Monthly Archives: July 2008

Books

Go here and here for context, then discuss the idiosyncrasy of such lists. There are books there I have not touched, but I have read equally long and boring ones by the same authors. I have read parts of some, or kids/abridged versions of others. Here are those I read from beginning to end in original, unabridged versions:
2 The Lord of the Rings – JRR Tolkien
4 Harry Potter series – JK Rowling
8 Nineteen Eighty Four – George Orwell
16 The Hobbit – JRR Tolkien
18 Catcher in the Rye – JD Salinger
24 War and Peace – Leo Tolstoy
25 The Hitch Hiker’s Guide to the Galaxy – Douglas Adams
29 Alice in Wonderland – Lewis Carroll
31 Anna Karenina – Leo Tolstoy
32 David Copperfield – Charles Dickens
40 Winnie the Pooh – AA Milne
41 Animal Farm – George Orwell
58 Brave New World – Aldous Huxley
70 Moby Dick – Herman Melville
71 Oliver Twist – Charles Dickens
87 Charlotte’s Web – EB White
89 Adventures of Sherlock Holmes – Sir Arthur Conan Doyle
92 The Little Prince – Antoine De Saint-Exupery
94 Watership Down – Richard Adams
100 Les Miserables – Victor Hugo

My picks from ScienceDaily

Missing Link Found Between Circadian Clock And Metabolism:

Two new research studies have discovered a long sought molecular link between our metabolism and components of the internal clock that drives circadian rhythms, keeping us to a roughly 24-hour schedule. The findings appear in the July 25th issue of the journal Cell.

Dinosaurs Did Not Evolve Quickly In Last 50 Million Years, New Dinosaur Super-tree Shows:

It has long been debated whether dinosaurs were part of the ‘Terrestrial Revolution’ that occurred some 100 million years ago during the Cretaceous when birds, mammals, flowering plants, insects and reptiles all underwent a rapid expansion.

Parasites Vastly Outweigh Predators In Estuaries: Could Have Significant Ecological Implications:

In a study of free-living and parasitic species in three estuaries on the Pacific coast of California and Baja California, a team of researchers from the University of California, Santa Barbara, the United States Geological Survey, and Princeton University has determined that parasite biomass in those habitats exceeds that of top predators, in some cases by a factor of 20.

Parasitic Worm Infections Increase Susceptibility To AIDS Viruses:

Persons infected with schistosomes, and possibly other parasitic worm infections, may be more likely to become infected with HIV than persons without worm infections, according to a new study.

Glia Guide Brain Development In Worms:

Again and again, experiments confirmed it. Without glia, neurons die. So scientists who wanted to study in living animals what glia — the most abundant brain cells — do for neurons besides keep them alive were out of luck. But now, a breakthrough.

Serious School Failure Is Depressing For Girls, But Not Boys:

Adolescent girls who had a serious school failure by the 12th grade — being expelled, suspended or dropping out — were significantly more likely to have suffered a serious bout of depression at the age of 21 than girls who did not have these problems.

Viagra Works For Antidepressant-related Sexual Dysfunction In Women, Study Suggests:

Women with sexual dysfunction caused by the use of antidepressants experienced a reduction in adverse sexual effects with use of sildenafil, commonly known as the erectile dysfunction medication Viagra, according to a new study.

Age-old Magic Tricks Can Provide Clues For Modern Science:

Revealing the science behind age-old magic tricks will help us better understand how humans see, think, and act, according to researchers at the University of British Columbia and Durham University in the U.K.

Licking Your Wounds: Scientists Isolate Compound In Human Saliva That Speeds Wound Healing:

A report by scientists from The Netherlands identifies a compound in human saliva that greatly speeds wound healing. This research may offer hope to people suffering from chronic wounds related to diabetes and other disorders, as well as traumatic injuries and burns. In addition, because the compounds can be mass produced, they have the potential to become as common as antibiotic creams and rubbing alcohol.

Milkweed’s Evolutionary Approach To Caterpillars: Counter Appetite With Fast Repair:

The adage that your enemies know your weaknesses best is especially true in the case of plants and predators that have co-evolved: As the predators evolve new strategies for attack, plants counter with their own unique defenses.

Controlling Invasive Cane Grass With Wasps?:

Researchers at The University of Texas at Austin will work with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service (USDA-ARS) to investigate biological control for an invasive cane grass that is choking waterways across North America.

Sex And Lifespan Linked In Worms:

A group of scientists who set out to study sex pheromones in a tiny worm found that the same family of pheromones also controls a stage in the worms’ life cycle, the long-lived dauer larva.

Who are you?

This is not meant in the sense of “who the heck do YOU think you are?”, but more along the lines of the experiment that Ed is doing:

1) Tell me about you. Who are you? Do you have a background in science? If so, what draws you here as opposed to meatier, more academic fare? And if not, what brought you here and why have you stayed? Let loose with those comments.
2) Tell someone else about this blog and in particular, try and choose someone who’s not a scientist but who you think might be interested in the type of stuff found in this blog. Ever had family members or groups of friends who’ve been giving you strange, pitying looks when you try to wax scientific on them? Send ’em here and let’s see what they say.

So, I am asking the same questions now. I hope to see a lot of comments here….

SciBlings meetup in New York City

Sheril will be there.
Janet will be there.
Zuska will be there.
Grrrl will be there.
Brian will be there.
Ed will be there.
Mark will be there.
Josh will be there.
Jake will be there.
Orac will be there.
I will be there.
A dozen or so more Sciblings will be there (watch the other blogs for their future announcements).
Are you going to be there?

Juno – at the age of 9 weeks

P1010060.JPG
P1010069.JPG
Juno%20staring%20in%20a%20mirror.JPG
Juno%20being%20a%20maniac%20in%20her%20sleep.JPG

ClockQuotes

A learned man is an idler who kills time with study. Beware of his false knowledge; it is more dangerous than ignorance.
– George Bernard Shaw

Today’s carnivals

Grand Rounds 4:44 – the 200th Edition! – are up on GruntDoc
Volume 3, Number 2 of Change of Shift is up on Emergiblog
The 134th Carnival of Homeschooling is up on Life on the Road
Strangely, blogs that were supposed to host this week’s Tangled Bank, Carnival of Education, and Carnival of the Green, have not been updated in a while….

Blogrolling for Today

Dent Cartoons


What we don’t know is A LOT


skeetersays


Crossing the Frame


The Spittoon


Unbalanced reaction


MaRS blog – Science and Technology


JMP Blog


Developer Blog

Obligatory Readings of the Day: Darwin and Evolution

Olivia Judson has, so far, posted four parts of her Darwin series. We (“we” meaning “bloggers’ including myself) have already commented on some of these, but here is the entire series (so far, I hope there will be more) for ease of use:
Darwinmania!
An Original Confession
Let’s Get Rid of Darwinism
A Natural Selection

New and Exciting in PLoS ONE

There are 51 new papers in PLoS ONE this week – check them out for stuff you are interested in (and post comments, notes and ratings and send trackbacks), but here are my personal picks:
Sample Size and Precision in NIH Peer Review:

The Working Group on Peer Review of the Advisory Committee to the Director of NIH has recommended that at least 4 reviewers should be used to assess each grant application. A sample size analysis of the number of reviewers needed to evaluate grant applications reveals that a substantially larger number of evaluators are required to provide the level of precision that is currently mandated. NIH should adjust their peer review system to account for the number of reviewers needed to provide adequate precision in their evaluations.

Measuring Co-Authorship and Networking-Adjusted Scientific Impact:

Appraisal of the scientific impact of researchers, teams and institutions with productivity and citation metrics has major repercussions. Funding and promotion of individuals and survival of teams and institutions depend on publications and citations. In this competitive environment, the number of authors per paper is increasing and apparently some co-authors don’t satisfy authorship criteria. Listing of individual contributions is still sporadic and also open to manipulation. Metrics are needed to measure the networking intensity for a single scientist or group of scientists accounting for patterns of co-authorship. Here, I define I1 for a single scientist as the number of authors who appear in at least I1 papers of the specific scientist. For a group of scientists or institution, In is defined as the number of authors who appear in at least In papers that bear the affiliation of the group or institution. I1 depends on the number of papers authored Np. The power exponent R of the relationship between I1 and Np categorizes scientists as solitary (R>2.5), nuclear (R = 2.25-2.5), networked (R = 2-2.25), extensively networked (R = 1.75-2) or collaborators (R<1.75). R may be used to adjust for co-authorship networking the citation impact of a scientist. In similarly provides a simple measure of the effective networking size to adjust the citation impact of groups or institutions. Empirical data are provided for single scientists and institutions for the proposed metrics. Cautious adoption of adjustments for co-authorship and networking in scientific appraisals may offer incentives for more accountable co-authorship behaviour in published articles.

Circadian Genes Are Expressed during Early Development in Xenopus laevis:

Circadian oscillators are endogenous time-keeping mechanisms that drive twenty four hour rhythmic changes in gene expression, metabolism, hormone levels, and physical activity. We have examined the developmental expression of genes known to regulate circadian rhythms in order to better understand the ontogeny of the circadian clock in a vertebrate. In this study, genes known to function together in part of the core circadian oscillator mechanism (xPeriod1, xPeriod2, and xBmal1) as well as a rhythmic, clock-controlled gene (xNocturnin) were analyzed using in situ hybridization in embryos from neurula to late tailbud stages. Each transcript was present in the developing nervous system in the brain, eye, olfactory pit, otic vesicle and at lower levels in the spinal cord. These genes were also expressed in the developing somites and heart, but at different developmental times in peripheral tissues (pronephros, cement gland, and posterior mesoderm). No difference was observed in transcript levels or localization when similarly staged embryos maintained in cyclic light were compared at two times of day (dawn and dusk) by in situ hybridization. Quantitation of xBmal1 expression in embryonic eyes was also performed using qRT-PCR. Eyes were isolated at dawn, midday, dusk, and midnight (cylic light). No difference in expression level between time-points was found in stage 31 eyes (p = 0.176) but stage 40 eyes showed significantly increased levels of xBmal1 expression at midnight (RQ = 1.98+/−0.094) when compared to dawn (RQ = 1+/−0.133; p = 0.0004). We hypothesize that when circadian genes are not co-expressed in the same tissue during development that it may indicate pleiotropic functions of these genes that are separate from the timing of circadian rhythm. Our results show that all circadian genes analyzed thus far are present during early brain and eye development, but rhythmic gene expression in the eye is not observed until after stage 31 of development.

