The Readings
McCauley, D. J. (2006). Selling out on nature. Nature, 443(7107), 27-28.
Reply to McCauley
Reid, W., Mooney, H., Capistrano, D. et al. (2006) Nature: the many benefits of ecosystem services. Nature 443, 749.
Reply by McCauley
McCauley, D. J. (2006). Nature: McCauley replies. Nature, 443(7113), 750-750.
Dear BIOL 4095 Class,
I chose these readings based on two criteria: 1) relevance to my own research and 2) article type.
Reason One: Relevance to my own Research
The original article by McCauley (2006) is a seminal paper in the area of nature valuation. It has been cited 825 times (Google Scholar, 2020. This means that other researchers thought the ideas presented by McCauley were important enough to include when they wrote their own articles. This does not mean they all agreed with McCauley’s ideas.
Reason Two: Article Type
You may have noticed McCauley (2006) is in the Commentary section of the journal Nature. I suspect most of you are more familiar with original research (ex. experimental) or review (essay style) articles. McCauley (2006) is very similar to a review type article; however, there is an important difference: an overall thesis. A typical review article summarizes previous research on a topic and makes suggestions for future research. Whereas in a commentary article the author uses previous research to support their thesis statement. A well written commentary article is thought provoking and sparks debate. I assigned the reply to MCCauley (2006), Reid and colleagues (2006) and McCauley reply to Reid et al. 2006 to give you all a small sample of the debates that occur in science.
Class Questions
- What was the thesis of McCauley (2006)?
- What was the thesis of Reid et al. (2006)?
- In your opinion, did McCauley’s reply address the critiques of Reid et al. 2006?
Applied Plant Ecology Winter 2020 