Innumeracy and related academic turf-defenses….

Chad: Innumeracy by John Allen Paulos
Tom: What Does the Public Really Need To Know?: Science/Math edition.
Chad: The Innumeracy of Intellectuals
Janet: Fear and loathing in the academy.
Join in the fray….

An eye-catching yet flawed bar graph

Discussed at these sites, among others:
Chart junk-ies
When bar charts go bad
World’s Most Expensive Places to Have Sex.
Catch the flaw(s).
Click here to see large.
Go under the fold to see small:

Continue reading

Now that’s old!

Pandagon is six years old today! How many is this in dog years? Congrats Amanda, Pam, Jesse and the crew!

What is ‘citizen journalism’?

From Jay Rosen:

Save this movie as a reference when someone asks you to define a Citizen Journalism in the future….

Left vs. Right online

There has been a lot of chatter on the interwebs (for years, but again now) about the differences between the ways the political Left and Right use the Internet and blogs:
GOP losing the new-media war:

…….The right is engaged in the business of opining while the left features sites that offer a more reportorial model.
At first glance, these divergent approaches might not seem consequential. But as the 2008 campaign progresses, it’s becoming increasingly clear that the absence of any websites on the right devoted to reporting — as opposed to just commenting on the news — is proving politically costly to Republicans.
While conservatives are devoting much of their Internet energy to analysis, their counterparts on the left are taking advantage of the rise of new media to create new institutions devoted to unearthing stories, putting new information into circulation and generally crowding the space traditionally taken by traditional media. And it almost always comes at the expense of GOP politicians.
While online Republicans chase the allure of punditry and commentary, Democrats and progressives are pursuing old-fashioned shoe-leather reporting, in a fashion reminiscent of 2004……..

A different view on the left versus right online debate:

In the regular debate about about how the right can catch up online, several points are often missed. The first is that the left has developed a movement based on the interconnectedness of people inside the movement. People get recruited, energized, and leveraged. This may or may not be as much a function of larger demographic and political trends, as it has something to do with the netroots specifically.
At the same time, the right has often been better at campaign mechanics, especially in recent years. Our assumption seems to be that if we get enough people to go and vote in this country — which we still believe is just right of center — then we can win.

Rebranding via Blogging:

The web is conducive to insurgency movements. That’s been the Democrats for the last eight years. They were out of power and needed different tools. Progressives perceived that the political culture had shifted, but the Democratic Party did not shift with it, so they began telling a story about a different vision of the Democratic Party and the political system. They made fundamental criticisms of both parties and the media, and rallied a lot of people to them. They erected a very effective mechanism for bringing the party in their direction, they created a gravitational pull so the political leaders and the money people had to come to them. That has fundamentally reshaped the Democratic Party. The Republican Party, on the other hand, was perceived by most in its base as being a more effective machine.

Via Ed Cone:

What the left does better online: report, rather than just opine.
Why they had to do it: the mainstream media was “browbeaten” into ineffectiveness.

Read the entire articles for more.
Well, an anti-democratic party cannot allow its lowly prole members to do anything but follow orders. It is a hierarchical structure where all the information (hmm, talking points and lies) flow from the top down. And how much fun is it to read second-hand lies on some blog instead of first-hand lies straight from Cheney? No amount of re-branding will ever change the basic core worldview of the GOP-ers, thus they can never have anything like a bottom-up online movement, independent from the party elders, working at reshaping the party from within.

Rise and Fall of HIgher Education

Here is just a brief excerpt from Why I am Not a Professor OR The Decline and Fall of the British University:

The more prosaic truth emerges when you scan the titles of these epics. First, the author rarely appears alone, sharing space with two or three others. Often the collaborators are Ph.D. students who are routinely doing most of the spade work on some low grant in the hope of climbing the greasy pole. Dividing the number of titles by the author’s actual contribution probably reduces those hundred papers to twenty-five. Then looking at the titles themselves, you’ll see that many of the titles bear a striking resemblance to each other. “Adaptive Mesh Analysis” reads one and “An Adaptive Algorithm for Mesh Analysis” reads another. Dividing the total remaining by the average number of repetitions halves the list again. Mozart disappears before your very eyes.
But the last criterion is often the hardest. Is the paper important? Is it something people will look back on and say ‘That was a landmark’. Applying this last test requires historical hindsight – not an easy thing. But when it is applied, very often the list of one hundred papers disappears altogether. Placed under the heat of forensic investigation the list finally evaporates and what you are left with is the empty set.
And this, really, is not a great surprise, because landmark papers in any discipline are few and far between. Mozarts are rare and to be valued, but the counterfeit academic Mozarts are common and a contributory cause to global warming and deforestation. The whole enterprise of counting publications as a means to evaluating research excellence is pernicious and completely absurd. If a 12 year-old were to write ‘I fink that Enid Blyton iz bettern than that Emily Bronte bint cos she has written loads more books’ then one could reasonably excuse the spelling as reflective of the stupidity of the mind that produced the content. What we now have in academia is a situation where intelligent men and women prostitute themselves to an ideal which no intelligent person could believe. In short they are living a lie.
It was living a lie that finally put an end to my being a professor. One day in 1999 I got up and faced the mirror and acknowledged I could not do the job any more. I quit; and from the day I quit, though things were often tough, I never experienced the sense of waste and futility that accompanied working in a British university. By stroke of fate, I am living only a few hundred yards from the institution at which I worked. Sometimes when walking past I see the people I worked with and they look old. Living a lie does that to you.

