Category: Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Laura Adams

 

a) I have chosen the following research paper, published in the journal Botany, as a source of scientific information:

Plant Community – soil relationships in a topographically diverse grassland in southern interior British Columbia, Canada

Lee, R.N., Bradfield, G.E., Krzic, M., Newman, R.F. & Cumming, W.P. 2014. Plant community – soil relationships in a topographically diverse grassland in southern interior British Columbia, Canada. Botany, 92:837–845.

 

b)  This paper is academic, peer-reviewed research material.

c) This paper is published in the academic journal, Botany, which has a set of guidelines in place where articles are edited and peer-review before articles are published.  It has been written by experts in the field, including Lee, Bradfield (a plant ecology expert), and Cumming who are all part of the Department of Botany at UBC.  Throughout the article, there are references to other papers written by these authors, as well as references to many other articles in reputable peer-reviewed journals.  There is a bibliography at the end of the article listing all of the sources the authors used.  There is also a link to the doi (dx.doi.org/10.1139/cjb-2014-0107) where readers can access the raw data from the study.

The paper reports the results of a field study by the authors, There is a section outlining methods used to perform the experiment, which would allow another experimenter to replicate this study.  There are diagrams (figures) used to demonstrate how the authors performed their sampling.  There is a results section that describes the findings of the study and how data was analyzed.

All of these aspects of this source allow it to meet the criteria for being an academic, peer-reviewed research article.

 

Source:

https://content-ebscohost-com.ezproxy.tru.ca/ContentServer.asp?T=P&P=AN&K=99345390&S=R&D=a9h&EbscoContent=dGJyMMvl7ESeprI4xNvgOLCmr1GeqLBSsqe4TbOWxWXS&ContentCustomer=dGJyMPGrtE%2BwqLJLuePfgeyx43zx

Sources of scientific information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Shannon Myles

January 21st, 2019

A) The source of ecological information that was used is an article published in the scientific journal Aquatic Ecology. The journal publishes various peer-reviewed papers in the field of ecology in all types of aquatic environments. The Aquatic Ecology journal has been running since 1968 and has published 52 volumes since. Its publisher, Springer Netherlands describes the journal has “a multidisciplinary journal relating to processes and structures at different organizational levels.”

The specific journal article that was chosen for the assignment was: “The use of historical environmental monitoring data to test predictions on cross-scale ecological responses to alterations in river flows” (Collof et al. 2018). A paper that looked at data previously collected by hundreds of previous studies in the area to achieve a conclusion. By using the data already at hand, the scientists evaluated the impact of river flow modification to the ecosystem.

Citation: Colloff, M.J., Overton, I.C., Henderson, B.L. et al. Aquat Ecol (2018) 52: 133. https://doi-org.ezproxy.tru.ca/10.1007/s10452-018-9650-y

Link: https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.tru.ca/article/10.1007/s10452-018-9650-y

 

B) The paper is an academic, peer-reviewed research article.

 

C) The academic basis of Collof’s paper is obvious as he and all of his co-writers are experts in the field. A list of everyone that worked on the paper’s affiliations is available. Per example, the author, Matthew J. Collof is a member of the Fenner School of Environment and Society, Australian National University and CSIRO Land and Water in Canberra Australia. A list of all the in-text citations is provided in the references section of the article. All the references are themselves, academic papers. The Acknowledgments section of the research mentions that the paper has been reviewed by an anonymous reviewer. The citation goes like such: “We thank […] and an anonymous reviewer for their practical and constructive reviews of the manuscript.” (Collof et al. 2018). Finally, what distinguishes this paper research article from a review material is its precise methods and results. The paper describes how it proceeded to gather information on its subject and then shows the exact results collected. Even if the study used previously collected data from previous studies, it had a goal different than any of those researches. Collof and his team used specific methods that are outlined in the paper to evaluate their own research question based on data scientifically gathered.

