Ecology B/C

[paleonaps]

Honestly, does anyone use anything else?

[Starapollo1]

I used to. The sad part is, the first time I placed in an event my freshmen year is when I went to wikipedia, went to 'cell biology' and just read the article. At the next competition i beat our varsity team.

[gneissisnice]

Wikipedia is honestly the best source of information for any scio event.

People say it's unreliable because it can be changed, but the scio stuff is so esoteric that no prankster is ever gonna visit those pages anyway.

[amerikestrel]

Wikipedia is honestly the best source of information for any scio event.

People say it's unreliable because it can be changed, but the scio stuff is so esoteric that no prankster is ever gonna visit those pages anyway.

It is unreliable, simply because you cannot rely on any of the information being accurate. That's just the nature of an openly editable website. Vandals are not the issue with SO-related articles; it's the quality of the information in the first place. Much of it is written by people who don't have any formal qualifications in the subjects, so they might be leaving out key topics or making common mistakes, even if they use reliable resources and have good intentions.

Nevertheless, Wikipedia often has quite good articles, but it should always be cross-referenced with other sources.

[Starapollo1]

Wikipedia is honestly the best source of information for any scio event.

People say it's unreliable because it can be changed, but the scio stuff is so esoteric that no prankster is ever gonna visit those pages anyway.

It is unreliable, simply because you cannot rely on any of the information being accurate. That's just the nature of an openly editable website. Vandals are not the issue with SO-related articles; it's the quality of the information in the first place. Much of it is written by people who don't have any formal qualifications in the subjects, so they might be leaving out key topics or making common mistakes, even if they use reliable resources and have good intentions.

Nevertheless, Wikipedia often has quite good articles, but it should always be cross-referenced with other sources.

Actally Wikipedia gives you a list of resources at the bottom of the pages where they recieved their information. Also the idea that it can be edited on whim is an urban myth, if you edit something it has to be approved, SO while you may edit something funny into a page within 24 hours it will be debunked so as long as you check back then you should be fine.
What I found so helpful about wikipedia is the fact that it in a relatively short read it can teach you a lot of general information and specific information about your event. Obviously you should use more than wikipedia but it's definitely a good place to start and I reccoment it to all the underclassmen when they ask for study tips.

[paleonaps]

I always look at references that Wikipedia cites to check their stuff if I find it questionable.

[lilolme]

The rules say to focus on local and regional ecology. Does that mean to study the biomes around us?

[paleonaps]

I believe this was already answered.

[lolliexdd]

Me and my partner came to the conclusion that ecology tests have mostly straightforward questions, and then they ask 1-3 questions that throw us off.
If that makes any sense, what questions have you gotten that threw you off, if any?

[XJcwolfyX]

The Extinction Vortex