It is bitter, bitter, bitter, but also revealing and thought-provoking….
[Hat-tip: Deepak over on FriendFeed]

Today’s carnivals

Tangled Bank #110 is up on Pharyngula

ClockQuotes

I will not eat oysters. I want my food dead – not sick, not wounded – dead.
– Woody Allen

Blog Carnivals – what is in it for you?

I keep getting asked: why should I participate in blog carnivals?
The Wikipedia page about blog carnivals is not really accurate (it includes things that are not carnivals), and also suffers from overzealous, obsessive-compulsive, self-important administrators (who have probably never seen a carnival, never submitted a post to one, never hosted one, never started or managed one, ah well…).
I have written a lot about carnivals in the past (see especially this, this, this, this and this) so you should check those out for more “meaty” treatments, though some of the stuff in there is a little out-of-date (and some links may be broken).
So, let me try to state this briefly here (newbie bloggers first, oldie bloggers below).
Let’s say you consider yourself to be a new science blogger by some reasonable criteria. You tend to write about various topics in science, nature, medicine, environment, you debunk pseudoscience or muse about the life in the academia. If you are a new blogger, nobody knows about you, your traffic is 3 visits per day, and you have no idea who else out there writes stuff you are interested in – carnival is a place for you. How?
Step I – find the appropriate carnivals
Here, let me help you – a list of good current science-related carnivals (hover over the titles to see what they are about):
Tangled Bank
Grand Rounds
Scientiae
Skeptics’ Circle
Carnival of the Blue
Carnival of the Green
The Giant’s Shoulders
Cabinet of Curiosities
Linnaeus’ Legacy
Circus of the Spineless
I And The Bird
Berry Go Round
Festival of the Trees
Encephalon
Molecular and Cell Biology Carnival
Oekologie
Change of Shift
Bio::Blogs
Philosophia Naturalis
Four Stone Hearth
The Accretionary Wedge
Boneyard
Mendel’s Garden
Gene Genie
Cancer research blog carnival
Carnival of Space
Carnival of Mathematics
Friday Ark
Hourglass
Medicine 2.0 Blog Carnival
Step II – read the carnivals
Once you find the carnival(s) that are close to your interests, go and check out the homepage to see what are the official criteria and “rules”, then go to the very latest edition (or two, or dozen or 200, as far back into the past as you have stamina to go). Click on every link and open every post. Read them.
First, you will find things you did not know before – you will learn something new.
Second, you will get the feel for what kinds of posts are appropriate for the carnival. You will see which posts you like and which ones you don’t, which posts have a lot of comments and which ones have none, which blogs are popular (and why) and which ones are not. You will quickly develop your own ‘taste’ and from it your own ‘style’.
Third, when you really like a post, click around that blog to see what else is there on the front page and in the archives. Bookmark and blogroll the blogs you like the best. Start posting nice, intelligent, polite comments on the blogs you like and on specific posts you like. Start making connections….
Also, start linking to the new editions of your favourite carnivals as they get published – sometimes the trackbacks will show up and bring you some back-traffic, but even if not, the host will come to pay you a visit and may look around to see who you are.
Step III – submit to carnivals
Some hosts are picky, but most will include pretty much every decent post in the edition of the carnival they are hosting. Thus, once you write a post that you think satisfies the criteria for the inclusion in the carnival, submit it. You are likely to be included if your stuff is worth anything. If you were unlucky with a picky host the first time, try again next week. You’ll get in there eventually. This is not a peer-reviewed journal, it’s a community magazine. Peer-review will come later, in the comments on your post.
When the carnival edition containing your post gets published, quickly link to it. Post a ‘thank you’ note in the comments of the carnival (with your name linking back to your blog, as always). Enjoy the traffic (you do have some kind of sitemeter or traffic tracker, don’t you?) and be prepared to politely respond to the comments that may show up on that post even if the comments seem a little harsh at first (you’ll get used to the blunt tone of the blogosphere after a while and your polite tone will mellow some of the blunter commenters’ tone – feel free to just delete obvious trolls and spam).
Most of the visitors will come once and leave as soon as they are done reading that one post. But a few will stay longer and look around. If they like what they see, they will keep coming back. You should be getting a more permanent bump in the traffic as well as some more comments than usual. You will notice (you do check on Technorati who is linking to you, don’t you?) that some people may put you on their blogrolls or in their RSS feeds.
Do it again next week (or fortnight or month or whatever) and monitor how people respond to your posts. Learn from the experience.
Step IV – host a carnival
Once your posts have been included in several carnivals, consider volunteering to host an edition. First read the posts linked inside this post to prepare. Take the job seriously – read all the entries carefully, publish the carnival on time, make it neat, check that all links are working correctly, notify all the participants (as well as regular promoters of carnivals like PZ, Greg Laden, Grrrrl, me etc.) by e-mail as soon as the carnival is up.
Then enjoy the increased traffic and comments. You are now really, truly, on the list of “who is who in the science blogosphere”!
Consider doing it again….
But still, ….why?
Because this is the best way to build a community around a particular topic – the quickest, easiest way for people who are harboring similar interests to find each other, decide if they like each other, to boost each other’s rankings and traffic, and, if needed, to organize together for some kind of action. In best cases, you will meet some of those bloggers in person and forge new friendships, or even scientific collaborations.
Then, there is a special case – American atheists. For decades almost every U.S. atheist thought that he/she was the only one, or at least the only one in town. It felt unsafe to say anything about it. But the Web changed this. First on Usenet groups, and later on forums and blogs. With the current explosion of blogs and blog readers, suddenly atheists realized they are not alone, not even in their towns, and that their numbers are much greater than the polls and censuses suggest. With the safety in numbers, it is now possible to come out of the closet.
And I would argue that Carnival of the Godless played a key role in this development as a venue for atheists to find each other, eye-ball their numbers, exchange ideas, and plan action – how to make atheism OK in the United States, how to make it OK to analyze/critique/criticize religion, how to pull together to counter the eggregious influences of religion on politics and society. Yes, some find it unpleasant to hear vocal atheists – after all, Americans have always been enculturated that criticizing religion is not something done in polite company so some sensibilities are hurt, but that is exactly what happened in the past in the matters of race, gender and sexual orientation. Nothing changes until someone fights for it. And the fight makes some people uncomfortable. It is their discomfort that eventually results in change for the better, even if it is because they are sick and tired of hearing it so they succumb to the persistent noise and start supporting the cause so it will stop! And nobody gets out of the closet until there is a perception of numerical advantage. And the Carnival of the Godless provided that perception for a lot of people.
How about the old-timers?
If you are an older, already prominent blogger, your participation will not likely affect your traffic, popularity or rate of commenting. But, you are prominent at least in part because you were an early adopter – one of the first science bloggers around. It is almost a duty, or pay-back time, to promote those who are good but new and need our help and promotion. It is not hard to link to new editions of carnivals, occasionally host one, sometimes send an entry to one or another carnival. It boosts other people’s traffic, it boosts their confidence (“I was in the same carnival with PZ!”), and helps build the community. You/we should all do it sometimes.