Blog Post 2

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

a. This source examines how emerald ash borer (EAB) have proliferated in North America since the early 2000s. Drawing on an improved understanding of EAB physiology the authors discuss how management strategies to mitigate the effects of EAB have developed over time to either slow ash mortality down, or attempt to use biological agents to try and protect desired ashes from infection.

https://www.annualreviews.org/doi/pdf/10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-162051

Herms, Daniel, and Deborah McCullough. “Emerald Ash Borer Invasion Of North America: History, Biology, Ecology, Impacts And Management”. Annual Reviews 59 (2014): 13-30. doi:10.1146/annurev-ento-011613-162051.

b. This is an example of non-peer reviewed academic material.

c. First, the authors, Herms and McCullough are associated with The Ohio State University and Michigan State University and have been paid to do research thereby making them experts in the field.

Second, the article uses in-text citations which it references as numbered citations that correspond to the full citation at the end of the paper.

For example:

Three species are currently being mass reared and released :an egg parasitoid(Oobius agrili Zhang and Huang)(Hymenoptera: Encyrtidae), a larval endoparasitoid (Tetrastichus planipennisi Yang) (Hymenoptera: Eulophidae), and a gregarious larval ectoparasitoid(Spathius agrili Yang)(Hymenoptera:Braconidae)(33,109). Asian parasitoids were first released at sites in southeast Michigan in 2007 (109,110).Production increased annually, and in 2012, more than 350,000 wasps were released in 14 states. Several releases appear to have resulted in successful establishment, although establishment of S.agrili in Michigan has been limited, possibly because of cold weather(25–27).

Third, the article includes a list of bibliographic sources referenced at the end of the paper.

For example:

2. Anulewicz AC, McCullough DG, Cappaert DL. 2007. Emerald ash borer (Agrilus planipennis) density
and canopy dieback in three North American ash species. Arboric. Urban For. 33:338–49
3. Anulewicz AC, McCullough DG, Cappaert DL, Poland TM. 2008. Host range of the emerald
ash borer (Agrilus planipennis Fairmaire) (Coleoptera: Buprestidae) in North America: results of
multiple-choice field experiments. Environ. Entomol. 37:230–41

Fourth, the article is not peer reviewed since it does not thank any reviewers but instead, thanks edits that were made to the publication.

For example:

We thank Cathy Herms for editorial expertise in producing the finished manuscript.

 

 

2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Blog post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

Amy Laycock.

A.  The source I have chosen is a research paper published in the Forest Ecology and Management Journal: Long-term time series of annual ecosystem production (198502010) derived from tree rings in Douglas-fir stands on Vancouver Island, Canada using a hybrid biometric-modelling approach.

B.  This article is an academic, peer-reviewed, research source.

C.  It has been written by experts in the field (authors who work in the Canadian Forestry Service and forest and ecology researchers out of UBC). It has been published in a scientific journal with a satisfactory impact score (3.169), which edits and peer-reviews papers before publishing. It includes in-text citations throughout the paper, citing other credible peer-reviewed sources. This article contains a section which outlines their methods in a way that other researchers could replicate the study and a results section which summarize the relevant data they collected. Therefore, the article contains all the required criteria to be a primary academic, peer-reviewed, research source.

source:

https://www-sciencedirect-com.ezproxy.library.uvic.ca/science/article/pii/S0378112718308405

Metsaranta, J., Trofymow, J., Black, T., & Jassal, R. (2018). Long-term time series of annual ecosystem production (1985–2010) derived from tree rings in Douglas-fir stands on Vancouver Island, Canada using a hybrid biometric-modelling approach. Forest Ecology And Management, 429, 57-68. doi: 10.1016/j.foreco.2018.06.040

Blog Post 2

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Link: https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2287884X18300554

This source of scientific information is an academic, peer-reviewed research material. It is academic material because it was written by experts in the field, includes in-text citations, and contains a bibliography. It has been peer reviewed by National Science Museum of Korea (NSMK) and Korea National Arboretum (KNA) so therefore it is peer-reviewed academic material. The source also reports results of a field study containing sections such as “Methods” and “Results” so thus this makes it academic, peer-reviewed research material.

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The article Ecology and population genetics of Sonoran Desert
Drosophila was published in the journal Molecular Ecology is a peer-reviewed academic research article.

The authors are professional researchers from the University of Arizona in the Ecology and Evolutionary Biology department.  The authors include their methods and results of their study in a satisfactory manner and expand on the cited knowledge when necessary. They provide dates of submission and extensive references and citations. All of their donations and contributors are acknowledged and made public in the acknowledgements section of their paper.

