Category: Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Blog Post 2:

 

The article, Estimates of Movement and Site Fidelity Using Mark-Resight Data of Canadian Geese, is a study which looks at the wintering habits of geese and their movement. The author, Jay Hestbeck, has held many positions within government organizations and specializes in bird migration and wildlife management. He has also made over 20 contributions in terms of scientific studies and articles. The study is classified as research material as it contains both a Methods and a Research section. However, it does not appear that the study was refereed by anyone, so it is classified as being non-peer reviewed academic material. I then went and searched both the journal and the article on Ulrich’s Web, which confirmed the fact that the article is not peer reviewed.

 

Article:  Hestbeck, J. B., Nichols, J. D., & Malecki, R. A. (1991). Estimates of Movement and Site Fidelity Using Mark-Resight Data of Wintering Canada Geese. Ecology,72(2), 523-533. doi:10.2307/2937193

 

 

Ulrich’s Web Result: https://ulrichsweb-serialssolutions-com.libaccess.lib.mcmaster.ca/search/-710683931

Blog Post 2 – Article classification

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Article:

Smith, L. S., Broyles, M. E. J., Larzleer, H. K., & Fellowes, M. D. E. (2015). Adding ecological value to the urban lawnscape. Insect abundance and diversity in grass-free lawns. Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(1), 47-62. 10.1007/s10531-014-0788-1

 

The article is published by Springer Netherlands in the Biodiversity and Conservation journal, which is international. Springer is recognized as an established publisher in the academic field. The Biodiversity and Conservation journal has an impact factor of 2.265, which is an indication that it is a well respected journal.

This paper is non peer-reviewed academic material.
-It was written by experts in the field who are associated with the School of Biological Sciences from the University of Reading, in Reading, UK
-There are numerous in text citations and a full bibliography of 78 references.
-The paper includes results from a field study that they completed and has supplemental information to show the study area and how the study was carried out
-There is a section for their methods and their results

Had this work been peer-reviewed (or labelled as such if it was), it would be Academic, peer reviewed research material.

 

Notes on whether or not it is peer reviewed:

Using the University of Victoria’s online library, the article is listed as peer reviewed. However, when attempting to verify this through the information provided about the journal and the article from Springer, there is no mention of the peer review process or that one was done.

Springer does engage in the peer review process, and for this particular journal, they do have an “editorial manager” program for authors and reviewers ([http://www.editorialmanager.com/bioc/default.aspx]).
The journal has an editor (David Hawksworth), however, there is no available information from Springer that lists this journal -or the article- as being peer reviewed, nor is there any indication of any referee other than the editorial process.

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The source of ecological information I have chosen is a scientific peer-reviewed research paper.

The paper is as follows:

Crothers, J. H. 1985. Dog-whelks: an introduction to the biology of Nucella lapillus (L.). 6: 291-360. https://learning.watfordboys.org/pluginfile.php/20239/mod_resource/content/2/Dogwhelk%20Biology%20Crothers.pdf

 

The author is an expert in the field as he has published several other studies in the field. He is part of the Field Studies Council in the UK. There are several in-text citations included in the paper. The paper also consists of a bibliography with a list of all the sources used. Furthermore, under the Acknowledgements section on page 45, the author lists the names of people who have reviewed the paper. The following is another one of several papers he has published:

http://fsj.field-studies-council.org/media/344189/vol2.5_55.pdf

 

Upon googling the author’s name, J. H. Crothers, a long list of published content can also be found with papers edited by him. Also one can find many of his papers in the Mendeley software.

This article is suitable to use for a reference ✔︎

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The article that I found is academic, peer-reviewed research material. The research was done following the flooding in 2005, when the macrophyte and water dynamics were changed by the influx of rainwater. Over a period of four months, samples of periphyton were collected bi-weekly from the Bow River at six different locations in the Southeast area of Calgary. The purpose of this study was to determine whether the Bow River water quality model (BRWQM) used by the City of Calgary was calibrated properly to detect dissolved oxygen and periphyton levels in the water. The BRWQM is an invaluable tool used to ascertain the quality of water that has been treated by the wastewater treatment plants.