Blogrolling for Today

The path forward


Maxwell’s Demoness


Science Matter


The Technium


The Wobbling Mind

New and Exciting in PLoS this week

Isolation-by-Distance and Outbreeding Depression Are Sufficient to Drive Parapatric Speciation in the Absence of Environmental Influences:

A commonly held view in evolutionary biology is that new species form in response to environmental factors, such as habitat differences or barriers to individual movements that sever a population. We have developed a computer model, called EvoSpace, that illustrates how new species can emerge when a species range becomes very large compared with the dispersal distances of its individuals. This situation has been called isolation-by-distance because remote parts of the range can take different evolutionary paths even though there is no particular place where we would expect different populations to separate. When the extent of genetic difference between individuals is coupled with decreasing offspring viability (e.g., resulting from developmental problems), EvoSpace predicts that sharp spatial boundaries can emerge in arbitrary locations, separating subpopulations that occasionally persist long enough to become reproductively incompatible species. The model shows an inherent tendency toward spatial self-organization, in contrast with the traditional view of environmentally forced origins of new species. We think that isolation-by-distance is a common aspect of the evolutionary process and that spatial self-organization of gene pools may often facilitate the evolution of new species.

The Interplay between Entamoeba and Enteropathogenic Bacteria Modulates Epithelial Cell Damage:

In amoebiasis, a human disease that is a serious health problem in many developing countries, efforts have been made to identify responsible factors for the tissue damage inflicted by the parasite Entamoeba histolytica. This amoeba lives in the lumen of the colon without causing damage to the intestinal mucosa, but under unknown circumstances becomes invasive, destroying the intestinal tissue. Bacteria in the intestinal flora have been proposed as inducers of higher amoebic virulence, but the causes or mechanisms responsible for the induction are still undetermined. Mixed intestinal infections with Entamoeba histolytica and enteropathogenic bacteria, showing exacerbated manifestations of disease, are common in endemic countries. We implemented an experimental system to study amoebic virulence in the presence of pathogenic bacteria and its consequences on epithelial cells. Results showed that amoebae that ingested enteropathogenic bacteria became more virulent, causing more damage to epithelial cells. Bacteria induced release of inflammatory proteins by the epithelial cells that attracted amoebae, facilitating amoebic contact to the epithelial cells and higher damage. Our results, although a first approach to this complex problem, provide insights into amoebic infections, as interplay with other pathogens apparently influences the intestinal environment, the behavior of cells involved and the manifestations of the disease.

In(s) and Out(s) of Academia

Bjoern Brembs is on a roll! Check all of these out:
Incentivizing open scientific discussion:

Apart from the question of whether the perfect scientist is the one who only spends his time writing papers and doing experiments, what incentives can one think of to provide for blogging, commenting, sharing? I think because all of science relies on creativity, information and debate, the overall value of blogging, commenting and sharing can hardly be overestimated, so what incentives can there be for the individual scientist?

Journals – the dinosaurs of scientific communication:

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. It doesn’t take an Einstein to realize that PLoS One is currently the only contender in the race for who will provide this database. For all the involved, it is equally clear what the many advantages of such a database would be. Consequently, traditional publishers are rightfully concerned that their customerbase is slowly dissappearing.

