I know HN is not that kind of site, but I have a hard time suppressing the knowledge that "step 3 is profit", and now we arguably know what step 2 is.

I came to post the gnomes, you posted the gnomes. As you say, HN isn't that kind of site, but you have my upvote.

> How much underwear decomposed was strongly linked to how many nutrients and how much organic material were in the soil. // Burying cotton underwear proved to be a simple, easy-to-use way to get a first impression of soil biological activity that anyone can try with a comparable pair of cotton briefs

A very simple question: why not directly using cotton fabric cuts?

They briefly (hah) covered it in TFA:

>Researchers have used cotton strips and specialty tea bags for similar purposes before, but those methods require precise scales and careful handling. A pair of underwear, by contrast, offers something immediate: anyone can look at what came out of the ground and grasp what it means.

The linked manuscript basically says the same:

>Cotton strips have previously been applied (Harrison et al., 1988; Nachimuthu et al., 2007), while the Tea Bag Index (TBI) makes use of commercially available teabags with standardized composition for the same purpose (Keuskamp et al., 2013). Due to the wide availability of the material, the TBI has been employed in a citizen science approach to gather global decomposition data (Sarneel et al., 2024). However, despite being relatively easy to apply and interpret, the method requires careful handling and specific tools, such as a fine scale balance. Moreover, it lacks visual appeal and may struggle to attract broader public attention for soil-related topics. A more playful approach that has occasionally been used to illustrate soil decomposition, though without scientific rigor, is the burial of cotton underpants (Figure 1).

It looks like establishing cotton underwear as a viable method was exactly the point of this study. As they say, "This work demonstrates that underwear decomposition varied widely across land-use types and that buried underwear is a simple and easily interpretable tool to gain a first impression of soil health."

Because cotton underwear is arguably the right answer:

"Buy this item made out of this material, bury two of them in the ground" requires no further cutting or measuring, and most people would have to go to the store to buy a cut of cotton fabric anyway.

This particular clothing item also contains a more resistant skeleton of fibers against which to compare when the test material is heavily decomposed. This is how the "10 point decomposition scale" functions, and a single cotton square would not facilitate that.

Finally, it's novel, which entices potential participants to complete the survey.

The photos in the team's actual paper (linked in OA) are hilarious and lovely - real pride there. Citizen science projects have educational value as well as the data.

Ig Nobel prize incoming?

That's kinky.

Also, the very notion that agriculture depends on underpants for studying soil, is - while entertaining - rubbish nonsense. For decomposition studies you typically use thorough material with consistent dimensions etc... like a rectangle of, say, 10cm x10cm, but even that is rarely done. This here really seems fake research.