Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice
Carrion & Fernandez (2009; further C&F) in a recent commentary on a paper published in Journal of Biogeography criticised an obvious mismatch between the predictions about the patterns of potential natural vegetation (PNV) made by phytosociologists, and those underpinned by pollen data. C&am...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Published: |
Universidad Complutense de Madrid
2010
|
| Online Access: | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43775 |
| _version_ | 1848756805079924736 |
|---|---|
| author | Mucina, Ladislav |
| author_facet | Mucina, Ladislav |
| author_sort | Mucina, Ladislav |
| building | Curtin Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | Carrion & Fernandez (2009; further C&F) in a recent commentary on a paper published in Journal of Biogeography criticised an obvious mismatch between the predictions about the patterns of potential natural vegetation (PNV) made by phytosociologists, and those underpinned by pollen data. C&F used this stage to take a broad sway on phytosociology in general (stopping only very short of denying it status of science), blaming power of tradition and influence of personal cult for ignoring scientific evidence. In my response I show that C&F have misinterpreted the concept of PNV, rendering their comparisons irrelevant. C&F obviously overslept the progress descriptive vegetation science made in recent decades, relegating their heavy criticism of phytosociology into the realm of prejudice. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T09:18:01Z |
| format | Journal Article |
| id | curtin-20.500.11937-43775 |
| institution | Curtin University Malaysia |
| institution_category | Local University |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T09:18:01Z |
| publishDate | 2010 |
| publisher | Universidad Complutense de Madrid |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | curtin-20.500.11937-437752017-09-13T13:41:45Z Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice Mucina, Ladislav Carrion & Fernandez (2009; further C&F) in a recent commentary on a paper published in Journal of Biogeography criticised an obvious mismatch between the predictions about the patterns of potential natural vegetation (PNV) made by phytosociologists, and those underpinned by pollen data. C&F used this stage to take a broad sway on phytosociology in general (stopping only very short of denying it status of science), blaming power of tradition and influence of personal cult for ignoring scientific evidence. In my response I show that C&F have misinterpreted the concept of PNV, rendering their comparisons irrelevant. C&F obviously overslept the progress descriptive vegetation science made in recent decades, relegating their heavy criticism of phytosociology into the realm of prejudice. 2010 Journal Article http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43775 10.5209/rev_LAZA.2010.v31.13 Universidad Complutense de Madrid unknown |
| spellingShingle | Mucina, Ladislav Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| title | Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| title_full | Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| title_fullStr | Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| title_full_unstemmed | Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| title_short | Floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| title_sort | floristic-phytosociological approach, potential natural vegetation, and survival of prejudice |
| url | http://hdl.handle.net/20.500.11937/43775 |