José Paruelo, Luis Lopez-Marsico, Pablo Baldassini, Felipe Lezama, Bruno Bazzoni, Luciana Staiano, Agustín Nuñez, Anaclara Guido, Cecilia Ríos, Andrea Tommasino, Federico Gallego, Fabiana Pezzani, Gonzalo Camba Sans, Andrés Quincke, Santiago Baeza, Gervasio Piñeiro, Walter Baethgen
{"title":"评论:“回到未来?保守的草原管理可以在乌拉圭不断变化的景观中保持土壤健康。","authors":"José Paruelo, Luis Lopez-Marsico, Pablo Baldassini, Felipe Lezama, Bruno Bazzoni, Luciana Staiano, Agustín Nuñez, Anaclara Guido, Cecilia Ríos, Andrea Tommasino, Federico Gallego, Fabiana Pezzani, Gonzalo Camba Sans, Andrés Quincke, Santiago Baeza, Gervasio Piñeiro, Walter Baethgen","doi":"10.5194/egusphere-2023-2023","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<strong>Abstract.</strong> In this article we make comments on some methodological issues and on the general approach of the paper “Back to the future? Conservative grassland management can preserve soil health in the changing landscapes of Uruguay” by Ina Säumel, Leonardo R. Ramírez, Sarah Tietjen, Marcos Barra, and Erick Zagal, Soil 9, 425–442, https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-425-2023. We identified various design and methodological problems that may induce potential misinterpretations. Our concerns are of three different types. First, there are aspects of the study design and methodology that, in our opinion, introduce biases and critical errors. Secondly, the article does not put forth any novel propositions and ignores extensive local literature and aspects that are central to the interpretation of the data Finally, we are concerned about the possible interpretations of a study, generated from institutions based on developed countries with not the participation of local scientists from the Global South in the design of policies and development of non-tariff barriers for South American countries.","PeriodicalId":48610,"journal":{"name":"Soil","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":5.8000,"publicationDate":"2023-11-14","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Comment on: “Back to the future? Conservative grassland management can preserve soil health in the changing landscapes of Uruguay” On the risks of good intentions and poor evidence\",\"authors\":\"José Paruelo, Luis Lopez-Marsico, Pablo Baldassini, Felipe Lezama, Bruno Bazzoni, Luciana Staiano, Agustín Nuñez, Anaclara Guido, Cecilia Ríos, Andrea Tommasino, Federico Gallego, Fabiana Pezzani, Gonzalo Camba Sans, Andrés Quincke, Santiago Baeza, Gervasio Piñeiro, Walter Baethgen\",\"doi\":\"10.5194/egusphere-2023-2023\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<strong>Abstract.</strong> In this article we make comments on some methodological issues and on the general approach of the paper “Back to the future? Conservative grassland management can preserve soil health in the changing landscapes of Uruguay” by Ina Säumel, Leonardo R. Ramírez, Sarah Tietjen, Marcos Barra, and Erick Zagal, Soil 9, 425–442, https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-425-2023. We identified various design and methodological problems that may induce potential misinterpretations. Our concerns are of three different types. First, there are aspects of the study design and methodology that, in our opinion, introduce biases and critical errors. Secondly, the article does not put forth any novel propositions and ignores extensive local literature and aspects that are central to the interpretation of the data Finally, we are concerned about the possible interpretations of a study, generated from institutions based on developed countries with not the participation of local scientists from the Global South in the design of policies and development of non-tariff barriers for South American countries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":48610,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Soil\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-11-14\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Soil\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"97\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2023\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"农林科学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"SOIL SCIENCE\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Soil","FirstCategoryId":"97","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5194/egusphere-2023-2023","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"农林科学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"SOIL SCIENCE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
摘要在这篇文章中,我们对一些方法论问题和论文“回到未来?”保守的草地管理可以在乌拉圭不断变化的景观中保持土壤健康”,作者:Ina Säumel, Leonardo R. Ramírez, Sarah Tietjen, Marcos Barra和Erick Zagal,土壤9,425-442,https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-425-2023。我们确定了可能导致潜在误解的各种设计和方法问题。我们的关注点有三种不同类型。首先,在我们看来,研究设计和方法的某些方面会引入偏差和关键错误。其次,这篇文章没有提出任何新颖的主张,并且忽略了大量的当地文献和对数据解释至关重要的方面。最后,我们关心的是,一项研究的可能解释是基于发达国家的机构产生的,而不是来自全球南方的当地科学家参与南美国家的政策设计和非关税壁垒的发展。
Comment on: “Back to the future? Conservative grassland management can preserve soil health in the changing landscapes of Uruguay” On the risks of good intentions and poor evidence
Abstract. In this article we make comments on some methodological issues and on the general approach of the paper “Back to the future? Conservative grassland management can preserve soil health in the changing landscapes of Uruguay” by Ina Säumel, Leonardo R. Ramírez, Sarah Tietjen, Marcos Barra, and Erick Zagal, Soil 9, 425–442, https://doi.org/10.5194/soil-9-425-2023. We identified various design and methodological problems that may induce potential misinterpretations. Our concerns are of three different types. First, there are aspects of the study design and methodology that, in our opinion, introduce biases and critical errors. Secondly, the article does not put forth any novel propositions and ignores extensive local literature and aspects that are central to the interpretation of the data Finally, we are concerned about the possible interpretations of a study, generated from institutions based on developed countries with not the participation of local scientists from the Global South in the design of policies and development of non-tariff barriers for South American countries.
SoilAgricultural and Biological Sciences-Soil Science
CiteScore
10.80
自引率
2.90%
发文量
44
审稿时长
30 weeks
期刊介绍:
SOIL is an international scientific journal dedicated to the publication and discussion of high-quality research in the field of soil system sciences.
SOIL is at the interface between the atmosphere, lithosphere, hydrosphere, and biosphere. SOIL publishes scientific research that contributes to understanding the soil system and its interaction with humans and the entire Earth system. The scope of the journal includes all topics that fall within the study of soil science as a discipline, with an emphasis on studies that integrate soil science with other sciences (hydrology, agronomy, socio-economics, health sciences, atmospheric sciences, etc.).