Post-publication paper assessment:

The more variables there are to game, the more difficult it becomes. Now we have one variable (IF) and we all know who is gaming it ad nauseum. In this thread we have 5 measures, add ratings and comments and you have 7. This should be impossible to game for anyone but the hacker who can get thousands to machines on the net to just hype this one paper.
All of these measures are relevant even long after publication. Some papers ignored by the media may later turn out to harbor the most important discovery of the century, while some of those tossed around everywhere turn out to be completely irreproducible. Having these measures in place, if nothing else, would allow us to quantify and study such events.
But again, no matter how many numbers you have, these measures cannot substitute for actually reading the papers! The numbers barely give you a rough idea of where a paper or a scientist can be placed with respect to others in the same field. Yet, these measures would be light-years ahead of any one-dimensional, irreproducible, obviously manipulated and corrupt measure such as the IF.

Building a scientific online reputation:

For me, this basically means that all the expertise and technical prerequisites are there to bring the scientific community into the 21st century. The advantages of the new system need to be succinctly summarized and widely publicized at the same time as the current system’s disadvantages and idiosyncracies need to be pointed out and publicized along with the new proposal. And because criticizing is always easier than advertising, I’ll start by summarizing why Thomson’s Bibliographic Impact Factor (BIF) is dead.

Why Thomson’s Bibliographic Impact Factor (BIF) is dead:

Despite the recent downpour of evidence against the use of Thomson’s BIF, I still get comments from people such as “However, IFs are still the most used way of evaluating a researcher’s career and value. Even if we find this ridiculous, it’s just the way it is.” or “in our institution, every researcher has to publish in journals whose BIF is at least 5.”. In the light of the current state of affairs concerning the BIF, this is just embarrassing. So here are the top three reasons why the BIF is dead:
1. The BIF is negotiable and doesn’t reflect actual citation counts (source)
2. The BIF cannot be reproduced, even if it reflected actual citations (source)
3. The BIF is not statistically sound, even if it were reproducible and reflected actual citations (source)
Now go and spread the information so I don’t have to suffer from these ridiculous statements any more.

Then, on Nature Network blogs and Nature blogs, discussion about the “manners” in the science blogosphere:
Corie Lok: What is fair play in the blogo/commentosphere?:

Now, maybe it’s a generational thing. Those of us who didn’t ‘grow up’ with blogs might be more easily taken aback by what goes on in them. Those of us who did grow up with them perhaps have learned to take the bad with the good.

To which I commented:

A lot depends on one’s prior experiences. If one comes to science blogging out of academia with its highly formalized and ritualized kabuki dance of language-use, extremely polite on the surface, yet often very vicious in the subtext, then one sees blogs as very uncourteous and unpleasant – the things that are supposed to be hidden between the lines and now said openly.
Many of the most popular science bloggers have a different history – many years of battling Creationist and other pseudoscience crusaders on Usenet groups in the early 1990s, people who, if they can use language at all, use it in a very vicious way, sometimes with threats of bodily harm. I spent the early 90s on Balkans usenet groups, battling heatedly nationalist Serbs, Croats and Bosnians who do not just voice empty threats but would, if they could find you, really kill you. Others cut their teeth on political blogs or feminist blogs, which are very blunt and heated. Just try not supporting Howard Dean in the 04 primaries or Obama in 08 – you get your fill of human nastiness. And that is nothing compared to what Republicans say once the general election starts!
My first blog was political – I wrote highly opinionated and strongly-worded posts. And of course, I got, let’s put it diplomatically, some highly opinionated commenters. I never deleted. Sometimes I responded (politely at first – that is unusual and disarming – I turned some trolls into friendly and polite commenters that way), sometimes I ignored, sometimes my other commenters took care of trolls.
Then, after the move to Sb, I gradually reduced writing about politics and religion and my threads are now quite nice and polite most of the times. Various heated debates about “framing” or the latest “Nature vs. PLoS” kerffufle are sweet lullabies compared to most of the stuff I saw and suffered over the years online. One grows a thick skin, understands that people behave strangely online, laughs at the most egregious examples, and moves on.
There is no single definition of a “science blog”. Blog is a piece of software. You do what you want with it. If you are a scientist with a blog, or if you write more-or-less regularly about science (or meta-stuff, e.g., life in the lab, women in academia, politics of science funding….), then you can claim that your blog is a science blog. And your blog is going to be different from all other science blogs out there, as it is what you want it to be, reflecting your own interests, goals and personality. Nobody can tell you how to do it. There is no, and there should be no “template” or “definition” of a science blog – that is the beauty of the beast.
Thus, some blogs are serious, others not. Some are nice, some are inflammatory. Some focus 100% on latest peer-reviewed research. Others are a smorgasbord of everything the blogger feels like posting at any given time (like my blog, for instance). There is no recipe, no straightjacket, no “one right way” to do it. And that is what makes the science blogosphere so exciting and vibrant – so many cool voices, interesting personalities! Who says that scientists are socially-inept or bad communicators?!

The discussion there continues:
Noah Gray: Getting into and out of character:

We seem to be at a critical juncture concerning the intersection of blogs and other Web 2.0 technologies with science. This is no time to poison the atmosphere and turn away the more “relaxed” or “casual” participants. Polarized communities refusing to tolerate rival positions, or unwilling to engage in a civil debate over any topic, from publication business models to the role of Ca2+-permeable AMPARs in LTP, will shut out many would-be contributors and stunt the growth or slow the adoption of blogs, commenting, and other web-based technologies dedicated to the pursuit of scientific collaboration. If such technologies are ever really going to work for science, it will be because of inclusivity, not exclusivity.

