Nautilus

The editors and publishers of Nature seek the opinion of scientists at a series of focus groups this October. The focus groups will be held in San Francisco, Washington DC, Glasgow, Manchester, Oxford, Geneva and Munich. Nature is seeking 20 people in each city. You need not be a regular reader of the journal, or to have published in it.
To be eligible, you must be aged between 25 and 65 and work in the sciences: in academia, a commercial company, NGO, governmental organization or other setting. We are seeking both working scientists and decision-makers within companies/organizations rooted in science.
Participants will receive a token £75/$150 and refreshments in return for three hours of your time.
To register your interest, please complete this online form as soon as you read this post - and before 4 October.
There are additional selection criteria for these focus groups. Regretfully, we can only reply to those chosen to take part.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 30, 2009
Categories: General | Permalink | Comments (0)

Via Nature Network: The Acting Editor-in-Chief of Scientific American, Mariette DiChristina, will be talking about the beginning of… everything! The event takes place at the 92YTribeca in New York on Thursday, 1 October at 6:30 p.m. local time. Tickets are $12 and include a one year subscription to Scientific American. For more information check out the 92Y website or read Caryn Shechtman's Nature Network New York post.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 29, 2009
Categories: Conferences | Permalink | Comments (0)

The journal's October Editorial outlines new policies that refine the responsibilities of authors and require author contribution statements in Nature Chemical Biology research papers ( Nat. Chem. Bio. 5, 697; 2009):

"When a manuscript is submitted to Nature Chemical Biology, one author assumes the role of corresponding author. This individual, typically a principal investigator of the study, serves as the central point of contact for the manuscript and manages communication with the journal while the paper is under consideration. Corresponding authors also take responsibility for coordinating communication among the paper's authors and for certifying that all authors have agreed to the contents of the manuscript prior to submission. Our updated authorship policy now clarifies the corresponding author's role in managing the manuscript's author list: prior to submission, the corresponding author "ensures that all authors are included in the author list, its order has been agreed by all authors, and that all authors are aware that the paper was submitted".
Why are these changes needed? Because publication records remain an important metric for assessing the research productivity of individual scientists, it is essential that author lists are accurate and are determined in an objective and open manner. Most authorship disputes result from lack of clarity on two main points: (i) defining whether an individual's scientific contributions warrant authorship and (ii) determining the order of the author list. Obtaining agreement on these points is made more challenging by differences in authorship models among disciplines and individual laboratories, and by the fact that collaborative papers in interdisciplinary areas often include data from multiple research groups."
The Editorial goes on to describe further details of these policies, including the introduction of authors' contributions statements in published articles.
Nature journals' authorship policies.
Nature Chemical Biology guide to authors.
About the Nature Chemical Biology editors.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 29, 2009
Categories: Authorship, Policies | Permalink | Comments (0)

The 2009 Nobel Prize in Chemistry will soon (early October) be awarded amid the usual speculation, angst, disagreement and elation — but Nature Chemistry's October Editorial (Nat. Chem. 1, 509; 2009) asks whether it is really worth all the fuss? The Editorial begins:

"Imagine a world where Christmas comes once a year, but only to one, two or three boys or girls who have been especially good. All the other well-behaved children receive no gifts, and those lucky few who were chosen become the centre of attention and no longer have time to do the chores that led to them being picked out in the first place. Not to mention that some of the other children are now a little jealous of the presents and the attention bestowed on their former playmates. Wouldn't that be a shame?
Of course, many more children are given Christmas presents every year, but the Nobel Prize Committee cannot be so generous. The rules of the Nobel Foundation — the private institution that administers the award of the Nobel Prizes — stipulate that each prize can be awarded to only one, two or three individuals."

After considering the aims of the prize in the years since it was first created, and reviewing some of the more contentious decisions, the Editorial concludes that science in Alfred Nobel's time was a pursuit of a few individuals, "a far cry from the worldwide endeavour of modern research groups. Giving a prize to all the people who have contributed to a scientific advance — integrating the curve of work from summer students to group leaders — would be fairer, but less likely to generate easily digestible headlines.
And that is where the Nobel Prize is of great benefit to science — rather than individual scientists. The day of the Nobel Prize in Chemistry announcement is the one day of the year that chemistry is guaranteed to generate headlines, and positive ones at that."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 28, 2009
Categories: Awards | Permalink | Comments (0)

