Nautilus

Networking is an essential part of the conference experience, but what opportunities are there for those who cannot make it to many, or even any, meetings? Can Web 2.0 applications enable scientists that do not have the time or money to attend meetings to reap the benefits of networking, and do Web 2.0 applications have a place in both our social and work lives? The June Editorial in Nature Reviews Microbiology (6, 410; 2008) takes a look at selected virtual networking resources, including wiki software such as OpenWetWare, preprint servers (for example, Nature Precedings) and scientific social networking sites (for example, Nature Network), that might be useful for microbiologists, and the editors welcome your comments here. From the editorial:

Finding the time to write and read blogs could stimulate collaborations or open up new career opportunities in science writing and education, but how many microbiologists actually write blogs? In the United Kingdom, the only microbiology academic who blogs on a regular basis is Alan Cann from the University of Leicester. His blog on new and exciting microbiology research, aptly named MicrobiologyBytes, has been particularly successful, with 300,000 page views over the past 18 months and 750 comments on 468 posts (Alan filters out all spam comments or 'splogs'). He also blogs about science in general on Science of the Invisible, and his enthusiasm for new technologies has led him to divert his energy into a non-laboratory-based career researching the use of online resources for education. Other active microbiology 'bloggers' include Moeslio Schaechter, whose blog Small Things Considered is hosted by the ASM, César Sánchez, whose blog Twisted Bacteria has a particular focus on actinomycetes and Ed Rybicki, whose blog ViroBlogy concentrates on virology. Some other bloggers, including microbiologist Rosie Redfield, focus more on their own research to provide an insight into the everyday lives of research scientists.
It is now even possible to attend conferences without leaving your desk: the first ever International Online Medical Conference was held on 10–11 May. But how useful will Web 2.0 applications be in your research? We welcome your views, as comments to this post.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 16, 2008
Categories: Communication | Permalink | Comments (1)

This weekly Nautilus column highlights some of the online discussion at Nature Network in the preceding week that is of relevance to scientists as authors.
The Nature Network week column is archived here.

Ennio Tasciotti writes a delightful account in the Nature Nanotechnology forum of the journey of his paper, from the experiments to final publication. I think it is a lovely account, one point of interest (among others) being that the author is not a native English-speaker.
In response to a discussion started by Cath Ennis about the obligation of authors to answer (sometimes frivolous) questions and comments from readers, Charles Darwin responds, helpfully: "take it from one who spent many years worrying about the questions and sensitivities of one’s correspondents and critics that they are rarely completely satisfied. By answering in detail you do them a great courtesy: some may be enlightened and informed, some may be grateful, some, I remember will then write a poisonous review of your work.
I wrote some years ago that ‘he who wastes an hour does not know the value of life’. Are the questions about which you fret worth an hour of your life or are there other waters to be – I ask this to a fellow seafarer – paddled?
These days I would have written ‘he or she’, of course."
At the Good Paper Journal Club, Martin Fenner starts a discussion of good papers about scientific writing. His first pick is Me write pretty one day: how to write a good scientific paper by W. A. Wells (J Cell Biol. 165, 757-758; 2004). "The paper starts by discussing the most important point: clearly state the take-home message of a paper", writes Martin. "The rest of the short text deals with the structure of a paper and with specific style issues." Half a dozen further articles and books are referenced, linked and discussed by forum contributors.
Cover letters are dissected at The Scientist, Richard Grant's blog. Richard writes that a well-written covering letter shows respect for the editor and might be useful in persuading them to send the manuscript out to review. "But — just like writing papers and giving seminars — cover-letter writing is one of those things that we are, as far as I can tell, supposed to acquire by osmosis. I wondered if you have hints or advice you’d like to share. If so, you should leave a comment." Twenty-seven comments follow, providing various degrees of detailed advice as well as a link to some humorous examples for those needing light refreshment.
The Science Blogging conference (London, 30 August 2008) plans are beginning to form, so if you are interested in coming along, whether you have a blog or are just interested in the topic, see here for suggestions about accommodation; volunteer to give a talk here; see here to offer a poster or a short presentation; and go here to make your suggestions for topics you'd like to be included on the agenda.