Maxine Clarke: Manners in the blogosphere:

The anonymity of cyberspace provides protection to both share honest opinions and participate in mud-slinging without repercussion, he notes. Yet interaction on the Internet is more personal. “So why should some choose to check their manners at the door before logging on?” He argues that intolerant online communities unwilling to engage in a civil debate — whether on publication business models or the role of glutamate receptors in long-term potentiation of neurons — will turn off would-be contributors and stunt the growth of online scientific collaboration. Web-based collaborative technologies will not work for science if they become dominated by exclusive, aggressive types. Gray isn’t calling for “communal singing of Kum Ba Yah during scientific debates”, but simply a certain level of restraint and professionalism online.

This is an interesting segue to Michael Nielsen’s latest instalment of his future book about the future of science: Shirky’s Law and why (most) social software fails:

Shirky’s Law states that the social software most likely to succeed has “a brutally simple mental model … that’s shared by all users”.
If you use social software like Flickr or Digg, you know what this means. You can give friends a simple and compelling explanation of these sites in seconds: “it’s a website that lets you upload photos so your friends can also see them”; “it’s a community website that lets you suggest interesting sites; the users vote on submissions to determine what’s most interesting”. Of course, for each Flickr or Digg there are hundreds of failed social sites. The great majority either fail to obey Shirky’s Law, or else are knockoffs that do little not already done by an existing site.
To understand why Shirky’s Law is important, let’s look at a site where it’s violated. The site is Nature Network, one of the dozens of social networking sites aspiring to be “Facebook for scientists”. Like other social networks, Nature Network lets you connect to other users. When you make a connection, you’re asked whether you would like to connect as a “friend” or a “colleague”. Sometimes the choice is easy. But sometimes it’s not so easy. Furthermore, if someone else connects to you, you’re automatically asked to connect to them, but given no immediate clue whether they connected as a friend or as a colleague. The only thing shared in the users’ mental model at this point is acute awkwardness, and possibly a desire to never connect to anyone on Nature Network again.
I don’t mean to pick on Nature Network. It’s the most useful of the social networks for scientists. But it and most other social websites (apart from the knockoffs) don’t even come close to obeying Shirky’s Law.
Why is Shirky’s Law so hard for developers to obey? I’ll give three reasons.

Interesting…. We here at Sb are often accused of being cliquish and insular. But if you look at our 70+ blogs and dig through the archives, you will see that we rarely comment on each other’s blogs – most (99%?) of the comments come from outside readers. Also, most of our links point to outside of Sb. On the other hand, NN is specifically designed to be a community (not a platform for independent players) and almost all of the comments there are from each other. Thus, it is easy for them to maintain a high level of politeness there (this is not a bad thing – this is how they designed it on purpose). It is much harder to harness the hordes of pharyngulites that spill over to all of our blogs – and I do not mind them at all, I think they make the debate spirited and in a way more honest by bypassing superficial niceness and going straight to the point. This may also have something to do with NN bloggers mainly being in the academia, while a large proportion of SciBlings are ex-academia, journalists, artists, etc. with a different rhetoric. The rhetoric of academia is a very formalized kabuki dance, while the rhetoric of the blogosphere has shed all formalities and is much more reminiscient to the regular everyday oral conversation.
Moving on to other, related topics…
Jocalyn Clark: Is the NIH open access policy regressive?:

Panellists noted that the recent NIH public access policy emphasises free not open access. That is, the policy may lead to freely accessible publications (for which publishers or organisations may reap profits from charging authors a fee to deposit their manuscripts), but these will remain under restrictive licenses (thus limiting text-mining).
This, Cockerill argued, makes the NIH policy regressive.

NASA to launch OA image collection:

Nasa is to make its huge collection of historic photographs, film and video available to the public for the first time.

Rhea Miller: Vow to never become Jaded…:

But I do NOT understand why it is socially accepted to be a Jaded student…to be completely negative about the research he/she does, to avoid showing up to journal clubs/seminars, or to never participate in scientific discussions. What does being burnt out do for you in becoming the best you can be?? How does it help your science, your field, or your coworkers??
I really only notice these attributes in young scientists, i.e. graduate students and post-docs. Does this mean that the Jaded ones eventually give-up, get use to it, change their prospectives, or do they hide that inner Jaded color as they progress?? Or maybe it’s just that grad students/postdocs can’t seem to see the light at the end of the tunnel until they get there??

Panthera studentessa: Letting fear take over:

As time goes on, I’m becoming more and more concerned that I don’t have what it takes to hack it in graduate school. In every community, every blog, every forum that I read, people always talk about how stressful and all-consuming grad school is. To be perfectly honest, my mental health isn’t exactly the best it’s ever been. I just worry that I won’t be able to handle the mental and physical stress.
——-
I suppose there’s always the option of just not going to graduate school, but that really throws a wrench in my career plans. I don’t even know what kind of jobs a person can get with a bachelor’s in zoology. And anyway, I don’t want to let my fear determine what I do with my life. I just wish I knew how to begin to get over it.