The authors are all based out of the University of Calgary. Robinson is in the Geomatics Engineering department in the Schulich School of Engineering; Valeo, Chu and Iwanyshyn are in the Civil Engineering department in the Schulich School of Engineering; and Ryan is in the Geoscience department. This means that the article is an academic one, researched and written by experts. The acknowledgments section thanks the reviewers, as well as City of Calgary and the Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) for funding the paper.

 

Reference Cited

Robinson KL, Valeo C, Ryan MC, Chu A, Iwanyshyn M. 2009. Modelling aquatic vegetation and dissolved oxygen after a flood event in the Bow River, Alberta, Canada. Canadian Journal of Civil Engineering [Internet]. [cited 2018 Feb 8]; 36(3), 492-503. Available from: http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/full/10.1139/L08-126#.Wny4dmbMzOQ doi:10.1139/L08-126

Blog Post #2 — Cameron Purdy

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Academic Peer Reviewed Research Paper

Title:  Terminal Nerve GnRH3 Neurons Mediate Slow Avoidance of Carbon Dioxide in Larval Zebrafish

Source: Koide T, Yabuki Y, Yoshihara Y. Terminal nerve GnRH3 neurons mediate slow avoidance of carbon dioxide in larval zebrafish. Cell Reports, 2018 DOI: 10.1016/j.celrep.2018.01.019

Link: http://www.cell.com/cell-reports/pdf/S2211-1247(18)30036-6.pdf

 

The following paper is an Academic Peer Reviewed Research Paper for the following reasons:

a) The paper is written by experts in the field. Koide, Yabuki, and Yoshihara are all associated with the Laboratory for Neurobiology of Synapse in Japan. It was published in the journal “Cell Reports” which publishes high quality peer-reviewed material.

b) The paper contains a bibliography citing additional sources used as information. These sources are cited in text throughout the article. (Ex.  “This fast escape response is mediated by reticulospinal neurons, including the large, morphologically conspicuous Mauthner cells” (Gahtan et al., 2002; Liu and Fetcho, 1999; O’Malley et al., 1996).)

c) Acknowledgements thank two editors for their critical reading of the manuscript indicating that the paper had gone through the peer review process. This is further supported by the journal the article is posted in.

d) The paper is formatted as a research paper as it contains an introduction, results and discussion. The experimental methods were included within the results section. We can see that there are multiple intervention levels further leading us to believe that the paper is experimental in nature. *(See below)

(To examine what chemosensory signals affect behaviors of larval zebrafish, we applied various chemicals to the head of fish at 5 days post-fertilization).

Fish Production and Primary Productivity

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

I have selected a paper titled ‘Fish Production Correlated with Primary Productivity, not the Morphoedaphic Index’ (Downing et al.,1990). This paper is classified as academic, peer-reviewed material. It is academic material because the authors are experts in this field and the paper includes in-text citations as well as a reference list. The paper was published in the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences which would require a peer-review process. This paper includes methods and results sections; however, no field or laboratory experiments were performed. The authors analysed data gleaned from previous studies to discover new correlations. Given the distinguishing characteristics between ‘research material’ and ‘review material’ detailed in the tutorial, this paper would technically be classified as review material; however, I argue that the statistically analysis methods were able to generate novel information, suggesting that this paper makes a contribution to ‘research’ as opposed to simply offering a review of findings by others.

http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f90-217#.Wmi2hainGUk

Blog post 2

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The source I decided to look at is entitled Positive plant and bird diversity response to experimental deer population reduction after decades of uncontrolled browsing (2016) by Simon Chollet et. al, a study that took place in the forests of Haida Gwaii.

There are in-text citations and an extensive bibliography, and the authors all come from either the University of Montpellier, the University of Ottawa, or the National Wildlife Research Centre, so it is safe to assume they are experts in the field, which al signifies that this is academic material.

In the acknowledgments section the authors gave thanks to the three anonymous referees, which gives evidence that it was peer reviewed.