Disturbed Clockwork Resetting in Sharp-1 and Sharp-2 Single and Double Mutant Mice:

The circadian system provides the basis to anticipate and cope with daily recurrent challenges to maintain the organisms’ homeostasis. De-synchronization of circadian feedback oscillators in humans causes ‘jet lag’, likely contributes to sleep – , psychiatric – , metabolic disorders and even cancer. However, the molecular mechanisms leading to the disintegration of tissue-specific clocks are complex and not well understood. Based on their circadian expression and cell culture experiments, the basic Helix-Loop-Helix (bHLH) transcription factors SHARP-1(Dec2) and SHARP-2(Stra13/Dec1) were proposed as novel negative regulators of the molecular clock. To address their function in vivo, we generated Sharp-1 and Sharp-2 single and double mutant mice. Our experiments reveal critical roles for both factors in regulating period length, tissue-specific control of clock gene expression and entrainment to external cues. Light-pulse experiments and rapid delays of the light-dark cycle (experimental jet lag) unravel complementary functions for SHARP-1 and SHARP-2 in controlling activity phase resetting kinetics. Moreover, we show that SHARP-1 and 2 can serve dual functions as repressors and co-activators of mammalian clock gene expression in a context-specific manner. This correlates with increased amplitudes of Per2 expression in the cortex and liver and a decrease in the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of double mutant mice. The existence of separate mechanisms regulating phase of entrainment, rhythm amplitude and period length has been postulated before. The differential effects of Sharp-deficiency on rhythmicity and behavioral re-entrainment, coupled to tissue-dependent regulatory functions, provide a new mechanistic basis to further understand the complex process of clock synchronizations.

Paleodistributions and Comparative Molecular Phylogeography of Leafcutter Ants (Atta spp.) Provide New Insight into the Origins of Amazonian Diversity:

The evolutionary basis for high species diversity in tropical regions of the world remains unresolved. Much research has focused on the biogeography of speciation in the Amazon Basin, which harbors the greatest diversity of terrestrial life. The leading hypotheses on allopatric diversification of Amazonian taxa are the Pleistocene refugia, marine incursion, and riverine barrier hypotheses. Recent advances in the fields of phylogeography and species-distribution modeling permit a modern re-evaluation of these hypotheses. Our approach combines comparative, molecular phylogeographic analyses using mitochondrial DNA sequence data with paleodistribution modeling of species ranges at the last glacial maximum (LGM) to test these hypotheses for three co-distributed species of leafcutter ants (Atta spp.). The cumulative results of all tests reject every prediction of the riverine barrier hypothesis, but are unable to reject several predictions of the Pleistocene refugia and marine incursion hypotheses. Coalescent dating analyses suggest that population structure formed recently (Pleistocene-Pliocene), but are unable to reject the possibility that Miocene events may be responsible for structuring populations in two of the three species examined. The available data therefore suggest that either marine incursions in the Miocene or climate changes during the Pleistocene–or both–have shaped the population structure of the three species examined. Our results also reconceptualize the traditional Pleistocene refugia hypothesis, and offer a novel framework for future research into the area.

Marine Biofilm Bacteria Evade Eukaryotic Predation by Targeted Chemical Defense:

Many plants and animals are defended from predation or herbivory by inhibitory secondary metabolites, which in the marine environment are very common among sessile organisms. Among bacteria, where there is the greatest metabolic potential, little is known about chemical defenses against bacterivorous consumers. An emerging hypothesis is that sessile bacterial communities organized as biofilms serve as bacterial refuge from predation. By testing growth and survival of two common bacterivorous nanoflagellates, we find evidence that chemically mediated resistance against protozoan predators is common among biofilm populations in a diverse set of marine bacteria. Using bioassay-guided chemical and genetic analysis, we identified one of the most effective antiprotozoal compounds as violacein, an alkaloid that we demonstrate is produced predominately within biofilm cells. Nanomolar concentrations of violacein inhibit protozoan feeding by inducing a conserved eukaryotic cell death program. Such biofilm-specific chemical defenses could contribute to the successful persistence of biofilm bacteria in various environments and provide the ecological and evolutionary context for a number of eukaryote-targeting bacterial metabolites.

Changes in Gray Matter Induced by Learning–Revisited:

Recently, activation-dependant structural brain plasticity in humans has been demonstrated in adults after three months of training a visio-motor skill. Learning three-ball cascade juggling was associated with a transient and highly selective increase in brain gray matter in the occipito-temporal cortex comprising the motion sensitive area hMT/V5 bilaterally. However, the exact time-scale of usage-dependant structural changes occur is still unknown. A better understanding of the temporal parameters may help to elucidate to what extent this type of cortical plasticity contributes to fast adapting cortical processes that may be relevant to learning. Using a 3 Tesla scanner and monitoring whole brain structure we repeated and extended our original study in 20 healthy adult volunteers, focussing on the temporal aspects of the structural changes and investigated whether these changes are performance or exercise dependant. The data confirmed our earlier observation using a mean effects analysis and in addition showed that learning to juggle can alter gray matter in the occipito-temporal cortex as early as after 7 days of training. Neither performance nor exercise alone could explain these changes. We suggest that the qualitative change (i.e. learning of a new task) is more critical for the brain to change its structure than continued training of an already-learned task.

Genetic Variation and De Novo Mutations in the Parthenogenetic Caucasian Rock Lizard Darevskia unisexualis:

Unisexual all-female lizards of the genus Darevskia that are well adapted to various habitats are known to reproduce normally by true parthenogenesis. Although they consist of unisexual lineages and lack effective genetic recombination, they are characterized by some level of genetic polymorphism. To reveal the mutational contribution to overall genetic variability, the most straightforward and conclusive way is the direct detection of mutation events in pedigree genotyping. Earlier we selected from genomic library of D. unisexualis two polymorphic microsatellite containg loci Du281 and Du215. In this study, these two loci were analyzed to detect possible de novo mutations in 168 parthenogenetic offspring of 49 D. unisexualis mothers and in 147 offspring of 50 D. armeniaca mothers . No mutant alleles were detected in D. armeniaca offspring at both loci, and in D. unisexualis offspring at the Du215 locus. There were a total of seven mutational events in the germ lines of four of the 49 D. unisexualis mothers at the Du281 locus, yielding the mutation rate of 0.1428 events per germ line tissue. Sequencing of the mutant alleles has shown that most mutations occur via deletion or insertion of single microsatellite repeat being identical in all offspring of the family. This indicates that such mutations emerge at the early stages of embryogenesis. In this study we characterized single highly unstable (GATA)n containing locus in parthenogenetic lizard species D. unisexualis. Besides, we characterized various types of mutant alleles of this locus found in the D. unisexualis offspring of the first generation. Our data has shown that microsatellite mutations at highly unstable loci can make a significant contribution to population variability of parthenogenetic lizards.

Universal Scaling in the Branching of the Tree of Life:

Understanding the patterns and processes of diversification of life in the planet is a key challenge of science. The Tree of Life represents such diversification processes through the evolutionary relationships among the different taxa, and can be extended down to intra-specific relationships. Here we examine the topological properties of a large set of interspecific and intraspecific phylogenies and show that the branching patterns follow allometric rules conserved across the different levels in the Tree of Life, all significantly departing from those expected from the standard null models. The finding of non-random universal patterns of phylogenetic differentiation suggests that similar evolutionary forces drive diversification across the broad range of scales, from macro-evolutionary to micro-evolutionary processes, shaping the diversity of life on the planet.

The Male Sex Pheromone of the Butterfly Bicyclus anynana: Towards an Evolutionary Analysis:

Female sex pheromones attracting mating partners over long distances are a major determinant of reproductive isolation and speciation in Lepidoptera. Males can also produce sex pheromones but their study, particularly in butterflies, has received little attention. A detailed comparison of sex pheromones in male butterflies with those of female moths would reveal patterns of conservation versus novelty in the associated behaviours, biosynthetic pathways, compounds, scent-releasing structures and receiving systems. Here we assess whether the African butterfly Bicyclus anynana, for which genetic, genomic, phylogenetic, ecological and ethological tools are available, represents a relevant model to contribute to such comparative studies. Using a multidisciplinary approach, we determined the chemical composition of the male sex pheromone (MSP) in the African butterfly B. anynana, and demonstrated its behavioural activity. First, we identified three compounds forming the presumptive MSP, namely (Z)-9-tetradecenol (Z9-14:OH), hexadecanal (16:Ald ) and 6,10,14-trimethylpentadecan-2-ol (6,10,14-trime-15-2-ol), and produced by the male secondary sexual structures, the androconia. Second, we described the male courtship sequence and found that males with artificially reduced amounts of MSP have a reduced mating success in semi-field conditions. Finally, we could restore the mating success of these males by perfuming them with the synthetic MSP. This study provides one of the first integrative analyses of a MSP in butterflies. The toolkit it has developed will enable the investigation of the type of information about male quality that is conveyed by the MSP in intraspecific communication. Interestingly, the chemical structure of B. anynana MSP is similar to some sex pheromones of female moths making a direct comparison of pheromone biosynthesis between male butterflies and female moths relevant to future research. Such a comparison will in turn contribute to understanding the evolution of sex pheromone production and reception in butterflies.

Neutrality and the Response of Rare Species to Environmental Variance:

Neutral models and differential responses of species to environmental heterogeneity offer complementary explanations of species abundance distribution and dynamics. Under what circumstances one model prevails over the other is still a matter of debate. We show that the decay of similarity over time in rocky seashore assemblages of algae and invertebrates sampled over a period of 16 years was consistent with the predictions of a stochastic model of ecological drift at time scales larger than 2 years, but not at time scales between 3 and 24 months when similarity was quantified with an index that reflected changes in abundance of rare species. A field experiment was performed to examine whether assemblages responded neutrally or non-neutrally to changes in temporal variance of disturbance. The experimental results did not reject neutrality, but identified a positive effect of intermediate levels of environmental heterogeneity on the abundance of rare species. This effect translated into a marked decrease in the characteristic time scale of species turnover, highlighting the role of rare species in driving assemblage dynamics in fluctuating environments.

Cheating on the Edge:

We present the results of an individual agent-based model of antibiotic resistance in bacteria. Our model examines antibiotic resistance when two strategies exist: “producers”-who secrete a substance that breaks down antibiotics-and nonproducers (“cheats”) who do not secrete, or carry the machinery associated with secretion. The model allows for populations of up to 10,000, in which bacteria are affected by their nearest neighbors, and we assume cheaters die when there are no producers in their neighborhood. Each of 10,000 slots on our grid (a torus) could be occupied by a producer or a nonproducer, or could (temporarily) be unoccupied. The most surprising and dramatic result we uncovered is that when producers and nonproducers coexist at equilibrium, nonproducers are almost always found on the edges of clusters of producers.

Network Evolution of Body Plans:

One of the major goals in evolutionary developmental biology is to understand the relationship between gene regulatory networks and the diverse morphologies and their functionalities. Are the diversities solely triggered by random events, or are they inevitable outcomes of an interplay between evolving gene networks and natural selection? Segmentation in arthropod embryogenesis represents a well-known example of body plan diversity. Striped patterns of gene expression that lead to the future body segments appear simultaneously or sequentially in long and short germ-band development, respectively. Moreover, a combination of both is found in intermediate germ-band development. Regulatory genes relevant for stripe formation are evolutionarily conserved among arthropods, therefore the differences in the observed traits are thought to have originated from how the genes are wired. To reveal the basic differences in the network structure, we have numerically evolved hundreds of gene regulatory networks that produce striped patterns of gene expression. By analyzing the topologies of the generated networks, we show that the characteristics of stripe formation in long and short germ-band development are determined by Feed-Forward Loops (FFLs) and negative Feed-Back Loops (FBLs) respectively, and those of intermediate germ-band development are determined by the interconnections between FFL and negative FBL. Network architectures, gene expression patterns and knockout responses exhibited by the artificially evolved networks agree with those reported in the fly Drosophila melanogaster and the beetle Tribolium castaneum. For other arthropod species, principal network architectures that remain largely unknown are predicted. Our results suggest that the emergence of the three modes of body segmentation in arthropods is an inherent property of the evolving networks.

