Table 4. Disciplinary bridges and barriers to integrated interdisciplinary research. Barriers   Codes   Bridges   Idiosyncrasies   Unique language/jargon, more technical background necessary   Language   Common or easy-to-understand language/jargon, less technical background necessary Lack of understanding of different paradigms or single-paradigm bias   Paradigm   Understanding of different paradigms or accepting multiple-paradigms   Scales and units   Poor match between extent of variables or processes   Spatial scale   Good match between extent of variables or processes Poor match between "speed" of variables or processes   Temporal scale   Good match between "speed" of variables or processes Few common units, standards, measurements   Metrics   Common units, standards, measurements Disjointed data gathering seasons   Timing   Coordinated data gathering seasons   Models and frameworks   No current models   Examples of interdisciplinary work   Existing examples of models that include relevant disciplines and data; predictive or descriptive Lack of necessary disciplines   Team make-up   Good fit to context of local problem   Focus theme   Disciplines on team have incommensurabilities that make answering management/conservation questions difficult   Problem centered/applied results   Disciplines on team can combine to answer management/conservation questions Diverse or multiple systems, policies, programs or process   Topical/systematic focus   Single system, crop, policy, program, or process No unifying theme   Unifying theme/focus   Unifying theme, such as spatial (GIS based) or social (management/conservation), that links research Different audiences   Audience   Common audiences