- Hardcover: 384 pages
- Publisher: CRC Press; 1 edition (November 1, 1997)
- Language: English
- ISBN-10: 1575040433
- ISBN-13: 978-1575040431
- Product Dimensions: 11.2 x 8.7 x 1.1 inches
- Shipping Weight: 2.9 pounds
- Average Customer Review: 15 customer reviews
- Amazon Best Sellers Rank: #1,250,809 in Books (See Top 100 in Books)
Enter your mobile number or email address below and we'll send you a link to download the free Kindle App. Then you can start reading Kindle books on your smartphone, tablet, or computer - no Kindle device required.
To get the free app, enter your mobile phone number.
Agroecology: Ecological Processes in Sustainable Agriculture 1st Edition
Use the Amazon App to scan ISBNs and compare prices.
There is a newer edition of this item:
The Amazon Book Review
Author interviews, book reviews, editors picks, and more. Read it now
Customers who bought this item also bought
Customers who viewed this item also viewed
..."developing a more ecological approach to food production is urgent...this text is an exciting introduction to achieving this goal..." - Dr. Eugene Odum, Director Emeritus, Institute of Ecology, University of Georgia "The book could provide a very useful reference for the serious farmer as well as students of the relatively new field." --Ecology Action Newsletter, February 2001
Browse award-winning titles. See more
Top customer reviews
I felt the text bounced from being a 100 level course book to being a 400 level course book within the same chapter. I believe Mr. Gliessman knows the material, but his editors and publishers did not. The book needed to be more throughly refined and there are some, if not errors, definite places where clarification should be. For instance in one chapter they talk about 40t, but never define what unit of measurement the 't' is. I might be incorrect about the number in front of the t, since I do not have the book to reference. He was writing about topsoil generation and erosion loss. The 't' I finally determined must be tons, but since it was never actually defined they could have been talking about teaspoons. For a text, that later gets very in-depth into the different types of photosynthesis functions, that is an inexcusable error. Either you're a scientific text or you are not, an abbreviation should always be defined.
I don't know if it was the way the text was used in my course or the text itself, but I did not get anything in particular out of this book, other than the fact there is room for an AMAZING agrocecology textbook if someone is inclined to write one!