Pulse Brain · Growing Health Evidence Index
Tier 4 — Narrative / commentaryPeer-reviewed

Response to commentary by Hollis et al. on “The development of soil health benchmarks for managed and semi-natural landscapes”

Christopher J. Feeney, David A. Robinson, Bridget A. Emmett

The Science of The Total Environment · 2025

Read source ↗ All evidence

Summary

This is a response paper defending the development of soil health benchmarks for managed and semi-natural landscapes against critical commentary. The authors (Feeney, Robinson, and Emmett) engage with critiques raised by Hollis et al., clarifying the methodological foundations and applicability of their benchmark framework. As a response piece published in 2025, it contributes to ongoing scientific dialogue on standardising soil health assessment across diverse landscape contexts.

UK applicability

Directly applicable to UK agricultural and environmental policy. The benchmark framework is developed for UK landscapes and the response addresses critiques relevant to UK soil monitoring programmes and agri-environmental schemes.

Key measures

Soil health benchmarks and associated assessment metrics (specific measures inferred from title but not detailed in available metadata)

Outcomes reported

This paper responds to commentary on the development and application of soil health benchmarks across managed and semi-natural landscapes. The response clarifies methodological approaches and defends the benchmark framework against critiques raised by Hollis et al.

Theme
Measurement & metrics
Subject
Soil health assessment & monitoring
Study type
Commentary
Study design
Commentary
Source type
Peer-reviewed study
Status
Published
Geography
United Kingdom
System type
Mixed farming
DOI
10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.179711
Catalogue ID
SNmoppcb43-jz5sm3

Topic tags

Pulse AI · ask about this record

Dig deeper with Pulse AI.

Pulse AI has read the whole catalogue. Ask about this record, its theme, or how the findings apply to UK farming and policy — every answer cites the underlying studies.