] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:57 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re:
[ECOLOG-L] Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Marcus, with due respect, and I do respect your opinion and
contributions: You
: grants, jobs, news
[mailto:ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU] On Behalf Of David L. McNeely
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 10:57 AM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Marcus, with due respect, and I do
Rudhira, I would definitely include the studies you describe as natural
history and as ecology. I was somewhat tongue in cheek, and a little bit
serious in my earlier post. To me, bottom line, ecology is an attempt to
understand the nature (or history) of nature. In recent years we have
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 3:21 PM
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Thanks, David. Now I don't have to toss all my Darwin stuff into the dustbin.
WT
PS: David or others: Can you suggest any
I think there might be a useful distinction between natural history and
ecology, namely, the degree to which observations are replicated. With the
phrase natural history there is no connotation or expectation that
observations can be strictly replicated (this does not mean patterns cannot
be
Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing in Ecology
Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net wrote:
Ecolog:
What specifically distinguishes natural history from ecology?
Wayne, Ernst Haeckel coined the term which became our modern term
ecology. You probably knew
I think the common interpretation of natural history among ecologists
could be called descriptive ecology. It has the tacit hypotheses Matt
Chew listed, but I don't think people associate natural history with
explicit hypothesis-testing. It's about collecting and describing
observations that
Maybe this was true in the 19th century, and there are still some
minor outlets where
observational notes with limited or no replication is accepted so you
can publish the
kind of observations you suggest, but modern and mainstream natural history
studies require huge sample sizes and extensive
that could do this might be
applicable anywhere.
- Original Message -
From: mcnee...@cox.net
To: ECOLOG-L@LISTSERV.UMD.EDU; Wayne Tyson landr...@cox.net
Sent: Wednesday, March 02, 2011 10:27 AM
Subject: Re: [ECOLOG-L] Question Ecology Natural History etc Re: [ECOLOG-L]
Hypothesis Testing
Nothing in modern studies; however, many contend that natural history
is still done like back in the 19th century. If you look at those
ancient papers you will find all kinds of pure speculation and things
that simply could never be published today. Modern natural history,
or life history
10 matches
Mail list logo