Nature Publishing Group's managing director, Stephen Inchcoombe, has just written his annual letter to the company's customers. NPG's customers are varied: as well as authors and peer-reviewers, they include readers, subscribers, librarians, institutions, advertisers, suppliers, partners, sponsors, and more. The annual letter is, necessarily, broad, so I'll highlight here a few points of particular interest to authors:
--A new XML repository for nature.com and other infrastructure improvements are the foundations for NPG to deliver a new wave of applications in the coming year
--In April 2010 we will introduce Nature Communications, an online-only peer-reviewed journal offering rapid publication for high-quality research across the biological, chemical and physical sciences, with a mixed publishing model
--Nature Chemistry, launched in April 2009, showcases the kind of innovative publishing functionality we want to provide. Highlighting chemical compounds in articles, redrawing chemical structures to be machine-readable and enhanced chemical compound reference pages created by journal editors, all further the journal article's role as an integral part of the reader's workflow. These advances will be applied to Nature Chemical Biology, Nature and other NPG journals in the near future
--NPG now publishes 16 of the top 50 (32%) journals by Impact Factor, twice as many as any other scientific publisher
--Expanded content in Nature Medicine from January and significant improvements to Nature later in the year, with no commensurate price increases
--Closer integration of nature.com and Nature Network, our social network for scientists. Comments on online journal articles will become part of the commenter's Nature Network profile, acknowledging that contributions to the scientific record stretch far beyond the journal article itself
--Scientific American became part of NPG in 2009, after many years as a sister Holtzbrinck organization. Expect to see functionality, services and interlinking between Scientific American and NPG journals and resources from next year.

The whole letter is published at NPG's press website; we welcome your feedback and comments.
More information about Nature Publishing Group and its executive committee.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 25, 2009
Categories: Author services, Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0)

Individual genomes vary, not only in sequence, but in both their structural organization and in the number of sequence copies they contain. The technology now exists to understand the mechanisms by which genomes diverge, so we can investigate the consequences of copy number variation for gene expression and clinical phenotypes. This month (September), Nature Genetics presents a Focus of articles published in Nature and Nature Genetics, free to read online, on copy number variation, which highlights the complementary roles of paired-end sequencing and oligonucleotide array technology in research discovery.
As well as an Editorial ('Making diversity count') and an NPG library of relevant past articles, the Focus consists of the following research articles:

A highly annotated whole-genome sequence of a Korean individual
Jong-Il Kim et al.

The DNA replication FoSTeS/MMBIR mechanism can generate genomic, genic and exonic complex rearrangements in humans
Feng Zhang et al.

Increased LIS1 expression affects human and mouse brain development
Weimin Bi et al.

Mapping and sequencing of structural variation from eight human genomes
Jeffrey M Kidd et al.

Closing gaps in the human genome with fosmid resources generated from multiple individuals
Donald Bovee et al.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 24, 2009
Categories: NPG special content | Permalink | Comments (0)

Charles Darwin's theory of descent with modification by means of natural selection has stood the test of time, with new discoveries in genetics and the mathematical basis of natural selection providing ever growing evidence for the theory. The October issue of Nature Reviews Neuroscience — contains an online focus, free to access online for six months from the issue date, celebrating the contribution of Darwin's ideas to our current understanding of the evolution of the nervous system. The articles in this special issue discuss the molecular, cellular and structural changes that have contributed to CNS (central nervous system) evolution and their functional consequences. The focus consists of reviews and perspectives on:
The origin and evolution of synapses
Tomás J. Ryan & Seth G. N. Grant
Considering the evolution of regeneration in the central nervous system
Elly M. Tanaka & Patrizia Ferretti
Evolution of the neocortex: a perspective from developmental biology
Pasko Rakic
Chordate roots of the vertebrate nervous system: expanding the molecular toolkit
Linda Z. Holland
Sleep viewed as a state of adaptive inactivity
Jerome M. Siegel
MicroRNAs tell an evo–devo story
Kenneth S. Kosik
Editors' summary of these articles.
NPG library of articles on CNS evolution.
Nature celebrates Darwin 200.
Nature Publishing Group celebrates Darwin 200 with a range of articles from its journals.
Fifteen evolutionary gems from Nature's archives.
More about Nature Reviews Neuroscience.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 23, 2009
Categories: NPG special content | Permalink | Comments (0)

