A few points:
(1) I not sure but I think that a psychology forum is probably not
the best venue for asking about the accuracy of statistical estimates
coming from the fields of soil science and biodiversity. It is true
that Tipsters have wide-ranging interest and I would not be surprised
that there may be a couple who are expert in soil science but, really,
shouldn't ask these questions of soil scientists? At the very least,
if I were interested in this topic, I'd try to find an intro to soil science
textbook and see if there is information about these issues.
(2) Given that the article referred to below appears to be a blogpost
or essay (in contrast to an article in a peer reviewed journal), I am not
surprised that not every assertion has a supporting citation (though the
author does use citations and provides references). It may also be
the case that the statements you take issue with are seen as being
noncontroversal in the soil science community which would explain
the lack of supporting citation. In examining the comments on the
article, I didn't see anyone dispute the eco-statistics, But perhaps
one can ask a soil scientist about this.
(3) Allen wrote:
|Leaving aside that someone complaining about loose writing then glibly
|cites figures on the basis of according to some estimates, does
|anyone have any idea how there can be anything but the vaguest
|estimates of how many organisms in the soil are unknown to science?
Again I would suggest asking a soil scientist or consulting a soil
science textbook or the research literature. One possibly relevant
article is listed below which explains some of the problems is
locating and identifying microbes in the soil.
Biodiversity of soil microbial communities in agricultural systems
C. E. Pankhurst, K. Ophel-Keller, B. M. Doube and V. V. S. R. Gupta
Biodiversity and Conservation
1996, Volume 5, Number 2, 197-209, DOI: 10.1007/BF00055830
Here is the abstract:
|The productivity and health of agricultural systems depend greatly
|upon the functional processes carried out by soil microorganisms
|and soil microbial communities. The biodiversity of the soil microbial
|communities and the effect of diversity on the stability of the agricultural
|system, is unknown. Taxonomic approaches to estimating biodiversity
|of soil microbial communities are limited by difficulties in defining
|suitable taxonomic units and the apparent non-culturability of the
|majority of the microbial species present in the soil. Analysis of functional
|diversity may be a more meaningful approach but is also limited by
|the need to culture organisms. Approaches which do not rely on
|culturing organisms such as fatty acid analysis and 16S/18S rRNA
|analysis have provided an insight into the extent of genetic diversity
|within communities and may be useful in the analysis of community
|structure. Scale effects, including successional processes associated
|with organic matter decomposition, local effects associated with abiotic
|soil factors, and regional effects including the effect of agricultural
|management practices, on the diversity of microbial communities are
|considered. Their impact is important in relation to the minimum
|biodiversity required to maintain system function.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/w3616n60360t9370/
I note that the above article was published in 1996 and recent developments
may have made the process of identifying and classifying soil microbes
easier. But I'm not a soil scientist and it would be worth the effort
to ask one. I bet they even have an email list.
-Mike Palij
New York University
m...@nyu.edu
Original Message
On Tue, 28 Jun 2011 01:18:57 -0700, Allen Esterson wrote:
Today's Arts and Letters Daily links to the article below with the
blurb:
Eco-ignorance. Up to 95 percent of organisms in the soil are unknown
to science, and by the end of the century, one-quarter of them will
wriggle off this mortal coil into oblivion...
http://places.designobserver.com/feature/a-home-before-the-end-of-the-world/26568/
The author of the article, Adelheid Fischer, opens with a discussion of
a book, of which she writes:
The fundamental issue here, I think, is not that Cunningham got the
details wrong, but that he didn't seem to care about getting them
right… So what makes us think that it's okay to play fast and loose
when it comes to matters of natural history?
A little further down Fischer writes:
Our ignorance is truly staggering. According to some estimates, 95
percent of organisms in the soil alone are unknown to science. […]
According to some estimates, by the end of the 21st century,
one-quarter or more of all species of plants and animals now living
will have gone extinct or been issued a non-refundable one-way ticket
off the planet.
Leaving aside that someone complaining about loose writing then glibly
cites figures on the basis of according to some
