Hostname: page-component-7479d7b7d-c9gpj Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-07-08T08:41:22.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Consistency and Convenience in the Choice of Units for Agricultural Science†

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  03 October 2008

J. L. Monteith
J. L. Monteith
Affiliation:
University of Nottingham School of Agriculture, Sutton Bonington, Loughborough, Leics LE12 5RD, England
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Summary

The Système International d'Unités (SI) provides a consistent and coherent set of units for specifying the magnitude of physical quantities. Use of SI is recommended by most scientific journals and in many, including Experimental Agriculture, it is now mandatory. Multiples and sub-multiples of units should be chosen to minimize the repetition of zeros before or after the decimal point. Several units related to SI (e.g. tonne and hectare) are convenient in speech as well as in writing but should be avoided in analysis to minimize the risk of numerical errors. Units common in agricultural science are discussed with special reference to the need for compromise between consistency and convenience.

Type
Research Article
Information
Experimental Agriculture , Volume 20 , Issue 2 , April 1984 , pp. 105 - 117
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1984

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

†

Invited contribution.

References

REFERENCES

Bell, C. J. & Rose, D. A. (1981). Light measurement and the terminology of flow. Plant, Cell and Environment 4: 89–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Campbell, G. S. & van Schilfgaarde, J. (1981). Use of SI units in soil physics. Journal of Agronomic Education 10: 73–74.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Garcia-Huidobro, G., Monteith, J. L. & Squire, G. (1982). Time, temperature and germination of pearl millet. Journal of Experimental Botany 33: 297–302.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Incoll, L. D., Long, S. P. & Ashmore, M. R. (1977). SI units in publications in plant science. Current Advances in Plant Science 28: 331–343.Google Scholar
Jerrard, H. G. & McNeill, D. B. (1980). A Dictionary of Scientific Units (3rd edn). London: Chapman and Hall.Google Scholar
Jones, H. G. (1980). Interaction and integration of adaptive responses to water stress. In Adaptation of Plants to Water and High Temperature Stress, 353–365. (Eds Turner, N. C. & Kramer, P. J.). New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
McRee, K. J. (1976). A rational approach to light measurements in ecology. In Commentaries in Plant Science, 45–50 (Ed. Smith, H.). Oxford: Pergamon Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mount, L. (1968). The Climatic Physiology of the Pig. London: Edward Arnold.Google Scholar
Quantities, Units & Symbols (1971, revised 1975). A Report by the Symbols Committee of the Royal Society. London: The Royal Society.Google Scholar
Rose, D. A. (1979). Soil water: quantities, units and symbols. Journal of Soil Science 30: 1–15.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ross, J. (1975). Radiative transfer in plant communities. In Vegetation and the Atmosphere, I. Principles, 13–15 (Ed. Monteith, J. L.). London: Academic Press.Google Scholar
Thien, S. J. & Oster, J. D. (1981). The international system of units and its particular application to soil chemistry. Journal of Agronomic Education 10: 62–70.CrossRefGoogle Scholar