Methods guides based on dogma not science: an example from microbiota restoration
Date
2023
Authors
Stanhope, J.
Austin, J.
Skelly, E.
Weinstein, P.
Editors
Advisors
Journal Title
Journal ISSN
Volume Title
Type:
Journal article
Citation
Restoration Ecology, 2023; 31(7):e13881-1-e13881-3
Statement of Responsibility
Jessica Stanhope, Jeremy J. Austin, Emily Skelly, Philip Weinstein
Conference Name
Abstract
Methods guides are useful for new researchers in a field and/or more established researchers needing to stay up-to-date with the best available methods. However, issues may arise where methods guides rely on outdated methodologies rather than progressing good science. We use a recent example of two methods guides for avoiding contamination in the emerging field of microbiota restoration studies, where ultraviolet (UV) “sterilization” was recommended for sample collection tubes. UV treatment is not an effective method of decontamination and may actually lead to contamination as a consequence of extended exposure to the aerobiome and other laboratory contamination before, during and after UV-light exposure. Indeed, the use of appropriate tubes negates the need for such decontamination. Although well intended, guidance materials that contain omissions or inaccurate recommendations may lead to inaccurate research findings. This example highlights the important need for such guides to be based on up-to-date scientific evidence, not simply dogma
School/Discipline
Dissertation Note
Provenance
Description
Access Status
Rights
© 2023 Society for Ecological Restoration.