There are sections for methods and results which tells us that this is research material rather than review material.

This study was really interesting and took place over 13 years. The authors found that when they culled the black-tailed deer, native plant communities increased in both richness and percent cover and birds that were dependent on understory vegetation increased.

 

Chollet, S., Padié, S., Stockton, S., Allombert, S., Gaston, A., Martin, J., & Larson, B. (2016). Positive plant and bird diversity response to experimental deer population reduction after decades of uncontrolled browsing. Diversity and Distributions, 22(3), 274-287. doi:10.1111/ddi.12393

Post 2: Sources of Scientific Information

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

The article I found, “Paleoecology and fire history of garry oak ecosystems in Canada: implications for conservation and environmental management”, is an academic, peer-reviewed research material.

 

It can be found at the following link:

 

https://link-springer-com.ezproxy.tru.ca/content/pdf/10.1007%2Fs10531-015-0880-1.pdf

 

I first determined whether the source is academic or non-academic by considering the following criteria:

 

  • was the material written by an expert?
  • Are there in-text citations?
  • Is there a bibliography?

 

The authors, Pellatt, McCoy and Mathewes are all experts in their field.  Pellatt is the Protected Areas Establishment and Conservation Directorate at Parks Canada. McCoy and Mathewes are both scientists at Simon Fraser University, in the Department of Biological Science.  There are in-text citations and a bibliography. Therefore, the source is academic.

 

The next criteria separate peer-reviewed academic sources, from non peer-reviewed academic sources.  A peer-reviewed academic source has been reviewed by at least 1-4 reviewers.  The article has been reviewed by 2 anonymous reviewers.  Therefore, the article is a peer-reviewed academic source.

 

The final criteria distinguishes peer-reviewed source research from peer-reviewed source reviews.  Peer-reviewed academic research material contains a methods and results section. Pellatt et al (2015) contains a methods or results section. Therefore, it is an academic, peer-reviewed research material.

 

Pellatt, M. G., McCoy, M. M., & Mathewes, R. W. (2015). Paleoecology and fire history of Garry oak ecosystems in Canada: implications for conservation and environmental management. Biodiversity and Conservation, 24(7), 1621-1639. doi:10.1007/s10531-015-0880-1

Blog post 2

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Blog Post 2

I’ll be using this article in relation to my previous question in Blog 1:

  • If the Vancouver park board decides for some reason to turn the Lost Lagoon to a salt marsh, what potential impact can that cause on the current wild life habiting the Lost Lagoon?

Bibliography:

Herbert, E. R., Boon, P., Burgin, A. J., Neubauer, S. C., Franklin, R. B., Ardón, M., … Gell, P. (2015). A global perspective on wetland salinization: ecological consequences of a growing threat to freshwater wetlands. Ecosphere, 6(10), 1–43. https://doi.org/10.1890/ES14-00534.1

This is a peer-reviewed, academic, article.

It is academic as the authors are professionals in the field and the paper has in-text citations and a bibliography. Furthermore, the journals website states it is a peer-reviewed journal.

 

 

Post 2.

TRU Open Learning Leave a comment

Blog 2: Sources Of Scientific Information.

The publication is “Coarse woody debris decomposition documented over 65 years on southern Vancouver Island”. It can be found at https://www.researchgate.net/publication/249534654_Coarse_Woody_Debris_Decomposition_Documented_over_65_years_on_Southern_Vancouver_Island

This publication is academic, peer-reviewed research material.

The authors are experts in the field. Ken Lertzman has a PhD in Zoology and is a professor at Simon Fraser University. Jeff Stone, Andy MacKinnon and John Parminter are staff with the Research Branch of the BC Ministry of Forests. They include in text references to other studies and their paper has an extensive bibliography.

The paper was reviewed by four referees.

The authors completed a field study which they document in“Methods” and “Results” sections.

Bibliography:

Stone, J. N., Mackinnon, A., Parminter, J.V. and Lertzman, K.P. (1998). Coarse woody debris decompostion documented over 65 years on southern Vancouver Island. NRC Canada.