Lack of data and misperception of open science limit the scope of Cantabrian brown bear body mass studies, not misinterpretation of results: Reply to comment by García-Vázquez (2025)
This manuscript responds to the comment of García-Vázquez on our recent paper, especially regarding the decline in body mass of the Cantabrian brown bear during the Holocene. The observations of García-Vázquez are reviewed point by point, addressing methodological aspects, that is, the use of the Vi...
| Autores: | , , , , , , , |
|---|---|
| Tipo de recurso: | artículo |
| Estado: | Versión publicada |
| Fecha de publicación: | 2025 |
| País: | España |
| Institución: | Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas (CSIC) |
| Repositorio: | DIGITAL.CSIC. Repositorio Institucional del CSIC |
| OAI Identifier: | oai:dnet:digitalcsic_::84a3c40a70e447c4f530739c7f088551 |
| Acceso en línea: | http://hdl.handle.net/10261/429866 |
| Access Level: | acceso abierto |
| Palabra clave: | Body size Holocene Iberian Peninsula Open science Ursus arctos |
| Sumario: | This manuscript responds to the comment of García-Vázquez on our recent paper, especially regarding the decline in body mass of the Cantabrian brown bear during the Holocene. The observations of García-Vázquez are reviewed point by point, addressing methodological aspects, that is, the use of the Viranta equation, the mass estimation of the specimen SH5-97-T29-35 and radiocarbon dating, as well as her ethical questions about the use of previously published data. Re-evaluations show that (1) the errors noted do not significantly affect the original conclusions of Fidalgo et al. and, (2) the use of third-party data was carried out in compliance with both legal regulations and open science principles. The new analyses maintain the pattern of declining bear body size after 7000–4500 years ago, without any conclusive evidence to link this phenomenon to the introduction of firearms in historical times. Neither this nor any alternative hypotheses are discarded, though. The importance of integrative meta-analyses in data-poor contexts is highlighted, and their legitimacy in the framework of collaborative and open science is defended, provided that sources of data are cited. |
|---|