Citation:

Pfeiler, E., Markow, T. A. (2001). Ecology and population genetics of Sonoran Desert Drosophila. Molecular Ecology. 10, 1787 – 1791. Retrieved from http://labs.biology.ucsd.edu/markow/articles/EcologyandPopulationGenetics.pdf

Source of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

A) The article I chose to read was one from the  American Journal of Tropical Medicine and Hygiene. The article is titled: A Malaria Ecology Index Predicted Spatial and Temporal Variation of Malaria Burden and Efficacy of Antimalarial Interventions Based on African Serological Data.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5361535/

doi: [10.4269/ajtmh.16-0602]

 

b) This article is a scientific  research peer reviewed paper.

 

c) This article is published in a scientific journal that needs to be reviewed and read by the journal before being published. This is indicated below the title where is states the date the article was submitted and the date in which it was accepted for publishing. This paper is also primary research as there is a clear indication and set of methods for study and results showing the data collected. These both indicate that this was not a review or a meta analysis of multiple studies.

 

 

 

 

 

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The article Estimating Carrying Capacity for Sea Otters in British Columbia published in the Journal of Wildlife Management is an example of academic peer-reviewed research material. 

The authors are professionals in their fields, associated with environmental consulting, the department of Fisheries and Oceans, and Malaspina University-College.The article contains in-text citations and appropriate references of citations. The authors include their methods and results of their study. Although dates of submissions and edits are not noted, the acknowledgements reference two anonymous reviews.

 

 

Gregr, E., Nichol, L., Watson, J., Ford, J., & Ellis, G. (2008). Estimating Carrying Capacity for Sea Otters in British Columbia. The Journal of Wildlife Management, 72(2), 382-388. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.ezproxy.tru.ca/stable/25097550

 

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Danielle Kinsella, November 17th 2018

The source is an online paper titled Integrative biomechanics for tree ecology: beyond wood density and strength from the Journal of Experimental Botany. The paper was retrieved via Google Scholar.

Citation:

Fournier, M., Dlouhá J., Jaouen, G., and T. Almeras. 2013. Integrative biomechanics for tree ecology: beyond wood density and strength. Journal of Experimental Botany, 64(15): 4793–4815 https://doi.org/10.1093/jxb/ert279 (accessed November 11, 2018)

It is classified as Academic, peer-reviewed review material because of the following factors:

Academic material

  1. The information was written by experts in their field, the affiliation of authors with several large institution and universities in France such as AgroParisTech (Paris Institute of Technology for Life, Food and Environmental Sciences), INRA (agricultural science research institution, and the CNRS Centre national de la recherche scientifique.(National Centre of Scientific Research)
  2. The article information includes in-text citations, stating the authors last name and year published, in reference to the bibliography.
  3. The article has a bibliography at the end indicating sources of information used in the paper.

Peer-reviewed, academic material

  1. The source has been reviewed by at least 1 referee before publication, indicated by Revised dates and acknowledgement to an anonymous reviewer.

Received 19 March 2013; Revised 18 July 2013; Accepted 22 July 2013

At the end of the acknowledgements is the sentence: “We are also grateful to Gail Wagman who improved the English, and to an anonymous reviewer for stimulating comments.”

Academic, peer-reviewed review material

  1. There is no Methods or Results section in the article, therefore, it is not research material it is review material. Several experiments from other research papers have been compiled into the review paper.

Therefore, the paper is classified as academic, peer-reviewed review material.

Blog Post 2

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The source I chose for this post, “Soil bacterial communities exhibit systematic spatial variation with land form across a commercial potato field”, is an Academic, peer-review research paper. I found this paper online published by ELSEVIER Which is a major publisher for scientific content that uses peer review. The first three people on the paper Neupane, Goyer and Zebarth all have PhDs, and either belong to a university or work for the government of Canada, so I would assume they have the required expertise in the field. The paper includes a bibliography, in-text citations, a methods section and a results section. All these features indicate an academic peer reviewed research paper.

Link to the article:

https://ac.els-cdn.com/S0016706118305056/1-s2.0-S0016706118305056-main.pdf?_tid=67ab562e-2873-4f3e-9ba7-2fd0377f7eba&acdnat=1539814414_c4e67f76788968e2bc11d4858d7ea5e9