Does Pathogen Spillover from Commercially Reared Bumble Bees Threaten Wild Pollinators?:

The conservation of insect pollinators is drawing attention because of reported declines in bee species and the ‘ecosystem services’ they provide. This issue has been brought to a head by recent devastating losses of honey bees throughout North America (so called, ‘Colony Collapse Disorder’); yet, we still have little understanding of the cause(s) of bee declines. Wild bumble bees (Bombus spp.) have also suffered serious declines and circumstantial evidence suggests that pathogen ‘spillover’ from commercially reared bumble bees, which are used extensively to pollinate greenhouse crops, is a possible cause. We constructed a spatially explicit model of pathogen spillover in bumble bees and, using laboratory experiments and the literature, estimated parameter values for the spillover of Crithidia bombi, a destructive pathogen commonly found in commercial Bombus. We also monitored wild bumble bee populations near greenhouses for evidence of pathogen spillover, and compared the fit of our model to patterns of C. bombi infection observed in the field. Our model predicts that, during the first three months of spillover, transmission from commercial hives would infect up to 20% of wild bumble bees within 2 km of the greenhouse. However, a travelling wave of disease is predicted to form suddenly, infecting up to 35-100% of wild Bombus, and spread away from the greenhouse at a rate of 2 km/wk. In the field, although we did not observe a large epizootic wave of infection, the prevalences of C. bombi near greenhouses were consistent with our model. Indeed, we found that spillover has allowed C. bombi to invade several wild bumble bee species near greenhouses. Given the available evidence, it is likely that pathogen spillover from commercial bees is contributing to the ongoing decline of wild Bombus in North America. Improved management of domestic bees, for example by reducing their parasite loads and their overlap with wild congeners, could diminish or even eliminate pathogen spillover.

My picks from ScienceDaily

Commercial Bees Spreading Disease To Wild Pollinating Bees:

Bees provide crucial pollination service to numerous crops and up to a third of the human diet comes from plants pollinated by insects. However, pollinating bees are suffering widespread declines in North America and scientists warn that this could have serious implications for agriculture and food supply. While the cause of these declines has largely been a mystery, new research reveals an alarming spread of disease from commercial bees to wild pollinators.

Unique Fossil Discovery Shows Antarctic Was Once Much Warmer:

A new fossil discovery- the first of its kind from the whole of the Antarctic continent- provides scientists with new evidence to support the theory that the polar region was once much warmer.

New Population Of Highly Threatened Greater Bamboo Lemur Found In Madagascar:

Researchers in Madagascar have confirmed the existence of a population of greater bamboo lemurs more than 400 kilometers (240 miles) from the only other place where the Critically Endangered species is known to live, raising hopes for its survival.

Some Earthworms Make Septic Systems Work Better, Others Do The Opposite:

The right earthworms can make home septic systems work better. The wrong ones could do the opposite.

Hormone Oxytocin May Inhibit Social Phobia:

Swedish and British scientists have shown using functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) that the hormone oxytocin can inhibit feelings of anxiety in specific individuals. Their discovery might lead to a better understanding and the improved treatment of psychiatric affections in which people feel distressed when meeting others, such as in cases of autism and social phobia.

Pollination Habits Of Endangered Texas Rice Revealed To Help Preservation:

A type of wild rice that only grows in a small stretch of the San Marcos River is likely so rare because it plays the sexual reproduction game poorly, a study led by the Lady Bird Johnson Wildflower Center at The University of Texas at Austin has revealed.

Genetics Of White Horses Unraveled: One Mutation Makes Ordinary Horses Turn Grey, Then White, Very Young:

The white horse is an icon for dignity which has had a huge impact on human culture across the world. An international team led by researchers at Uppsala University has now identified the mutation causing this spectacular trait and show that white horses carry an identical mutation that can be traced back to a common ancestor that lived thousands of years ago.

Environmental Factors Linked To Sex Ratio Of Plants Discovered:

Environmental factors can transform the ratio of females to males in plant populations according to new research out of the University of Toronto.

New in: Open Access and Science 2.0

The complexity of sharing scientific databases:

Under US law, pretty much anything you write down is copyrighted. Scrawl an original note on a napkin and it’s protected until 70 years after your death. Facts, however, are another matter – they can’t be copyrighted. So while trivial but creative scribblings are copyrighted, unless you choose to release them into the public domain, the information painstakingly discovered about the human genome – DNA sequences, for instance – aren’t. But the containers they’re stored in – the databases they’re held in – can be copyrighted.

Breaking News: Open access to large-scale drug discovery data at EBI:

The Wellcome Trust has awarded £4.7 million to the European Bioinformatics Institute (EBI) to support the transfer of a large collection of information on the properties and activities of drugs and a large set of drug-like small molecules from BioFocus DPI, part of the publicly listed company Galapagos to the public domain.

What scientists are we talking about?:

This discussion seems to have focused on just a small fraction (but an important one) of the number of scientists who would benefit from these tools. These researchers are funded by grants and are in tenure-track positions at 4 year research universities.
More scientists work at non-profits. What sorts of pressures are brought to bear there to prevent open collaboration? How different are these pressures from a research university? Those in business might also benefit from these approaches but have another set of barriers. Can they be surmounted?
This discussion is really important but it also conflates a large number of scientists/engineers who have different needs and pressures. There are 12 million in business who will have different needs than the 1.6 million at research universities.

MedPedia Is Wikifying the Medical Search Space:

The medical industry is one that thrives on innovation and evolution. New procedures, medicines, diseases, and theories are released practically every day. In such an environment, the need for a website to reflect and allow for documentation is apparent.

Open Access to Health and Human Rights:

Here’s another important step forward in the open access movement. Under its new editor Paul Farmer (who is often talked about as a future Nobel laureate), the international journal Health and Human Rights (HHR) has become fully open access.
The entire contents are freely available and are published under a progressive copyright license that allows readers to reuse the materials for any legal non-commercial purpose.

Indexing Institutional Repositories and Authors Self-Archived Collections:

The question then is whether or not ChemSpider can index institutional repositories or authors self-archived collections on their university research group websites. The authors self-archived collections will be very valuable but of course most likely to upset the publishers. We’d like to do both.
I envisage a time when articles are indexed and searchable even before they are published and indexed by others. Why not? If there are changes to the article between pre-and post-publication both can be indexed.

Another Wiki, WikiPathways:

I’ve already made known my “skeptical optimism” for wikis for biological data known in a previous post, reading this later paper, that would still apply here. But right now I’m not going to write beyond that, I’m just going to point you to this paper and wiki. Later (this week, next at the latest) I’ll be critiquing this paper more fully and more generally look at this trend currently to use wikis for community curation and documentation of biological data and databases.

Tracking the openness of databases:

Shirley Fung has launched Molecular Biology Databases, a website to evaluate the openness of databases in molecular biology.
———
Fung evaluates 34 databases to date, under six criteria: Downloadable, Offers Batch Processing, Offers a Query Interface, No Registration Required, Policy is Available, Public Domain. Her website supports the open-data research of Melanie Dulong de Rosnay, described last week by Ethan Zuckerman (and blogged here).
This is a very time-consuming but useful job. Everyone in molecular biology should be grateful, especially if the project leads to more consistent policies on open data across the field.

Fair game: a grad student’s adventures in fair use and copyright:

For scholars who study media, the internet has broadened research horizons and expanded the reach of teaching and publications. But powerful gatekeepers remain. From academic journals seeking to control our intellectual property to lawyers crying foul when we quote from copyrighted material, we are bombarded with a myriad of confusing and dubious restrictions. In short, the implied threat of legal action creates a chilling effect that impacts us all. Some have pushed back, arguing that our educational activities are protected under the “fair use” statute. But this is a risky game to play. The rules aren’t always clear. And when it comes to fair use, we either use it, or lose it.

Where should we spend our money?:

The lesson here seems to be that the digital environment is inevitably going to change the environment for textbooks as it has for most other kinds of intellectual property, for good or for ill. Georgia seems to feel that the publishers will eventually figure the market out and move to new profit models while supporting open access. But I think there is also an opportunity here for institutions to be more proactive and seek ways to invest in open access textbooks on a campus-wide level.

STM publishers imprisoned in their own walled gardens?:

Journals aggregate interesting science – many scientists still very much like a group of qualified editors and peer reviewers providing a filter on the deluge. Secondly, while knowledge discovery requires unfettered access for machines to content, I don’t see why that necessarily implies unfettered access for humans. You can perfectly well have an API that lets machines mine full-text, while still putting up a paywall for humans. As well, I think the versions issue is very challenging, and we are a long way from reliable automatic disambiguation and identification of authoritative copies. Finally, many conference proceedings already are peer-reviewed, and we can certainly imagine peer review extending to other areas, such as data sets.

History of the Journal Nature:

Nature introduced their formal peer review system in… 1967!

Who comments on scientific papers – and why?:

The quality of comments at BMC is high and the vast majority add value to the paper, though the numbers involved are relatively low (would a larger audience reading higher impact papers be different?).
Perhaps unsurprisingly comments on papers are not like comments on blogs; they’re far more formal (only 8% of comments were of the chatty, supportive variety) and it’s not the same people coming back each time (with the exception of the crazy 2%).

ClockQuotes

He who would teach men to die would at the same time teach them to live.
– Michel Eyquem de Montaigne

My picks from ScienceDaily

90 Billion Tons Of Microbial Organisms Live In Deep Marine Subsurface: More Archaea Than Bacteria:

Biogeoscientists show evidence of 90 billion tons of microbial organisms–expressed in terms of carbon mass–living in the deep biosphere, in a research article published online by Nature, July 20, 2008. This tonnage corresponds to about one-tenth of the amount of carbon stored globally in tropical rainforests.

Female Monkeys More Dominant In Groups With Relatively More Males:

Female monkeys are more dominant when they live in groups with a higher percentage of males. This is caused by self-organisation. This surprising discovery was made by researchers at the University of Groningen. What makes the study particularly interesting is that the researchers used a computer model which can simulate interaction between monkeys.

For Your Eyes Only: Custom Interfaces Make Computer Clicking Faster, Easier:

Insert your key in the ignition of a luxury car and the seat and steering wheel will automatically adjust to preprogrammed body proportions. Stroll through the rooms of Bill Gates’ mansion and each room will adjust its lighting, temperature and music to accommodate your personal preference. But open any computer program and you’re largely subject to a design team’s ideas about button sizes, fonts and layouts.