Maddox2: Advice on Freelance Science Writing:

Caveat: I am writing this advice from the perspective of an editor who regularly works with freelance science writers. However, the market in which I work may not be the same as some of you out there work in, or want to work in. Therefore, I can guarantee that following the advice below will endear you to K-12 educational publishers (and to companies like mine who work for educational publishers). I can’t speak to journals, newspapers, etc…but I can’t imagine they’d mind if you follow this advice! And given that a lot of people here have expressed an interest in freelance writing, I thought I might be able to provide a bit of a different perspective on things.

Mad Hatter: Networking Nuts And Bolts:

I think the most important thing to keep in mind when networking is that your contacts are much more likely to help you if they like you. My personal philosophy on networking is this: when my networking contact turns on her computer and sees an email from me, I want her to click on the email thinking, “Hey, I remember Mad Hatter. I liked talking to her. I wonder what she’s been up to?” What I don’t want her to do is groan and think, “Oh, no…it’s Mad Hatter again. What does she want now?” So with that in mind, here are some tips on networking that have worked for me.

John Hawks has posted first two of a 4-piece series on Blogging And Tenure: How to blog, get tenure and prosper: Starting the blog:

Last month, the University of Wisconsin officially granted me tenure. So, I can say without any doubt (if other examples had not been sufficient), it is absolutely possible to write a daily, high-profile blog and still be recognized by your colleagues as a scholar. In fact, it is possible to blog, do good research, and earn tenure at a Research I university.
That seems like progress, compared to the situation four years ago when I began blogging. A few high-profile tenure denials in late 2005, including physicist Sean Carroll and political scientist Daniel Drezner, made it seem like a blog might be the kiss of death for a research reputation. Inside Higher Education ran a story on the subject, as did Slate, with the melodramatic title, “Attack of the Career-killing Blogs”. Since I was interviewed in that article, I suppose I should have been a little nervous (I wrote about it here).
Happily things have changed.

…and: Graduate students and blogging:

As far as I know, there are no data concerning blogging and career success — or, for that matter, between any kind of public outreach and success in research careers (as opposed to teaching or industry careers that directly involve outreach). Anecdotally, there are some people who spend a lot of effort on outreach who have very well-respected research careers, and others who don’t. I’d say it’s up to the individual to chart her own course.
——————–
I’d like to advocate for a model of blogging that many graduate students might find useful. If I were starting out today, I’d blog my dissertation. Why not? Is there really anything so secret in your history and literature review that it couldn’t be read by the few hundred people who will find your blog?

Happy birthday, PLoS Genetics!

PLoS Genetics is celebrating its third birthday this month! Let’s see what’s new this week, among else…
PLoS Genetics Turns Three: Looking Back, Looking Ahead:

PLoS Genetics is three years old this month–a milestone worth celebrating! As we do, and as we recognize all who have helped us reach this point in time, we thought this would be a good opportunity to share with you a summary of our brief history and a look ahead.
Our original intent was to provide an open-access journal for the community that would “reflect the full breadth and interdisciplinary nature of genetics and genomics research by publishing outstanding original contributions in all areas of biology.” Now, three years later, all of us on the Editorial Board are very pleased with the breadth of topics covered and with the diversity of approaches, organisms, and systems. Going forward, PLoS Genetics will continue to be a journal by and for the entire genetics and genomics community.

The Status of Dosage Compensation in the Multiple X Chromosomes of the Platypus:

Dosage compensation equalizes the expression of genes found on sex chromosomes so that they are equally expressed in females and males. In placental and marsupial mammals, this is accomplished by silencing one of the two X chromosomes in female cells. In birds, dosage compensation seems not to be strictly required to balance the expression of most genes on the Z chromosome between ZZ males and ZW females. Whether dosage compensation exists in the third group of mammals, the egg-laying monotremes, is of considerable interest, particularly since the platypus has five different X and five different Y chromosomes. As part of the platypus genome project, genes have now been assigned to four of the five X chromosomes. We have shown that there is some evidence for dosage compensation, but it is variable between genes. Most interesting are our results showing that there is a difference in the probability of expression for X-specific genes, with about 50% of female cells having two active copies of an X gene while the remainder have only one. This means that, although the platypus has the variable compensation characteristic of birds, it also has some level of inactivation, which is characteristic of dosage compensation in other mammals.

Pain Genes:

Pain, which afflicts up to 20% of the population at any time, provides both a massive therapeutic challenge and a route to understanding mechanisms in the nervous system. Specialised sensory neurons (nociceptors) signal the existence of tissue damage to the central nervous system (CNS), where pain is represented in a complex matrix involving many CNS structures. Genetic approaches to investigating pain pathways using model organisms have identified the molecular nature of the transducers, regulatory mechanisms involved in changing neuronal activity, as well as the critical role of immune system cells in driving pain pathways. In man, mapping of human pain mutants as well as twin studies and association studies of altered pain behaviour have identified important regulators of the pain system. In turn, new drug targets for chronic pain treatment have been validated in transgenic mouse studies. Thus, genetic studies of pain pathways have complemented the traditional neuroscience approaches of electrophysiology and pharmacology to give us fresh insights into the molecular basis of pain perception.