Via press release: Nature Publishing Group (NPG) and the Associazione Differenziamento e Morte Cellulare (ADMC) have announced a new open access journal, Cell Death & Disease. Launching in January 2010, Cell Death & Disease will explore the area of cell death from a translational medicine perspective. The journal is now accepting submissions.
Cell Death & Disease is a sister journal to the well-established and highly respected journal Cell Death & Differentiation. Together, the two journals provide a unified forum for scientists, clinicians and members of the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry.
Cell Death & Disease is devoted to the biology of cell death in the pathogenesis of human diseases or relevant animal models. The journal aims to publish papers that present novel observations in the field of cell death, with pathophysiological or medical implications. Particular emphasis will be given to clinical, translational and applied research through its five sections: experimental medicine, cancer, immunity, internal medicine and neuroscience.
Cell Death & Disease will be online only and will make all content freely available to all researchers worldwide. There will be an processing charge of £2,000 / $3,000 / €2,400 for each article accepted for publication.
The editorial team is led by Gerry Melino, Guido Kroemer and Pierluigi Nicotera, and will include a highly respected international editorial board.
Cell Death & Disease preliminary website.
Cell Death & Disease: journal scope.
Submit your manuscript to Cell Death & Disease.
The journal's guide to authors.
Summary of author benefits.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 22, 2009
Categories: NPG special content, Publications, Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0)

A final reminder that The Source Event careers fair takes place in London later this week - Friday 25 September. The Source Event, now in its 3rd successful year, is a dedicated science career fair that combines a dynamic exhibition with conference and workshop sessions. The event will showcase opportunities in the United Kingdom and the rest of Europe for careers in science, be it in industrial research, research organizations or academia.
Jobseekers will be able to meet with potential employers who are offering hundreds of vacancies. Plenary and workshop sessions will provide a unique opportunity to meet high-profile scientists and gain careers information and advice. The details of the programme are now available. The sessions are split into three streams, for graduates, for postdocs, and for non-traditional careers. Among the speakers are Gene Russo, editor of NatureJobs, who will talk about careers in science writing, and Sowmya Swaminathan, a Senior Editor at Nature Cell Biology, who will describe what editors look for in a paper and will provide advice on how to get your work published in a leading scientific journal.

The Source Event in London will take place at the Business Design Centre. There will be a second event in Berlin in December.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 21, 2009
Categories: Careers | Permalink | Comments (0)

Continuing the theme of yesterday's post about data sharing, Nature Biotechnology is running an Editorial this month (Nature Biotech. 27, 777; 2009), 'DNA confidential', pointing out that as "the cost of human genome sequencing plunges and large-scale genome-phenotype studies become possible, society should do more to reward those individuals who choose to disclose their data, despite the risks". The Editorial continues:

"The genome sequence of Patient Zero is disclosed on p. 847 of this issue. The paper is notable not only because it provides the first description of the performance of a single-molecule platform in sequencing a human genome (90% of it, at least), but also because Stanford professor Stephen Quake (aka Patient Zero) opted to tell the world that it was his DNA that had been sequenced. Like scientific pioneers before him, Quake is heroically self-experimenting—testing the risks in publishing identifiable personal information of the most intimate kind."

The Editorial goes on to weigh up some of the risks and benefits to an individual and to society at large if people's genome sequences are generally available, covering healthcare, privacy issues and costs, concluding that "There will be some individuals, like Steve Quake, who will provide samples and data without an incentive; but when it comes to exploring the basis of being human and moving toward the goal of genomic medicine, society needs to do more to provide personal incentives to those who choose to disclose their data, despite the risks. After all, everybody will ultimately benefit—both those who share and those who choose not to."

Single-molecule sequencing of an individual human genome
Dmitry Pushkarev, Norma F Neff & Stephen R Quake
Nature Biotechnology 27, 847-850; 2009. doi:10.1038/nbt.1561