Pregnant Mice Block Odor Of Strange Male’s Urine To Protect Their Pups:

Mouse mothers-to-be have a remarkable way to protect their unborn pups. Because the smell of a strange male’s urine can cause miscarriage and reactivate the ovulatory cycle, pregnant mice prevent the action of such olfactory stimuli by blocking their smell. Researchers from the European Molecular Biology Laboratory (EMBL) in Monterotondo, Italy, have now revealed the nature of this ability. A surge of the chemical signal dopamine in the main olfactory bulb – one of the key brain areas for olfactory perception — creates a barrier for male odours, they report in the current issue of Nature Neuroscience.

Suckling Infants Trigger Surges Of Trust Hormone In Mothers’ Brains:

Researchers from the University of Warwick, in collaboration with other universities and institutes in Edinburgh, France and Italy, have for the first time been able to show exactly how, when a baby suckles at a mother’s breast, it starts a chain of events that leads to surges of the “trust” hormone oxytocin being released in their mothers brains.

Common Wisdom About Troubled Youth Falls Apart When Race Considered:

One of the most widely accepted beliefs about the differences between troubled boys and girls may need to be revised, according to new research. Experts have long believed that girls tend to internalize their problems, becoming depressed or anxious, while boys externalize, turning to violence against people or property.

Ultrasonic Frogs Can Tune Their Ears To Different Frequencies:

Researchers have discovered that a frog that lives near noisy springs in central China can tune its ears to different sound frequencies, much like the tuner on a radio can shift from one frequency to another. It is the only known example of an animal that can actively select what frequencies it hears, the researchers say.

New and Exciting in PLoS Biology and PLoS Medicine

Across the Curious Parallel of Language and Species Evolution:

In February 1837–even before he sailed on the Beagle–Charles Darwin wrote to his sister Caroline, discussing the linguist Sir John Herschel’s idea that modern languages were descended from a common ancestor. If this were really the case, it cast doubt on the Biblical chronology of the world: “[E]veryone has yet thought that the six thousand odd years has been the right period but Sir J. thinks that a far greater number must have passed since the Chinese [and] the Caucasian languages separated from one stock”.

The Effects of International Monetary Fund Loans on Health Outcomes:

What kind of impact might IMF loans, and their conditionalities, have upon health outcomes? A new study in this issue of PLoS Medicine attempts to address this question by examining IMF programs and tuberculosis (TB) outcomes in post-communist countries [1].
Critics of the IMF charge that IMF conditionalities have helped undermine the health of some of the world’s most vulnerable populations. They argue that health outcomes suffer from reduced government spending on health care and on other inputs to health, such as food, as well as from the capping of public sector wages. IMF policies are also cited as having led to the diversion of foreign aid intended for health to the repayment of domestic debt. Such an outcome could serve as a strong disincentive for external funders to increase future health financing.

WikiPathways: Pathway Editing for the People:

The exponential growth of diverse types of biological data presents the research community with an unprecedented challenge and opportunity. The challenge is to stay afloat in the flood of biological data, keeping it as accessible, up-to-date, and integrated as possible. The opportunity is to cultivate new models of data curation and exchange that take advantage of direct participation by a greater portion of the community.
This combination of challenge and opportunity is especially relevant to the task of collecting biological pathway information. Pathways are critical to understanding the functions of individual genes and proteins in terms of systems and processes that contribute to normal physiology and to disease. Each biological pathway must be hewn from a mass of biological information distributed across multiple publications and databases.

Visuomotor Transformation in the Fly Gaze Stabilization System:

Many behavioral tasks rely on sensory information. This information, however, needs to be transformed into a format that is compatible with the requirements of motor systems. In this study we characterize the neural basis of such a sensorimotor transformation in a model system. Flies, like humans, stabilize their gaze to keep their eyes level, even when the body is rotating. An identified population of fly brain neurons called lobula plate tangential cells (LPTCs) contributes to this task. These cells analyze the wide-field retinal image shifts generated when the fly is moving relative to its environment. We have characterized the visual receptive fields of motor neurons that use the information encoded by LPTCs to control gaze-stabilizing head movements. Our results suggest that the motor neurons use their LPTC inputs in a comparatively simple and direct way: they combine inputs from both sides of the brain to increase the motor neurons’ selectivity for rotations. Such a mechanism enables a specific, fast, and surprisingly simple sensorimotor transformation in which visual information contributes to gaze stabilization.

ClockQuotes

Whatever you do, don’t give up. Because all you can do once you’ve given up is bitch. I’ve known some great bitchers in my time. With some it’s a passion, with others an art.
– Molly Ivins

Science Podcasts

There is a nice list of sites that offer regular science (and history and philosophy) podcasts. Do you know any others that you can recommend?

Squishables!

These are adorable!
This one for PZ.
This one for Amanda and the Thumb crew.
My kids are getting one each, right now!
squish_duck_15_user4.jpg

NYC SciBlings MeetUp

Remember last summer when a bunch of sciencebloggers all snuck into NYC under the cover of the night for a weekend of frolicking and karaoke? We kept it too secret last time, so very few of our readers had enough time to show up and meet us at short notice.
This time we are meeting again in NYC, a couple of weeks from now. But we want to give you more of a heads-up so you can plan. We will do other stuff in secret, but we want to meet our readers on Saturday, August 9th, around 3pm. Where? Depends on how many of you say you will come for sure (it will be indoors, in an air-conditioned space, no matter what).
So, pile up in the comments, or send me e-mails if you will be in New York City at the time and can come and meet us. When the Overlords get a better idea of the numbers, they will make more definite plans about the location, exact time, perhaps some kind of program, and we will post that information once we have it.

Science To Life hits a big milestone!

Go there right now and congratulate Karen Ventii on her shiny new PhD!

Reverse Magazines

These are funny! (via PZ):
ModestyFair.jpg

My picks from ScienceDaily

Social Behavior In Ants Influenced By Small Number Of Genes:

Understanding how interactions between genes and the environment influence social behavior is a fundamental research goal. In a new study, researchers at the University of Lausanne and the University of Georgia have shed light on the numbers and types of genes that may control social organization in fire ant colonies.

Regular Walking Protects The Masai — Who Eat High Fat Diet — From Cardiovascular Disease:

Scientists have long been puzzled by how the Masai can avoid cardiovascular disease despite having a diet rich in animal fats. Researchers at Karolinska Institutet believe that their secret is in their regular walking.

Dust Storms In Sahara Desert Sustain Life In Atlantic Ocean:

Research at the University of Liverpool has found how Saharan dust storms help sustain life over extensive regions of the North Atlantic Ocean.

Changes In Winds Could Have Been Cause Of Abrupt Glacial Climatic Change:

Spanish and German researchers have carried out a collaborative study that shows how during the last glacial period, small variations in the surface winds could have induced significant changes in the oceanic currents of the North Atlantic, and could even have played a role in the abrupt climate change that occurred at the time.

Spotted Hyenas Can Increase Survival Rates By Hunting Alone:

Recent research by Michigan State University doctoral student Jennifer Smith has shed new light on the way spotted hyenas live together and – more importantly – hunt for their food alone.

How A Simple Mathematic Formula Is Starting To Explain The Bizarre Prevalence Of Altruism In Society:

Why do humans cooperate in things as diverse as environment conservation or the creation of fairer societies, even when they don’t receive anything in exchange or, worst, they might even be penalized? This is a question that has puzzled academics for centuries, especially since in evolution the basis for the “survival of the fittest” is, after all, selfishness.

Loud Music Can Make You Drink More, In Less Time, In A Bar:

Commercial venues are very aware of the effects that the environment — in this case, music — can have on in-store traffic flow, sales volumes, product choices, and consumer time spent in the immediate vicinity. A study of the effects of music levels on drinking in a bar setting has found that loud music leads to more drinking in less time.

Horse Racecourse In Ancient Olympia Discovered After 1600 Years:

The site of the ancient hippodrome course in Olympia, where the emperor Nero competed for Olympian laurels, has been discovered. The hippodrome was discovered in Olympia by a research team that included Professor Norbert Müller (a sports historian from Mainz), Dr Christian Wacker (a sports archaeologist from Cologne) and PD Dr Reinhard Senff (chief excavator of the German Archaeological Institute – DAI.

Second Life Improves Real-life Social Skills:

Social interaction is enhanced rather than diminished by online interfaces, according to new research on the virtual program Second Life. Eryn Grant, a PhD student in Queensland University of Technology’s School of Humanities, recently completed a study which took an in-depth look at social order in emergent online environments.

Semantics Gives The Web Meaning – For Machines:

Where would we be without the web? It is such an immense and rich source of information; we feel that every answer is out there. All it takes is a bit of searching…

Lionfish Decimating Tropical Fish Populations, Threatening Coral Reefs:

The invasion of predatory lionfish in the Caribbean region poses yet another major threat there to coral reef ecosystems — a new study has found that within a short period after the entry of lionfish into an area, the survival of other reef fishes is slashed by about 80 percent.

If Northern Trees Suffer Because Of Global Warming, Southern Trees May Still Be Slow To Replace Them:

If a warmer Wisconsin climate causes some northern tree species to disappear in the future, it’s easy to imagine that southern species will just expand their range northward as soon as the conditions suit them.

How Birds Spot The Cuckoo In The Nest:

It’s not always easy spotting the cuckoo in the nest. But if you don’t, you pay a high price raising someone else’s chick. How hosts distinguish impostor eggs from their own has long puzzled scientists. The problem remained largely unsolved while looking at it through our own eyes. It was only when people started thinking from the birds’ perspective that they began to understand how hosts recognise a cuckoo egg in the nest.

Natural Selection May Not Produce The Best Organisms:

“Survival of the fittest” is the catch phrase of evolution by natural selection. While natural selection favors the most fit organisms around, evolutionary biologists have long wondered whether this leads to the best possible organisms in the long run.

Today’s carnivals

Encephalon #50 is up on SharpBrains
Gene Genie #34 is up on ScienceRoll
The new edition of the Philosophers’ Carnival is up on Beyond Borders

Karadzic arrested

Serbia captures fugitive Karadzic:

Bosnian Serb war crimes suspect Radovan Karadzic, one of the world’s most wanted men, has been arrested in Serbia after more than a decade.
He has been brought before Belgrade’s war crimes court, in accordance with a law on cooperation with the Hague Tribunal, the Serbian presidency said. The Bosnian Serb wartime political leader disappeared in 1996.
He had been indicted by the UN tribunal for war crimes and genocide over the 1995 massacre at Srebrenica.

Perhaps his poetry will get better once he starts writing it in jail….
Update: picture – Karadzic on the right as we remember him, on the left in “disguise”:
Karadzic.jpg
And, do not miss this, Jasmina Tesanovic has a good look at the news.

