Abstract
A recent analysis revealed that most environmental microbiologists neglect replication in their science (Prosser, 2010). Of all peer-reviewed papers published during 2009 in the field's leading journals, slightly more than 70% lacked replication when it came to analyzing microbial community data. The paucity of replication is viewed as an 'endemic' and 'embarrassing' problem that amounts to 'bad science', or worse yet, as the title suggests, lying (Prosser, 2010). Although replication is an important component of experimental design, it is possible to do good science without replication. There are various quantitative techniques - some old, some new - that, when used properly, will allow environmental microbiologists to make strong statistical conclusions from experimental and comparative data. Here, I provide examples where unreplicated data can be used to test hypotheses and yield novel information in a statistically robust manner.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
