Contagious is around: about some aspects of incorrect methodology and terminology in soil research and publications

Abstract

The article discusses some examples of incorrect methodology and terminology practice in soil research and publications. In particular, the authors draw attention to extremely inflated and unjustified use of the phrase “statistically significant”, to the controversy between the chemical determination and terminological definition of soil humus, to the inadequacy of using mass concentrations of chemical elements to inferring soil organic matter stoichiometry, to frequent interpreting empirical regression as if describing some conceptual relationship, to the principle impossibility to estimate bacteria and fungi numbers in soil by agar plate counts of colony-forming units. Based on the discussed examples, the authors conclude that the ease and the rate of the present-day communication flow will increasingly enhance the role of communication exchange in estimating the validity of results of a certain piece of scientific cognition, which will significantly increase the negative impact of consensuality, especially in soil science, as soil is one of the most complex natural bodies.