ClockQuotes

In conversation the game is, to say something new with old words. And you shall observe a man of the people picking his way along, step by step, using every time an old boulder, yet never setting his foot on an old place.
– Ralph Waldo Emerson

Scientists are Excellent Communicators (‘Sizzle’ follow-up)

Titles of blog posts have to be short, but I could expand it to something like this:
“Depending on the medium and the context, many scientists can be and often are excellent communicators”
That is what I understood to be the main take-home message of “Sizzle”. If you check out all the other blog reviews, even those that are the harshest do not state the opposite, i.e., that the movie pushes the stereotype of scientists as dull, stuffy communicators. Though, some of the commenters on those blog posts – people who could not have seen the movie themselves yet – imply that this was the case.
So, just a quick summary first, which I will try to use a springboard for some musings on science communication….
‘Sizzle’ is a movie in two parts, two very different halves that are purposefully made to make as much contrast to each other as possible.
The first half is full of exaggerated caricatures of stereotypes: stereotype of mindless Holywood (hard to make a caricature of that, though, as the first scene in which “serious” producers reject Randy’s idea is pretty realistic – after all, big-ego Holywood is openly stating “No more environmental movies”: who do they think they are to make such decisions? After all, ‘Sizzle’ is not a movie about global warming because it could not be funded – GW is there as a subtext, a tangent, and could have been replaced by another scientific topic easily), gay stereotypes (sweet and charming, rich and into fashion, but mercurial, shallow and materialistic, but passionate), Black stereotypes (Hummer, bling, being late), and all those are as exaggerated as possible in order to give people the hint that the other guys in the movie, the scientists, are also presented in exaggerated caricatures of stereotypes – as dry and boring and dull as possible.
The second half turns it all on its head – once out of Holywood, the medium steps out of the stereotype, gays step out of stereotype, Blacks step out of stereotype and, if you need a hint, scientists step out of stereotype and show how good they are at communicating: we get to see the clips that we were prevented from seeing in the first half.
Which makes one wonder – why are the stereotypes there in the first place, and why was the first half believable to some? The first half edited the scientists’ interviews in ways that fit well with the prevailing stereotype, cutting out the good parts according to expectations and biases – but whose expectations and biases? Who would cut the best parts of interview and for what reason? The movie explores the sterotypes of dull, data-hungry scientists, why are the stereotypes there, who is pushing them, and how they can be busted.
Which makes me wonder if we need to systematize our discussion of science communication in some way, distinguishing different types according to various factors – who is talking to whom, about what, with what goals, through what medium?
Goals
I can think of three possible goals of science communication:
– Education: you need to know this in order to be an educated, well-informed citizen and in order to make good choices in your personal life.
– Persuasion: you need to know this in order to correctly choose which politicians, organizations and initiatives to support with your money and your votes.
– Entertainment: you gotta see this! It is soooo coool!
Medium
– in person in an informal setting
– public lecture or Science Cafe
– classroom
– blog
– newspaper
– scientific journal
– popsci magazine
– radio
– TV
– movie
– theatrical production
– YouTube video
– etc.
Who talks to whom?
– scientists to scientists
– scientists to students
– scientists to media professionals
– scientists, via media, to the general population
– scientists directly to the general population
How many in the audience?
– one-to-one
– one-to-few
– one-to-many
Nature of the medium
– one-way communication
– two-way communication
You really need to read this excellent post by Janet who drew my attention to the importance of this factor.
So?
So, there are many different combinations of all of the above factors. In some of those, scientists excel. In others, they tend to do badly for various reasons, e.g., miscommunication about the goals between players, lack of training, incompatibility between scientific ethical criteria and the demands of the medium, or just being set up to look bad.
Also, individual scientists vary in their ability to be effective communicators in a variety of different settings and combinations of the above factors.
There is no space here to go through all possible permutations, so let’s look at a few plausible scenarios….and especially the one point that ‘Sizzle’ makes – that scientists are much better in communicating directly to their intended audience than through the professional media. Let’s see why this may be the case….
As Janet noted in her post, it appears that scientists are much better at communicating when they get instant feedback from the audience, e.g., at cocktail parties, at Science Cafes, and on blogs. The question is: are they better in those venues because of instant feedback or because of directness of communication, i.e., the absence of the middlemen – the media?
Or let me phrase the question a little differently (and more provocatively): how does professional media screw up the communication between scientists and the audience by interposing itself in-between the two? Is it just due to blocking the feedback? Or is it something about the way they transduce the information from the source to the target (the game of Broken Telephones in which the journalists horribly mangle the message)?
Or is it something third: communication between scientists and journalists is broken due to differing goals, differing expectations, lack of knowledge about each other’s jobs, stereotypes and biases the two groups hold about each other, and thus wrong questions getting asked and wrong answers getting provided?
Take a look at this case of a misquoted scientist! Everyone has or knows of such horror stories. Commenter ‘helen’ writes there:

I’ve been interviewed quite a lot of times and almost never had the so-called quotes match what I said, and most of the time, they’re substantively different. I started learning to speak in sound bites in self-defense — if you can spit out a catchy sounding sound bite, it has a much higher chance of being reported accurately. But sound bite news tends to be stupid and trite. Sigh.

Hmmm, Houston, we have a problem!
When interviewed by the media professionals, scientists tend not to remember that they are indirectly communicating to the general populace. They are focused on communicating to that guy with a microphone. And the two of them are already, a priori, biased about each other!
Scenario #1
The newbie journalist goes to do his/her first interview with a scientist. Never met a scientist before. Has no scientific background so spends some days studying online in order to learn the background and also to impress. Comes in a little nervous. Colleagues say that scientists are tough to interview, dry and humorless, using over-complicated language, showering with data. How to ge that “money quote”?! Gotta get the scientist’s trust somehow in order to get the conversation to open up.
The scientist notices that the young journalist appears very sharp and smart, has some background, has a great command of language, and seems genuinely interested in the topic – so the scientist starts…teaching! Treats the journalist as a science student, a future colleague. Completely forgets that the journalist’s job is not to learn the science, but to make a fun story for the masses.
The journalist goes home and writes a fun story, misquotes the scientist in order to make the story-line follow the preconcieved story-line, picks up the paycheck and moves on to another assignment, just to be surprised by tons of angry e-mails from the scientists, science bloggers, etc., about the innacuracy of the article.
The scientist is livid – there is an utterly crappy misquote in a totally inacurate piece of fluff in the newspaper! How did that happen?
Why did the two never discuss what the goal of the interview was in the first place? Why did the scientist want to educate, and the journalist to entertain, and neither was aware that the goals do not match? Could they have agreed on a common goal? If not, should they have cancelled the interview rather than go on with the farce?
Scenario #2
The journalist, now with some negative experience, decided for the next interview to change tactics and to be more chatty and mellow and even “flaky” in order to prevent the scientist from misreading the intent and responding with a lecture.
The scientist, burned by previous experiences with the press, sees this shallow creature enter the office and works hard, hard, hard to stress how important accuracy is. The poor journalist is drowned in even more data, and even more strident calls fo absolute accuracy. The scientist insists on reading and approving the draft before it goes to print, as this is according to science norms (peer-review and stuff). The journalist refuses as that is against the media norms due to the importance of the freedom of the press (imagine the President having the veto power on every article about him).
The tension grows. There is an impasse that cannot be broken. The mutual stereotypes (humorless scientists and shallow journalists) persist.
Scenario #3
You are a scientist and you get invited to appear on a cable news show in a segment about, let’s say global warming. The segment is about 2 minutes long, out of which you will get, at best, 30 seconds, and that is if you are aggressive. There is another guy on the show who is a GW denialist, employed by some slime like Heritage Foundation or American Emterprise Institute or Cato Institute, personally trained by Frank Luntz to throw out talking points designed to pull at emotional strings of the audience.
What do you do?
Many scientists in this situation make a basic error in thinking they were invited to explain the science. No, they were invited with a pretense of explaining science. They are there to be fodder for the other guy.
Scientific training makes one want to preface one’s statements with a litany of caveats. By the time you are on your third caveat, your 30 seconds are up. You have no time to get into the science.
Your opponent talks aggressively over you and interrupts you (unlike your polite fellow scientists at a conference) and you are fazed and confused.
It is against the Philosophy of Science to make over-confident statements – that is why we always focus on our p-values and Confidence Intervals and standard errors. This does not work on TV. On TV, making any such statements comes off as you being unsure, insecure, having something to hide, perhaps even lying. That is the nature of the medium – only absolute confidence wins.
Your opponent trots out 30 lies in his 30 seconds. Each lie takes 30 minutes to debunk. You do not have that time. At this point you can actually say something like “Wolf, you are supposed to be informed enough to see when he trots out 30 lies per minute and call him out on it, as you know you will never give me hours needed to debunk them myself”. This makes certain Wolf will never invite you to his show again, but may be a good move at the time: the audience will emphatize with your face of exasperation as everyone’s been in those shoes before, they will rethink what they dislike about the media (and everyone hates the Corporate Media these days), and everyone likes to see the media talking-head doofoses smacked down every now and then. If nothing else, you’ll be the hero of the blogosphere for about 24 hours.
Remember – the goal of your opponent is to use his 30 seconds to discredit you. You are not on the show as a scientist but as an official Face Of Science, i.e., as a politician and a speaker. Your job is to use your 30 seconds to discredit the other guy and be better at it than he is about you. You do not need to talk about science at all for this goal. When preparing ahead, do not even go over the science, instead study the other guy – who is he, who pays him, what is his motivation, what other stupidities he has said in the past? That is the information you have to have at your fingertips, not scientific data. If he lies, you talk over him and say in plain language that he is lying. Then say it again. And again.
This is where the Framing Guys can help with their studies and polls and focus-groups, helping you find the catch-phrases that work. You are there to persuade, not educate (while the host wants you to be there for entertainment, as a victim of the other gladiator, thrown to the lions). You do not really need to be a scientist – you are there not because of expertise, but because you have the three letters PhD after your name.
Thus, most scientists should refuse such invitations and refer the studios to a list of a very small number of scientists who are specially talented and specifically trained for surviving and winning in this kind of media massacre.
In a sense, this is not a case of science communication at all, but a case of a scientist tricked into acting as a talking head – something best left to the professionals.
Scenario #4
You run a popular blog and one of the things that irks you to no end are anti-vaccinationists. You keep blogging about them, and how the science annuls all of their claims, and how their movement is dangerous for public health, etc., etc. The symbol of their movement is Jenny McCarthy who half the country is drooling over. I have met Orac and I just don’t think, objectively (sorry Orac), that he can get the other half of the country to drool over him. So, what can he do?
About 1-2% of visitors post comments. Those are usually people firmly on one side or the other. The anti-vaccer loons come in and spew nonsense in the comments, and the regular commenters counter with their arguments. What can Orac do to make sure that the other 99% of the visitors, including those who just arrived for the first time through Google searches (as his blog comes up high in searches), take the correct take-home lesson? How can we all help in this endeavor? After all, his blog nicely combines the three goals: education (facts), persuasion (glorious smackdowns of quacks) and entertainment (glorious smackdowns of quacks) and is very popular. Everyone agrees that Orac is an excellent communicator. Why is he not winning yet? Can the Framing Squad be of help to Orac? How can Orac’s blog and the way he deals with the problem be translated into Big Media in order to reach more people?
U.S. Media culture
OK, so we probably agree that scientists are good when talking directly to the audience (especially if getting instant feedback), but either screw up or get screwed up when trying to communicate through the professional media. In the two-step process, we have looked at a couple of scenarios in which the first step is messed up as the scientists and the representatives of the corporate media mis-communicate with each other. How about the second step, between media and the audience?
I think these two are in a spiral of mutually-enforcing expectations. The media look down at the people and assume that all they want is entertainment, and as low-brow as possible. The audience has learned that all the media is good for is entertainment, so when they switch on that TV, they want to be entertained. It got to the point that most people turn to information elsewhere as they do not expect the MSM to provide correct information – MSM is for entertainment only (and the same goes for movies, talk radio, etc.).
If you are a scientist and a non-scientist asks you something at a party, are you surprised how much interest there is for science? Yes, the amount of ignorance and disinformation out there is frustrating, but that person is genuinely interested and you know how to talk to him/her in a way that is appealing and understandable, and it is obvious that you can quickly and easily build trust and authority. You are looked up at as a scientist.
Now, what you say may not be accepted instantly. The person may keep countering you and disbelieving you, but you have planted a seed of doubt. It may take some time for the information you imparted to get comfortably meshed with that person’s worldview. But it may get there after a while, especially if that person hears the same message from other sources, repeatedly. It is an important aspect of framing that the ideas get repeated often by a variety of different kinds of authorities.
But if you say the same things on TV, people turn away and do not want to listen to you. Why? Because you are not Britney Spears or Jenny McCarthy. You are a wrong person at a wrong time at a wrong place with a wrong message using wrong language – get off my TV, I want to be entertained right now. I’ll ask you again at the neighborhood BBQ, or I’ll come to the Science Cafe next week, but please, man, leave me alone now, I am tired and I want to watch something funny now.
This is a very American phenomenon – that media is equated with entertainment and only entertainment. Yes, you can find some educational stuff on a few of the 500 cable channels, but nobody watches those. But unlike in other countries, the audience has been primed not expect or want anything else in mass media but shallow fun.
Watch BBC for a while to see the difference – educational shows, TV news, documentaries: they are serious, and they are popular.
Back in April, when I visited Belgrade after 15 years of absence, one of the things that struck me was the quality of TV programming. I know they complain there how silly it is, but compared to anything in the USA, the Belgrade TV channels are oozing with pure intellect. Quizzes are not multiple-choice – those competitors really know their stuff and the questions are not trivia either. Political debates (election was upcoming at the time) are long and full of detailed analysis of economic plans, etc., with spade being called a spade and liars being called liars in their faces while everyone is smiling and remaining polite.
My friend Ljuba is a small-animal veterinarian and he has a weekly show on TV in, pretty much, prime time. I have four of the episodes on DVD and have to figure out a way to place them online. The show has a little bit of fun – they start with a question and end with the funniest answer from the audience at the end. The hostess is pretty, so there is a little use of sex-appeal (this is TV, and this is Europe, after all). But for the most part the show is serious, even solemn. There is a dog or a cat in obvious pain on the screen. There is a bunch of vets doing diagnostics and discussing it using big words and explaining what it means. You see how the vets from several practices communicate with each other and how they solve differences in diagnoses. It is explained why a particular treatment is chosen, you see it performed in all the gory detail, and you end with the scene of the animal on the road to recovery. No watering-down of science at all. And it it a popular show there. Now, imagine trying to sell this idea to NBC – they will laugh in your face. The media in the States does not think of themselves as having any role and any responsibility in informing or educating – they are entirely interested in entertainment and the way if brings in profit. And the audience has learned to think of them that way, too.
How do we change this media culture?
Or should we just leave the MSM to rot and die, and put our efforts into new media, the kind in which there is no intermediate (who may believe that he-said-she-said journalism is the way to go) but the communication is many-to-many with instant feedback? Because in such an environment scientists are experts and seen as authorities and listened to and believed.