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 17, 2009
Categories: Data availability, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Sharing data is good. But sharing your own data? That can get complicated. As two research communities who held meetings on this question in Rome and in Toronto in May report their proposals to promote data sharing in biology, a special issue of Nature (10 September 2009) examines the cultural and technical hurdles that can get in the way of good intentions. Some of the authors of these proposals are participating in two online forums (Rome and Toronto) at Nature Network - so please accept our invitation to visit and have your say on these questions.
More details:
The two research communities held meetings with a broad range of stakeholders to discuss ways to promote data sharing in biology. Data producers and users met at a workshop in Toronto to discuss the benefits and best practices of rapid data release prior to publication. Ewan Birney, Tom Hudson and colleagues report the main conclusions of these discussions in a community statement, free to access here.
The Toronto group propose that the principles for early release of genomics data should be extended to other large datasets in biology and medicine. A grace period should be allowed, if requested, to enable data producers to analyse and publish their dataset, but this should be limited to one year. The authors also suggest a set of best practices for funding agencies, scientists and journal editors.
The recommendations are intended to spark community discussion on this subject. Ewan Birney, Tom Hudson and others will be responding to reader comments in our Nature Network forum. Be sure to have your say.
Mouse researchers, along with funding agencies and publishers, met in Rome to address the barriers preventing more effective sharing of data and biomaterials — particularly mouse strains and embryonic stem cells. Their agenda, free to access here, suggests guidelines to enable sharing of materials under the least restrictive terms, avoiding material transfer agreements where possible.
The Rome participants argue that funding organizations, journals and researchers need to work together to encourage better use of public repositories and to promote a ‘research commons’ in mouse biology.
The recommendations are intended to spark community discussion on this subject. Paul Schofield and others will be responding to reader comments in our Nature Network forum. Be sure to have your say.
See also the Editorial (free to access online) in the same issue of Nature (461, 145; 2009): 'Data's shameful neglect', opining that research cannot flourish if data are not preserved and made accessible. All concerned must act accordingly.
Nature's special issue on data sharing.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 16, 2009
Categories: Data availability, NPG special content, Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0)

Are you watching the Nobel laureates on Nature Video? Each year, hundreds of young researchers from around the world meet with Nobel prizewinning scientists on Lindau Island in Germany. In 2009 it was the turn of the chemists, and Nature Publishing Group was there to capture moments of this unique meeting of minds on film.
Nature Video presents five short films on chemistry plus a special film feature on climate change. Join laureates and young researchers as they discuss the future of medicine, consider the ethics of nanotechnologies, plan new collaborations, and seek ways to avoid dangerous climate change. The videos are archived as they are published and can be accessed at this Nature Video Lindau page:
24 August: an introduction to the LIndau meetings and the films
27 August: breaking down Alzheimer’s with Aaron Ciechanover
3 September: nanotechnology, use and misuse with Harry Kroto
10 September: smart drugs and sneaky microbes with Peter Agre
17 September: seeing green with Roger Tsien and Richard Ernst
24 September: catalysts and collaborations with Richard Schrock
1 October: climate change: The two-degree target

Nature Chemistry report of the 2009 meeting.
Films of the 208 Lindau Nobel laurate meeting, on physics.
Nature Physics report on the 2008 meeting.
Multimedia at Nature.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 15, 2009
Categories: Disciplines, NPG special content | Permalink | Comments (0)

Translating a basic finding into a new therapy requires us to speak many languages—scientific, clinical, legal and financial. Yet most of us are hopelessly 'monolingual', a limitation that substantially slows translational research. Steps have been taken to address this problem, but a lot remains to be done, as described in September's Editorial in Nature Medicine 'In the land of the monolingual' (15, 975; 2009). The Editorial begins optimistically:
"Congratulations! You've just published a paper in Nature Medicine identifying a new target to treat your favorite disease and are eager to take this finding to the clinic. Excellent, but where do you start? Are you familiar with all the steps you need to take from your discovery to a clinical trial?" It contiunes with much valuable advice and references for those wishing to navigate the translational pathway from bench to clinic, focusing on new initiatives in the main areas of resources and training. Even though there are some positive approaches, the Editorial concludes that "the best ways to facilitate translational research have yet to be discovered. However, their sheer existence offers hope that translational research will become smoother, speeding up the rate at which drugs and medical devices make it to the clinic. At the same time, it is clear that we need to do a lot more on a global scale to empower scientists with the education necessary to make a real translational impact. If each of us tries to become at least 'bilingual', we might feel a little less overwhelmed by the Tower of Babel that translational research has become."

