It's actually pretty good reporting. I'd give it a full read.
There's enough details dropped about experiment durations, species counts, and references to the techniques used to measure that if you've already got a background in the field, you can infer quite a lot; and if you don't, you can skip those details.
What good reporting should be, in other words: a summary valid for a wide audience.
6 comments
[ 56.9 ms ] story [ 454 ms ] threadhttps://youtu.be/rcKxS2rbEdg
There's enough details dropped about experiment durations, species counts, and references to the techniques used to measure that if you've already got a background in the field, you can infer quite a lot; and if you don't, you can skip those details.
What good reporting should be, in other words: a summary valid for a wide audience.