Summer science student blogging at Duke

Just like they did it last year, Howard Hughes program at Duke is hosting student blogs in their summer program. Check out what the students are writing on their blogs, starting at homepages of the undergraduate students and high school students and going through the blogrolls on the right-hand sidebars.

Today’s carnivals

The latest edition of Medicine 2.0 Carnival is up on ScienceRoll
Carnival of the Godless #96 is up on Sean the Blogonaut
Friday Ark #200 is up on Modulator
Next Berry Go Round will be hosted by me here, so send me your entries by July 27th.

ClockQuotes

A week is a long time in politics.
– Harold Wilson

Make your own HMS ‘Beagle’ ship

From the The Beagle Project Blog:

Vedran Vucic on Open Access

A couple of weeks ago, Vedran Vucic gave a talk about Open Access at the law school at the Belgrade University. For those of you who can read Serbian, here is the newspaper report. Glad to see PLoS mentioned…

Blogrolling for today

Palaeoentomology & Insect Evolution


More Grumbine Science


Buttered Waffles


The Evolving Mind


Moose Droppings


On The Media–Cavewoman Style

Global Warming, Media and Politics

Robert Grumbine has a series of posts with thoughts about climate change and what a non-expert can do to get properly informed:
Climate is a messy business:

Climate certainly is a messy business. One of the things that makes it interesting to those of us who work on it is precisely that. Wherever you look, you find something that affects climate, regardless of whether you look at permafrost, sea ice, forests, farms, rivers, factories, sunspots, volcanoes, dust, glaciers, …
So certainly we have a complicated science and certainly few people are going to understand enough of it to argue the finer points. This is true within the science as well, as few who study volcanoes and their climate effects are going to be able to argue the finer points about the role of sea ice in climate, or vice versa.
What does an honest and interested person do then? Two things as I see it. First, not all the science involved is difficult. For those parts of the science, learn the science. Anybody who can get through normal life, cook a recipe, balance a checkbook, etc., can understand the basics. One source is Jan Schloerer’s summary at http://www.radix.net/~bobg/faqs.scq.basics.html Jan was not a climate scientist, but, as I said, you don’t need to be one to understand the basics. One thing he did do (see his acknowledgements, for instance) is check with people who were to ensure that he’d gotten the science right (or at least correct given the limits of writing a general audience description). I’ll come back to basics in a minute.
Second, for things that aren’t elementary, start looking to expert opinion. No different than if your car is acting up and you can’t figure out why, or you’ve got something like a cold but it isn’t going away like one should. You go find an auto mechanic or doctor and use their expertise. If your concern is, instead, about climate, then find some climate scientists. While there aren’t that many (even counting worldwide) they do exist. And it’s not that hard to find their professional understanding. You’ll see it more directly in journals like Science and Nature than Scientific American or Discover. But both can be gotten fairly easily, and both include summaries of the science which are written for laymen.

Science not politics:

Many people have vested interests relating to climate change and thoughts about what, if anything, to do about it. That does produce politics, in that groups of people with interests act politically.
But the science is the science, and respects no party, no nation, no religion, etc.
This does make for the problem that groups with interests other than explaining and discussing the best science also establish web sites, write editorials, produce shows, etc. to propagandize their views, distorting and lying about the science along the way. So if you’re interested in the science, you have to work harder to find it than in something which doesn’t scare people. You also have to work harder to disentangle the parts of an article that are science from those which are opinion, wishful thinking, and such.
One thing which I think is helpful in deciding about sources is to, first, hold your nose about their political viewpoints. This can be hard when the politics are greatly different from yours, but bear with it. As you read through, look for scientific claims, or claims which the author thinks are scientific. As you find them, go hit the literature on the topic and see if the author has represented the point correctly. It may sound like a lot of work, but in practice, most web sites which are more concerned about their politics than the science display this fairly quickly by lies and distortions, and some are at an extremely basic level. Basic enough that you can check the truth of it by looking at a textbook from 30 years ago (before the topic was getting nearly as much press, but well after the scientific basics were understood). If not an outright lie, very often what you’ll see is a quote selected from a scientific article and removed from its context. Once you find the context, you see that the original author’s intent was quite different than the bit quoted.

Climate confusion:

Agreed about the media thing. It’s one of the things which irritates the scientists who are trying to communicate accurate, careful, correct information. People hear wild claims in the media, and then when we discuss what we really know and how well, we don’t get believed (since we’re not as extreme as the media reports, it’s no story). (‘we’ by the way doesn’t exactly include me. I haven’t talked to the media for a long time, and it wasn’t about this. Still, I do know folks who get quoted.)
One thing for you to do, with the 27,000 on either side of you, is to start looking at what they’re scientists of. It turns out that the 27k saying that climate is changing and part of the reason is human activity are climate scientists, while the 27k disagreeing are doctors, chemists, nuclear physicists, … But do the checking yourself. There’s a petition, for instance, with over 17,000 signers, but very few of them are in climate sciences (but check me on that). If your mechanic says your car needs a new belt, as do the several other mechanics you take the car to, while a bunch of doctors you know say that it doesn’t, do you get the belt or not? I get the belt. Being knowledgeable (about something) isn’t sufficient; you have to be knowledgeable about the thing at hand.

Journals – the dinosaurs of scientific communication

Bjoern Brembs:

Today’s system of scientific journals started as a way to effectively use a scarce resource, printed paper. Soon thereafter, the publishers realized there were big bucks to be made and increased the number of journals to today’s approx. 24,000. Today, there is no technical reason any more why you couldn’t have all the 2.5 million papers science puts out every year in a single database.
——–snip——–
Precurser to this publishing reform was access reform: scientific papers are the result of publicly funded research and should be publicly accessible. This reform appears now to be well underway and will probably conclude in 2-3 years. Both reform movements have their base in the more general open science movement. The goal of this reform movement is to have full public access not only to the published papers, but also to the raw data, ideas and reagents for sharing among scientists. There are still plenty of problems which have to be worked out before open science can become a reality, if it is even feasible. One of the more easy to solve problems (one that is shared with publishing reform) is that of how to attribute credit. If we all publish in the same database and share ideas online, how can two scientists competing for the same position or grant be assessed objectively?
——–snip——–
Different universities/employers will focus on different aspects of a researcher and value some of his/her contributions more than others. I don’t think there can be too many measures to capture the complexity of scientific output. I’d like to see an aggregating service, maybe based on services like OpenID, where a flexible portfolio can be organized such that employers can easily search for the traits they are looking for and find or compare the people who maximize their efforts on these traits.
——–snip——–
I think most researchers would gladly pay for a service which has a track record of picking the most interesting, groundbreaking and well-done papers from the 2.5 million every year. Today’s professional editors would be a great pool from which such services could recruit employees.

My picks from ScienceDaily

Distribution Of Creatures Great And Small Can Be Predicted Mathematically:

In studying how animals change size as they evolve, biologists have unearthed several interesting patterns. For instance, most species are small, but the largest members of a taxonomic group — such as the great white shark, the Komodo dragon, or the African elephant — are often thousands or millions of times bigger than the typical species. Now for the first time two SFI researchers explain these patterns within an elegant statistical framework.

Bees Go ‘Off-color’ When They Are Sickly:

Bumble-bees go ‘off colour’ and can’t remember which flowers have the most nectar when they are feeling under the weather, a new study from the University of Leicester reveals.

Tips On How To Build A Better Home For Biological Parts:

Researchers at the Virginia Bioinformatics Institute (VBI) at Virginia Tech have compiled a series of guidelines that should help researchers in their efforts to design, develop and manage next-generation databases of biological parts. The stakes are high: the concept of biological parts is essential if methods developed in other fields of engineering are to be applied to biology. If successful, this approach will result in significant productivity gains for the biotechnology industry.