Stable in a Genome of Instability: An Interview with Evan Eichler:

We like to think that our genome is rock-solid, that it is dependable, there for us when we need it. The truth is far from that. By fits and starts, our species’ collective genome is undulating, reshaping itself with eruptions of genomic lava and clashes of sequence tectonics, at once both marvelous and unsettling. We are unaware of this tumult within us until we are confronted with disease in ourselves, our friends, or our family.
Evan Eichler is a man obsessed with this process, and to speak with him is a study in contrasts (Image 1). An unassuming Canadian, Eichler is a student of genomic architecture, the arrangement of sequences in our genome, and their evolution. Eichler grew up on a farm in Manitoba, married his college sweetheart, and now lives together with her and their four children in the mountains east of Seattle. As we walked up the hill to my office during his recent visit to UCSF, he talked about being an early riser, taking his son to band practice before school, and then driving the 30 miles to work in his Toyota. Eichler is a man bristling with excitement for his discoveries, but holding it in check by a tradition of modesty. He has consistently followed his own path, chosen career opportunities that were dictated not by politics or peer pressure but rather by what feels like a good fit for him.

Today’s carnivals

Friday Ark #201 is up on Modulator

Sex, Gender, Reproduction

I have not done a Friday Weird Sex Blogging post in ages, and I won’t do today either, but others did some cool blogging on various related topics: from gender disparities, to gynecological procedures, to weird animal/plant sex, so here is a little collection for this weekend:
My take on Mr. Tierney’s article:

Again, I can’t predict what the gender breakdown of any profession would be if we didn’t live in a rather patriarchal society. Maybe it wouldn’t be 50/50 if everything else was equal. But it’s not. I hate to use the P-word, but consider the environment our girls are being raised in. Until societal pressures can really be controlled for, I’m not sure that we can really say what people’s “natural tendencies” are. And that goes for men, too. Gender stereotypes are stupid. And Tierney’s insistence that girls just don’t like some things isn’t terribly inspiring (or new).

Blogging my mammogram:

At the urging of my colleague Abel, who liveblogged his own vasectomy, I’m documenting my first mammogram. Given that I had pretty much no idea what to expect going into this, I’m hopeful that this post will demystify the experience a little for those who know they probably should get mammograms but have been putting it off.

The pros and cons of screening mammography: reading my ‘patient instructions’:

However, to the extent that most of us who are getting regular health care in the U.S. are doing it within the context of some kind of insurance, we aren’t generally making this call individually. We’re working within the framework of our health care provider’s policy, which usually tracks what insurance will cover.

Why Not? Blogging My D & C:

And that’s it! Now I am officially one of those people who shares every intimate detail of their lives with total strangers on the internet. You know, just like I promised myself I would never do. If you had asked me, when I first took up blogging, whether I’d be posting pictures of the inside of my uterus on my blog, I’m pretty sure I’d have answered “what the hell are you talking about?” And yet, here we are. Just don’t tell my mom.

World Wide Web Abortions:

In theory, I think it’s pathetic (not to mention potentially high-risk) that some patients have to resort to DIY specialized medical care just because they happen to be pregnant. In practice, when your reality is that your access to proper medical care is at the mercy of strangers, it’s preferable to obtain care from (apparently) competent strangers like Women on Web, rather than some unqualified black marketeer.

Sex and the over seventies – what the research really said:

Media coverage has stuck to this, although a lot of coverage has focused on the ooo-isn’t-it-shocking-that-wrinklies-are-having-sex angle, and in many places misquoting or misunderstanding the study data. This is probably because most journalists didn’t read the original research or editorial, and based their stories on the press release. Of the journalists I spoke to who were writing their coverage yesterday the majority were not interested in getting reportage of the study right, but simply wanted me to find them a seventy year old couple who didn’t mind talking about their sex lives or having their photograph included in the paper.

Lonesome George not so lonesome:

George, a Pinta island tortoise who has shown little interest in reproducing during 36 years in captivity, stunned his keepers by mating with one of his two female companions of a similar species of Galapagos tortoise.

This Friday’s Weird Science: Foot-binding:

This is where Dr. McGeoch got his idea. He notes that ancient Chinese historians who lived during the Tang Dynasty talked about women with their feet bound, noting that they were, perhaps, a little more “sensitive” in bed than those who had big feet. So foot binding was considered conducive to a better sex life. Dr. McGeoch hypothesizes that, because the girl’s feet were kept small, broken, and atrophied, she might get a structural reorganization in her somatosensory cortex, where neurons were recruited from the feet to the genetalia, resulting in a stronger signal from the genitals. Of course, this would remain to be seen (and I would not want to be the lab rat for that experiment), but it’s an interesting idea.

Not quite viagra!:

…It’s a penis shaped fungus! A Stinkhorn in the family Phallaceae. I came across this in a unit about fungi I did last year and just found it funny… a bit immature perhaps…

Botanical posts – you have 8 hours left!

Next edition of Berry Go Round, the carnival about all things related to plants, will alight here at A Blog Around The Clock tomorrow (probably late afternoon), so please send your submissions tonight by midnight EDT to: Coturnix AT gmail DOT com

The importance of stupidity in scientific research

Now this is a title of a paper in a scientific journal that will make one’s eyebrows go up: The importance of stupidity in scientific research (by Schwartz J Cell Sci.2008; 121: 1771) :

I recently saw an old friend for the first time in many years. We
had been Ph.D. students at the same time, both studying science,
although in different areas. She later dropped out of graduate school,
went to Harvard Law School and is now a senior lawyer for a major
environmental organization. At some point, the conversation turned
to why she had left graduate school. To my utter astonishment, she
said it was because it made her feel stupid. After a couple of years
of feeling stupid every day, she was ready to do something else.
I had thought of her as one of the brightest people I knew and
her subsequent career supports that view. What she said bothered
me. I kept thinking about it; sometime the next day, it hit me. Science
makes me feel stupid too. It’s just that I’ve gotten used to it. So
used to it, in fact, that I actively seek out new opportunities to feel
stupid. I wouldn’t know what to do without that feeling. I even
think it’s supposed to be this way. Let me explain.

