume, you seem to have travelled over much of the world. Outside of work, is traveling also a hobby for you?

All trips abroad are certainly enriching. When visiting foreign universities and institutes, one can be inspired by different approaches to work, whether scientific or educational, and one’s language skills can improve. The private trips that I undertake, together with my wife, are also pleasant and informative. Aside from lying by the sea, we prefer to travel where there is undisturbed nature and interesting plants. In first place, I would put South Africa, where we have been several times, because it is a botanical paradise. We also found Mexico particularly interesting. Last year, we went to see Cuba again after many years, mainly to places with undisturbed nature.

How do you relax besides traveling?

Behind our house, we have a large garden and a greenhouse. In this, I cultivate many interesting plants that I have grown myself or brought from my travels. South African succulents, cacti, bromelia and orchids predominate. Their maintenance requires a lot of work, but also provides a lot of pleasure. Sometimes, I give lectures to succulent plant growers associations and I contribute to their magazines. Finally, I very much like to go hiking or cycling with my wife in the countryside surrounding our residence.

What would you wish Masaryk University over the next hundred years?

That is a difficult question as I am not able to assess the university’s current situation and realistic future prospects. However, it is undoubtedly important that we succeed in attracting and maintaining not only enough quality educators and researchers but also students. Emphasis should be placed on foreign exchange in order to achieve a level of quality in the educational and research activities of Masaryk University that is comparable to the top European universities.