New Model Explains Why We Overestimate Our Future Choices:

When people make choices for future consumption, they select a wider variety than when they plan to immediately consume the products. A new study examines the reasons behind this diversification of choices.

Paradoxical Relationship Discovered Between Dengue Hemorrhagic Fever And Its Carrier Mosquitoes:

A study by researchers in Thailand, Japan, and the UK has shown a negative correlation between dengue hemorrhagic fever (DHF) and the density of the Aedes mosquitoes that transmit the virus. The study explains how current efforts to reduce the mosquitoes may actually increase the incidence of the potentially fatal viral disease.

Leatherback Turtles’ Newly Discovered Migration Route May Be Roadmap To Salvation:

With a name like “Leatherback Turtle” you might think the sea turtles could stand up to just about anything the ocean can throw at them, and for more than a hundred million years, they have. But tough, long-lived critters though they are, the population of leatherbacks in the eastern Pacific Ocean has plummeted by over 90 percent in the last 20 years.

Electronic Publication and the Narrowing of Science and Scholarship. Really?

Electronic Publication and the Narrowing of Science and Scholarship by James A. Evans, ironically behind the paywall, has got a lot of people scratching their heads – it sounds so counter-intuitive, as well as opposite from other pieces of similar research.
There is a good discussion on FriendFeed and another one here.
A commentary at the Chronicle of Higher Education is here, also ironically behind the paywall.
Here is the press release and here is the abstract:

Online journals promise to serve more information to more dispersed audiences and are more efficiently searched and recalled. But because they are used differently than print–scientists and scholars tend to search electronically and follow hyperlinks rather than browse or peruse–electronically available journals may portend an ironic change for science. Using a database of 34 million articles, their citations (1945 to 2005), and online availability (1998 to 2005), I show that as more journal issues came online, the articles referenced tended to be more recent, fewer journals and articles were cited, and more of those citations were to fewer journals and articles. The forced browsing of print archives may have stretched scientists and scholars to anchor findings deeply into past and present scholarship. Searching online is more efficient and following hyperlinks quickly puts researchers in touch with prevailing opinion, but this may accelerate consensus and narrow the range of findings and ideas built upon.

For now, let’s see what others say:
Peter Suber:

* It’s hard to say much based on a newspaper summary and a press release. But at first glance, Evans’ results conflict with the many studies showing that OA articles are cited significantly more often than non-OA articles. These studies differ from one another on how to explain the correlation between OA and increased citation counts, but they agree on the correlation. However, there may be ways to reconcile the two sets of results. For example, authors may cite fewer articles when they have more to choose from, but they may still cite OA articles relatively more often than TA articles. Or the average number of citations per article may decline with the growth of the total number of articles accessible to authors, but OA articles might bring the average up, and TA articles might bring it down. Or the multiplication of ejournals may be narrowing the scope of the average paper, and therefore shortening the average reference list, but citations may be growing overall and the of citations of OA articles may be growing faster than the citations of TA articles. (On the other side, the Economist said that “the same effect applied whether or not a journal had to be paid for” –though without specifying exactly which effect.)
* Evans’ results also appear to conflict with a recent study by Arthur Eger, Database statistics applied to investigate the effects of electronic information services on publication of academic research – a comparative study covering Austria, Germany and Switzerland, GMS Medizin – Bibliothek – Information, June 26, 2008. Eger found that “a larger content offering coincides with a dramatic increase in Full Text Article requests, and an increase in Full Text Article requests, after about 2 years, coincides with increased article publication.” If Evans is right that “less is sampled”, then the two studies are definitely incompatible. But if look only at Evans’ conclusions about citations, the two studies may be compatible. Evans is saying that access to more literature reduces the number of different sources one cites, and Eger is saying that it increases (“dramatically” increases) the number of articles one requests or samples. Researchers may be viewing more articles but citing fewer. Are they using their enhanced access to browse neighboring topics? Are they exploring serendipitous discoveries, only some of which turn out to be citable? Does their wider reading help them zero in on citable research?

Brandon Keim asked (and commenters are answering):

What do you think, scientist and scholar Wired Science readers, especially those whose careers have spanned the jump from paper to screen? What have you gained — or lost — from the internet’s rise?

Philip Davis:

In other words, it is not the additional online access that this causing the change in citation behavior but the tools that accompany the online access — tools that allow readers to link to related articles, rank by relevance, times cited, etc. It is these tools that signal to the reader what is important and should be read. The result of these signals is to create herding behavior among scientists, or what Evans describes as consensus building.
A highly-efficient publication system can come with unanticipated consequences — the loss of serendipity. In an earlier blog post, we discuss how the Internet is changing reading behavior in general, reducing the depth of inquiry. In another blog, we discuss how signaling can help readers save time.

David Crotty:

Evans brings up a few possibilities to explain his data. First, that the better search capabilities online have led to a streamlining of the research process, that authors of papers are better able to eliminate unrelated material, that searching online rather than browsing print “facilitates avoidance of older and less relevant literature.” The online environment better enables consensus, “If online researchers can more easily find prevailing opinion, they are more likely to follow it, leading to more citations referencing fewer articles.” The danger here, as Evans points out, is that if consensus is so easily reached and so heavily reinforced, “Findings and ideas that do not become consensus quickly will be forgotten quickly.” And that’s worrisome-we need the outliers, the iconoclasts, those willing to challenge dogma. There’s also a great wealth in the past literature that may end up being ignored, forcing researchers to repeat experiments already done, to reinvent the wheel out of ignorance of papers more than a few years old. I know from experience on the book publishing side of things that getting people to read the classic literature of a field is difficult at best. The keenest scientific minds that I know are all well-versed in the histories of their fields, going back well into the 19th century in some fields. But for most of us, it’s hard to find the time to dig that deeply, and reading a review of a review of a review is easier and more efficient in the moment. But it’s less efficient in the big picture, as not knowing what’s already been proposed and examined can mean years of redundant work.

Martin Fenner:

The greater availability of research papers in recent years thanks to electronic publication (and open access) should broaden and not narrow the papers that we read and ultimately cite in our own publications. But looking at my own behavior when reading papers or writing a publication, and thinking about many discussions we had on related topics, these findings make perfect sense.
Today’s technology allows us to make the distribution of scientific papers in electronic form very efficient, and thanks to this technology we have new business models (author-pays) and an ever-increasing number of journals. Access to research articles is now easier, cheaper and for a broader audience than in ever was before. This is of course a wonderful development, but unfortunately creates a new problem: information overflow and how to filter out the relevant information.
Twenty years ago the typical researcher would use the personal or institutional journal subscription to regularly follow the important papers in his field. Index Medicus and Current Contents were used to find additional articles, but they were cumbersome to use. Today few researchers regularly read printed journals. Most papers are found by searches of online databases and by subscriptions of tables of content by email or RSS. There are many clever tools to facilitate this, but most people probably are overwhelmed by the information and stick to some very specific research interests and high-profile journals.

Thomas Lemberger:

In any case, the study highlights two complementary strategies in information retrieval: finding relevant papers by targeted searches versus staying informed on a broad range of topics by systematic browsing. In our Google-driven era, we may have the tendency to forget the importance of good old-fashioned ‘table-of-content-skimming’ to stimulated cross-disciplinary thinking, widen our horizon and cultivate scientific curiosity.
Perhaps it is a specificity of printed media to provide “poor indexing” and therefore enforce broad exposure to unrelated areas of research. On the other hand, some web technologies already help to browse through vast amounts of online publications (for example an RSS aggregator helps me to generate a daily literature survey; this can be further combined, for example here at Frienfeed, with other community-centered feeds; other aggregators highlight information by automatic clustering: Postgenomic and Scintilla). However, these tools remain imperfect and, in our reflection on the future of scientific publishing, we will need to find the right balance between the two strategies above and think of how the increasing efficiency of searching engines can be complemented by means providing continuous exposure to diversity.

Bill Hooker does the most detailed analysis of the paper so far (so click and read the whole thing, graphs and all):

What this suggests to me is that the driving force in Evans’ suggested “narrow[ing of] the range of findings and ideas built upon” is not online access per se but in fact commercial access, with its attendant question of who can afford to read what. Evans’ own data indicate that if the online access in question is free of charge, the apparent narrowing effect is significantly reduced or even reversed. Moreover, the commercially available corpus is and has always been much larger than the freely available body of knowledge (for instance, DOAJ currently lists around 3500 journals, approximately 10-15% of the total number of scholarly journals). This indicates that if all of the online access that went into Evans’ model had been free all along, the anti-narrowing effect of Open Access would be considerably amplified.
In fact, the comparison between print and online access is barely even possible when considering Open Access information. The same considerations of cost — who can afford to read what — apply to commercial print and online publications, but free online information has essentially no print ancestor or equivalent. Few if any scholarly journals were ever free in print, so there’s a huge difference between conversion from commercial print to commercial online on the one hand, and from commercial print to Open Access on the other.
Indeed, I would suggest that if the entire body of scholarly literature were Openly available, so that every researcher could read everything they could find and programmers were free to build search algorithms over a comprehensive database to help the researchers do that finding, then in fact the opposite effect would obtain. Perhaps it’s true that the more commercial online access you have, the less widely a researcher’s literature search net is cast, but as I mentioned above I see no reason to attribute that more to the mode of access than to its cost.

Perhaps with greater accessibility, people have quit citing old papers which they used to cite just because everyone always cites those papers without even reading them. Those who have the least access, tend to cite very old stuff, textbooks, popsci articles, e.g., these guys. Those who have good access can both browse and search and find what is truly relevant to their work. They cite only stuff that they have actually read and found useful. Perhaps people are just getting more honest.

Periodic Table of Videos

Periodic Table of Videos on YouTube:

This channel has a video about each element on the periodic table.
With help from some clever chemists, I’ve done all 118, but I’m not stopping here.
Now I’m updating and improving all the videos with new stories, better samples and bigger experiments.
Please subscribe to follow my progress.
Or visit the main website at Periodic Table of Videos

Dr.Horrible – a sing-along blog

Everyone is posting these movies and e-mailing me the URL – so here it is (is there a way to enbed these?) for your enjoyment (btw, geeky me, Doogie Howser, M.D. was my favourite show when I was a kid)

Time Perception news

Carl Zimmer: How Your Brain Can Control Time:

For 40 years, psychologists thought that humans and animals kept time with a biological version of a stopwatch. Somewhere in the brain, a regular series of pulses was being generated. When the brain needed to time some event, a gate opened and the pulses moved into some kind of counting device.
One reason this clock model was so compelling: Psychologists could use it to explain how our perception of time changes. Think about how your feeling of time slows down as you see a car crash on the road ahead, how it speeds up when you’re wheeling around a dance floor in love. Psychologists argued that these experiences tweaked the pulse generator, speeding up the flow of pulses or slowing it down.
But the fact is that the biology of the brain just doesn’t work like the clocks we’re familiar with. Neurons can do a good job of producing a steady series of pulses. They don’t have what it takes to count pulses accurately for seconds or minutes or more. The mistakes we make in telling time also raise doubts about the clock models. If our brains really did work that way, we ought to do a better job of estimating long periods of time than short ones. Any individual pulse from the hypothetical clock would be a little bit slow or fast. Over a short time, the brain would accumulate just a few pulses, and so the error could be significant. The many pulses that pile up over long stretches of time should cancel their errors out. Unfortunately, that’s not the case. As we estimate longer stretches of time, the range of errors gets bigger as well.