I am not sure what he wrote is really what she meant, but anyway, this was a nice way for him to start the article. What he is talking about is not really stupidity. I’d call it ignorance. And grad school teaches you to cherish and relish in your ignorance, as that is the main motivator in working every day to diminish it a little bit at a time by discovering something new, a little bit of information about the way the world works that in some reduces your own and everyone else’s ignorance. If you are successful in acquiring this mindset – enjoying the ambiguity of science, having ease with saying “I don’t know….and, by the way, nobody does” – you feel good. If you are a different kind of person, you may as well feel stupid:

Productive stupidity means being ignorant by choice. Focusing
on important questions puts us in the awkward position of being
ignorant. One of the beautiful things about science is that it allows
us to bumble along, getting it wrong time after time, and feel
perfectly fine as long as we learn something each time. No doubt,
this can be difficult for students who are accustomed to getting the
answers right. No doubt, reasonable levels of confidence and
emotional resilience help, but I think scientific education might do
more to ease what is a very big transition: from learning what other
people once discovered to making your own discoveries. The more
comfortable we become with being stupid, the deeper we will wade
into the unknown and the more likely we are to make big
discoveries.

My picks from ScienceDaily

‘Snow Flea Antifreeze Protein’ Could Help Improve Organ Preservation:

Scientists in Illinois and Pennsylvania are reporting development of a way to make the antifreeze protein that enables billions of Canadian snow fleas to survive frigid winter temperatures. Their laboratory-produced first-of-a-kind proteins could have practical uses in extending the storage life of donor organs and tissues for human transplantation, according to new research.

Freedom’s Just Another Word For Less Sexually Active Teens:

Sophisticated statistical research is providing more evidence of a link between rigid parenting and increased sexual activity in older teens. Although it is difficult to confirm that controlling mothers and fathers cause kids to have more sex, the findings suggest it is wise to give children freedom, said Rebekah Levine Coley, lead author of a new study of nearly 5,000 U.S. teenagers. Coley is an associate professor of applied developmental and educational psychology at Boston College.

Costs Of Climate Change, State-by-state: Billions, Says New Report:

Climate change will carry a price tag of billions of dollars for a number of U.S. states, says a new series of reports from the University of Maryland’s Center for Integrative Environmental Research (CIER). The researchers conclude that the costs have already begun to accrue and are likely to endure.

It Takes Nerves For Flies To Keep A Level Head:

The nerve connections that keep a fly’s gaze stable during complex aerial manoeuvres, enabling it to respond quickly to obstacles in its flight path, are revealed in new detail in research published today (22 July 2008).

Various Species’ Genes Evolve To Minimize Protein Production Errors:

Scientists at Harvard University and the University of Texas at Austin have found that genetic evolution is strongly shaped by genes’ efforts to prevent or tolerate errors in protein production.

Prevailing Theory Of Aging Challenged: Genetic Instructions Found To Drive Aging In Worms:

Age may not be rust after all. Specific genetic instructions drive aging in worms, report researchers at the Stanford University School of Medicine. Their discovery contradicts the prevailing theory that aging is a buildup of tissue damage akin to rust, and implies science might eventually halt or even reverse the ravages of age.

Outdoor Enthusiasts Scaring Off Native Carnivores In Parks:

Even a quiet stroll in the park can dramatically change natural ecosystems, according to a new study by conservation biologists from the University of California, Berkeley. These findings could have important implications for land management policies.

UNDERCURRENTS: the voice of undergraduate research

The July issue of our e-newsletter is now available.
http://snipurl.com/34wgh
Highlights:
* Social Networking For Researchers
* Do Research and Teaching Mix?
* Undergrads Create New Science
* Writing An Undergrad Thesis
* Research Conferences Update
* Ongoing Items database and conferences database
* Please contribute to Undercurrents

ClockQuotes

Work expands so as to fill the time available for its completion. General recognition of this fact is shown in the proverbial phrase “It is the busiest man who has time to spare.”
– C. Northcote Parkinson

Is there an ornithologist in the house?

If so, go help Michael identify this bird he took a picture of earlier today. If you can, post a comment here.

WALL-E

I finally found some time to go and see a movie theater from the inside. My daughter and I went and saw Wall-E tonight.
Like everyone says, it is a beautiful movie.
Get some popcorn and sit back.
Take in the fantastic graphic design.
Play the “spot the cultural reference” game.
Enjoy the sweet love story.
Laugh.
Leave the social analysis for later, if you insist on doing one at all.

Blogrolling for Today

Moss Plants and More


The Wild Side (Olivia Judson)


The Phytophactor


Mendeley Blog


The Apprenticing Lab Rat

Today’s carnivals

I and the Bird #80 is up on Hawk Owl’s Nest
The 181st edition of The Carnival of Education is up on The Education Wonks

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.