Previous Nature Network columns.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 16, 2008
Categories: Nature Network round-up | Permalink | Comments (0)

From Nature 453, 145 (8 May 2008):
Two research centres will open their doors in Cape Town, South Africa, this month in a bid to bolster theoretical physics and mathematical sciences across the continent.
A pan-African centre of the existing African Institute for Mathematical Sciences will be launched on 12 May, followed the next day by the National Institute for Theoretical Physics, to be headquartered at the Stellenbosch Institute for Advanced Study.
The two institutes are funded mainly by the South African Department of Science and Technology. The pair will work closely with each other, using mainly local scientific talent to contribute to regional cosmology and astrophysics programmes such as SALT (the Southern Africa Large Telescope) in Sutherland and MeerKAT, a radio-telescope facility under construction in the Karoo desert.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 15, 2008
Categories: Disciplines | Permalink | Comments (0)

Doctors used to try out their surgical skills on animals before being allowed to work on patients. Now just a handful of US medical schools still have animal labs. A Nature News report (453, 140-141; 8 May 2008) asks if they've lost a vital tool.

This month sees the shutdown of the live-animal laboratory at Case Western Reserve University School of Medicine in Cleveland, Ohio. The lab is currently used to train medical students, allowing them to practise on anaesthetized pigs before attempting their first incision into humans. But the school, which has used live cats, dogs and ferrets in its surgery programme in the past, intends to stop using live animals at the end of this semester in favour of technologies such as virtual simulations. It is the latest closure in a phase-out of animal labs across the United States: in 1994, live-animal experiments were on the curriculum in 77 of 125 medical schools; now it is thought that just eight use them.

In the context of a global trend to reduce the use of live non-human animals for surgical training, the News story reports a range of opinions from medical scientists, physicians, directors, students and others on the value of training using simulation or real animals.
See here for previous Nautilus posts and discussion on animal experimentation.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 14, 2008
Categories: Animal experiments | Permalink | Comments (0)

From Nature 453, 145 (8 May2008):
A researcher who blew the whistle over animal-rights issues at the University of Nevada in Reno went to court last week to try to win his job back after being fired.
Nutrition researcher Hussein Hussein, a tenured professor, was sacked last month by university president Milton Glick, despite a recommendation by a university administrative hearing that he merely be reprimanded or demoted. Four years ago, Hussein reported deficiencies in the care of laboratory animals that led to US$11,400 in fines against the university. He claims the university sought to fire him in retaliation.
After the administrative hearing, he was cleared of charges of plagiarizing graduate student work, but found to have incorrectly reported on $377,000 in grants, thus denying the university overhead costs.
Hussein's lawyer asked a Nevada judge to reinstate him, arguing that he was improperly fired. A spokeswoman says the university acted appropriately, and will vigorously defend its actions.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 13, 2008
Categories: Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Is scientific progress being stifled by a lack of support for researchers who aim to change research directions? This is the question asked in Nature Cell Biology's May Editorial (10, 499; 2008).

At a time when cell biologists are exposed more than ever to diverse fields of research, it is notable that we are not seeing a parallel increase in researchers moving into new areas. There are certainly compelling examples of cell biologists who have successfully maintained more than one research focus or shifted the direction of their laboratory entirely — but not as many as one might expect. Perhaps people really do have a healthy obsession with their particular research focus, but is there also a fear of failure that is being compounded by the current funding and publishing process?

The Editorial goes on to identify some initiatives designed to encourage this type of innovation, for example schemes such as the Pioneer Award, requiring that "the proposed research must reflect ideas substantially different from those already being pursued in the investigator's laboratory or elsewhere".
Some fields, particularly smaller ones, can be harder to break into than others, partly because of a sense of "ownership" by those working in the discipline. According to the Editorial, "No doubt some of the best research is done by those who appreciate a particular system in all its depth and complexity; however, a fresh view can provide clarity. Exploring new areas may be risky for the individual but there is no question that it drives overall research progress."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 13, 2008
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Presenting at a conference is a unique opportunity to communicate your work. Editors attend many conferences, and although they may not address an audience often, they have plenty of opportunity to observe presentation skills.
Nature Methods (5, 371 - 372; 2008), in its May Editorial, makes ten suggestions for making the most of such presentational opportunities, and invites readers to add their own tips and comments at its blog Methagora. The Nature Methods list:
1. Plan for the allotted time.
2. Know your audience.
3. Define your goals.
4. Structure your talk.
5. Keep your slides simple (content).
6. Keep your slides simple (design).
7. Beware of animations and multimedia.
8. Watch your delivery.
9. Choose your words.
10. Rehearse!
Advice can also be found on Nature Network: see Lab Daze blog; End of the Pier Show blog; Expression Patterns blog; and a post in the Visualization and Science forum, in which Hilary Spencer provides some very good, practical advice about the balance between information and presentation in Power Point slides.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on May 12, 2008
Categories: Communication | Permalink | Comments (2)