Chris Chatham: Impulsivity Due to Distortions in Time: Hyperbolic Discounting and Logarithmic Time Perception:

New research from Wharton and the Carlson School shows that a methodologically-appealing measure of impulsivity – hyperbolic discounting rate – may actually reflect a systematic “skew” in the way people perceive time.
Previous work has shown that people tend to decreasingly discount the usefulness or appeal of a reward with increasing delays; that is, a reward provided now is more appealing than a reward provided 1 week or 1 month from now, but that change in appeal is nonlinear (hyperbolic) across time. In other words, people prefer to behave impatiently now, but prefer to act more and more patiently in the future – suggesting that this “hyperbolic discounting rate” might be related to impulsivity.

Vaughan: The future is nonlinear:

These are quite different concepts – for example, we know logically that waiting four weeks is exactly four times as long as waiting a week, but it might not feel exactly four times as bad.

Door To Door Atheists Bother Mormons

Silly, but funny to see how people react when treated to a dose of their own medicine:

“Australian filmmaker John Safran is so fed up with mormons ringing his doorbell early in the morning that he flies to Salt Lake City Utah and tries to convert Mormons to atheism. Needless to say, the locals were not pleased.”


[Hat-tip: Tanja]

ClockQuotes

More than print and ink, a newspaper is a collection of fierce individualists who somehow manage to perform the astounding daily miracle of merging their own personalities under the discipline of the deadline and retain the flavor of their own minds in print.
– Arthur Ochs Sulzberger

Science Blogging 2008: London

The conference website is up. Check out the program, attendees, etc.

Science Cafe: The History and Science of Paper

Tuesday July 22
6:30-8:30 p.m.

After a thousand years, it’s still a great technology! Follow the story from papyrus to nano-fibrils with Med Byrd, of the Department of Wood and Paper Science in the NCSU College of Natural Resources. Q&A after his talk. Tir Na Nog 218 South Blount Street, Raleigh, 833-7795

Blogrolling for today

JenDodd


It’s Alive!!


David Hone’s Archosaur Musings


Visualizing Evolution


Ruminations of An Aspiring Ecologist


BPR3 (new address)

Cool bloggy miscellanea

Scientific Collectivism 1: (Or How I Stopped Worrying and Loved Dissent):

I want to bring up a discussion about what I perceive is a dangerous trend in neuroscience (this may be applicable to other areas of science as well), and that is what I will term “scientific collectivism.” I am going to split this into two separate posts because it is so long. This first post is the weaker arguments, and what I see are the less interesting aspects of scientific collectivism-however, they deserve a discussion.

What will you be? and the related Friday Poll: Tinker, Tailor, Biologist, Researcher. So, how do you call yourself when you are introduced to a stranger?
A little muddled (especially in not making sufficient distinction between peer-reviewed Journals and pop-science magazines), but an interesting look from the outisde in: The High Cost Of Science:

Let’s say, for the sake of argument, that you are interested in science and you want to learn more about it. Maybe you’re tired of creation vs evolution debates and you want to do the research yourself, or maybe you just want to become a more informed citizen. Whatever your reasons, you have a few options but none of them are all that appealing.

Online Alarm Clock which, once set, does not need to be online in order to ring on time. Does it work on an iPhone?
Fair Use Rights:

Intellectual property, copyright, creative commons, copyleft, open access… These are all terms high on the science and other agenda these days. For example, public-funded scientists the world over are calling for research results to be available free to them and their peers for the public good and for the good of scientific advancement itself. Librarians likewise are also interested in the fullest dissemination and sharing of knowledge and information, while user-creators and the new breed of citizen journalists that are the result of the Internet Age are also more liberal in their outlook regarding the proprietary nature of creative works.

Survival of the Abudant: Mutational Networks Constrain Evolution:

What has been found over the last few years is that these neutral mutations occur in networks. That means that there are little fleets of genotypes, all of the same “fitness”, that have overlapping series of neutral mutations. Most of these fleets are small, but a few are larger, and its the larger fleets of genotypes that the researchers in this study focused on. The large networks tend to be adjacent to a pretty large number of phenotypes. So you have all these little neutral mutations, next to RNA with a wide variety of phenotypes. Do these little neutral mutations influence evolution after all?

The Kudlow Year:

We’ve had a terrible year. Obvious problems remain, along with whatever else lurks beneath the waterline. Wall Street showed some optimism about the future yesterday, but we’ve still got a long way to go. A lot of this boils down to arithmetic. Pay more attention to the numbers and less to ideologues on teevee or the web who try to tell you different.

Scribd and Lulu partner:

Print-on-demand publisher Lulu (which offers an OA option for content providers) and document sharing site Scribd are partnering, according to ReadWriteWeb. Lulu will begin making some of their OA content available in Scribd’s iPaper format (a “sort of a YouTube for PDFs”), including utilizing iPaper’s ability to embed AdSense ads within the documents.

Rational Voters?

The underlying assumption, of course, is that issues matter, that voters are fundamentally rational agents who vote for candidates based on a coherent set of principles. In other words, they assume that my political preferences reflect some mixture of ideology and selfish calculation. I’ll vote for the guy who best matches my geopolitics and tax bracket.
The problem, as political scientist Larry Bartels notes, is that people aren’t rational: we’re rationalizers. Our brain prefers a certain candidate or party for a really complicated set of subterranean reasons and then, after the preference has been unconsciously established, we invent rational sounding reasons to justify our preferences. This is why the average voter is such a partisan hack and rarely bothers to revise their political preferences.

I Like My Facts Well Done and Humorless. The funny take on Sizzle.
PhysioProf rants and raves on Feministe for a couple of weeks or so. Check the tribal wars in the comments!
A pierced scientist? AKA, I need a mentor:

It occured to me yesterday that I have a lot of questions to ask and nobody to go to for answers. I really need a mentor of some kind. I mean, I have an academic advisor, but he’s an old white man who doesn’t make any attempt to engage me in conversation. He’s very standoffish and business-oriented whenever I meet with him, which I think has been once a year for the last three years. I doubt he knows my name. And I have Dr. Calhoun, my research advisor, who I’m starting to warm up to a little bit but I’m not really at the point where I can ask him the kinds of personal questions that are the most burning. I doubt I’ll ever be able to not be intimidated by him, especially since I found out he’s the chair of the graduate admissions committee.

Obligatory Reading of the Day: Cameron Neylon on Open Science

Policy for Open Science – reflections on the workshop:

One thing that was very clear to me was that the attendees of the meeting were largely disconnected from the more technical community that reads this and related blogs. We need to get the communication flowing in both directions – there are things the blogosphere knows, that we are far ahead on, and we need to get the information across. There are things we don’t know much about, like the legal frameworks, the high level policy discussions that are going on. We need to understand that context. It strikes me though that if we can combine the strengths of all of these communities and their differing modes of communication then we will be a powerful force for taking forward the open agenda.

Crackpottery

Just an hour or so ago I was in the car, listening to This American Life on NPR, when this story (Act Three) came up on the air:

Bob Berenz had a good job as an electrician. But he wanted to do something bigger. He came up with an idea for an invention. But as he studied physics texts to see if his invention could work, he happened upon the biggest idea of his life: a revelation about physics that would disprove Einstein, and Newton. That is, if Bob’s right.

It is a great story to listen to, and quite revealing about the psychology and the emotional motivations for crackpottery.
Ah, what a Great Cosmic Synchronicity – me and a bunch of other science bloggers, mainly biologists, physicians and philosophers, all got this e-mail today:
crackpot.JPG
Except, it is not a synchronicity. This show first aired in 2005. And no matter when it aired, that would be at least within the same week if not the same day when we get one of these crackpot e-mails. Usually, I spend about a millisecond before sending such things to Trash, but listening to the show made me fish it out again just so I can show it to you.
These kinds of e-mails are a constant in many science bloggers’ mailboxes. I get roughly one per week. I bet PZ gets a dozen a day. I cannot imagine how many of those are received and promptly deleted by real physics professors, or the editors of physics journals!
There are some things in common to all of them.
People who come up with these theories have no science background. They think they are very smart (and may innately be so – they usually do not sound stupid, just ignorant), but do not have any idea how much they do NOT know.
If they knew anything, why would they send their physics theories to a bunch of biologists?
They want to become famous scientists but are too lazy to do the necessary work to get there. They are much more interested in becoming instantly famous than becoming scientists.
They really do not know what constitutes knowledge, and the way one gets to knowledge. They do not understand how science works, because they were never trained in it.
They are incapable of taking criticism, or admitting they are wrong. Big egos help in this regard, and so does a lack of scientific training (which makes you quite humble pretty quick in grad school).
Once they try peddling their impressionistic ideas, they get rebuffed which makes them resort to conspiracy theories about the walls surrounding the academia. As Bob from the NPR show says at one point, scientists are too engrossed in all that mathematics to be able to see the Truth (I am confident he meant it with a capital T).
As it is impossible to talk sense to them, and as they are unwilling to put effort into some real training, the only thing one can do with e-mails like one above is to quickly delete them as they come in – there is just no reason to waste time on it.

My picks from ScienceDaily

Pathologists Believe They Have Pinpointed Achilles Heel Of HIV:

Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV) researchers at The University of Texas Medical School at Houston believe they have uncovered the Achilles heel in the armor of the virus that continues to kill millions.

Farming At Young Age May Lead To Bone Disease In Adulthood:

Although farm chores are likely to keep young boys in shape and out of trouble, University of Cincinnati (UC) environmental health experts caution that it could be harmful to overall bone health if done too often at a young age.

Volcanic Eruptions May Have Wiped Out Ocean Life 94 Million Years Ago:

Undersea volcanic activity triggered a mass extinction of marine life and buried a thick mat of organic matter on the sea floor about 93 million years ago, which became a major source of oil, according to a new study.

Distribution Of A Species Of Butterfly Predicted Using Geometric Variables:

Biologists have recently explored the distribution of the butterfly Iolana iolas, one of the endangered species in the Madrid region whose population dynamics are determined by its host plant. The study, prepared by scientists from the King Juan Carlos University in Madrid, proposes a new path for designing conservation plans for the species using geometric variables.

Good News For Veggies: Personal Values Deceive Taste Buds:

Many heavy meat eaters believe they eat a lot of meat because of the taste. But according to groundbreaking new research the reason that a beef burger tastes better than a veggie burger to some people has more to do with values than actual taste.

How to read a scientific paper

Here is a good example. Step-by-step.

ClockQuotes

Entire new continent can emerge from the ocean in the time it takes for a Web page to show up on your screen. Contrary to what you may have heard, the Internet does not operate at the speed of light; it operates at the speed of the DMV.
– Dave Barry