3 ms·

I think the natural interpretation is that the January 1977 numbers showed a value 60 times greater than the January 2013 value. (the dry weight of all the c

I think the natural interpretation is that the January 1977 numbers showed a value 60 times greater than the January 2013 value. (the dry weight of all the captured invertebrates) Here's a direct link to the relevant graph: http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2018/10/09/1722477115/F2.large.jpg http://www.pnas.org/content/pnas/early/2018/10/09/1722477115... Full publication: http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/10/09/1722477115 http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2018/10/09/1722477115

lisper 8y ago
That would indeed be a not-entirely-unreasonable interpretation except for two things: 1. Why not just say that the numbers went down by 98% (i.e. 59/60)? 2. If you look at the graph, the numbers clearly went down by less than 98%.