Related article in the same issue of Nature Medicine (15, 1006-1009; 2009):
The advancement of translational medicine—from regional challenges to global solutions
Salvatore Albani & Berent Prakken
The Arizona Arthritis Center, University of Arizona, and the Center for Molecular and Cellular Intervention, University Medical Center Utrecht. Both authors are at Eureka Institute for Translational Medicine, Siracusa, Italy.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 14, 2009
Categories: Disciplines, Education, Support | Permalink | Comments (0)

The next Nature Debate is on 21 September at King's Place, London, and marries together ideas scientific and pecuniary. The 1980s saw the rise of the ‘rocket scientists’ of finance – as engineers, mathematicians and physicists rejected careers in science and technology and instead opted to work for banks. What part did they play in the financial crisis? And what is the future of science in finance? Join leading experts from science and banking as they debate whether the crisis was the result of bankers and regulators failing to grasp complicated, expert knowledge; and whether scientific knowledge – in particular fields such as complex systems, ecological economics and human behaviour – could help to ensure that economies are better understood and better regulated.
And those leading experts? Physicist turned financial mathematician Tim Johnson (Heriot-Watt University); researcher, entrepreneur and journalist John Browning; and Nature Consulting Editor Ehsan Masood. Nature Network community manager and London expert Matt Brown will be in the Rotunda bar before and after the event, and looks foward to meeting you there.
Book tickets for the Nature Debate.
Nature's Recession Watch special: with news, opinion, podcast, features and blogs, the journal keeps you updated on what it all means for science. Will your research funding be cut? How secure is your company or research institution? And can the meltdown actually create opportunities for science?

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 11, 2009
Categories: Public and media | Permalink | Comments (0)

Scientific publishing seems to be moving in several contradictory directions. Against these conflicting trends, EMBO reports seeks to re-assert the importance of the short-format article, carrying a single key message of ground-breaking significance. So writes the journal's Editor, Howie Jacobs (EMBO reports 10, 935; 2009). Against a background of screeds of scientific articles, blogs and other commentary available on the internet, and vast mountains of supplementary information and data, the short-format of EMBO reports is increasingly popular. From the Editorial:
"Our philosophy is that science proceeds in steps. Each major conceptual advance towards a complete understanding—whether of a macromolecule, an organelle, the cell or the organism—should be documented properly, judged on its merits and made rapidly available for the community. In a fast-moving field such as molecular biology, erroneous findings inevitably make their way into print; however, any resulting damage is minimized if knowledge is parcelled into manageable chunks. When too many different findings are bundled together, valid results can be 'contaminated' by their association with those that prove to be flawed, and significant errors might be overlooked. More importantly, crucial discoveries should not require sophisticated data-mining tools to be accessible."
The Editorial goes on to define the key features the editors look for in a "short report" - encapsulation of the key message in a single sentence, novelty, significance for the field, and broad interest to the molecular biology community. Those who think their work fits these criteria and are considering submitting to EMBO reports will find the Editorial a helpful guide.

EMBO reports guide to authors.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 10, 2009
Categories: Format, Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0)

Public trust in science is vital. But how do we ensure trust without imposing authority? An Editorial in the September issue of Nature Physics (5, 613; 2009) asks "where does evidence stop and trust in authority begin? Televisions, computers and other technological wonders are proof enough to convince most people of the validity of the physical principles on which they are based. But what of global warming, evolution and other issues in which science and politics or beliefs collide? Whom is the public to believe?"
Pointing out problems such as the media's tendency to provide "balance" - equal time to fringe or wrong science, which can inaccurately distort perceptions; the lack of scientificially trained journalists and programme-makers; and the inherent uncertainty of science, the Editorial suggests that more and better general scientific education is not enough. At some level, trust in scientific expert opinion is inevitable, coupled with "a better awareness of the importance of science to politics, policy and collective prosperity, coupled with healthy, informed scepticism of the claims of scientists and non-scientists alike."

Also in the September issue of Nature Physics (5, 613; 2009): Don't overdo it. 'Fun' science may grab summer headlines, but only the real thing has a lasting effect.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 09, 2009
Categories: Education, Public and media | Permalink | Comments (0)

Nature and Icon Films cordially invite you to a private screening of the feature film CREATION.
Please join us on Wednesday 16 September 2009 at the Science Museum in London for this advance screening. Director Jon Amiel and Oscar winning Producer Jeremy Thomas will introduce the film, followed by a screening on the Science Museum's IMAX screen.
CREATION is the powerful story of Charles Darwin and the single most explosive idea in history.
Based upon Randal Keynes’s book, Annie’s Box about the life of his great great grandfather Charles Darwin, the film stars Paul Bettany, Jennifer Connelly, Jeremy Northam, Toby Jones and Benedict Cumberbatch.
Drinks reception: 1830
Screening: 1915
Location: Science Museum, Exhibition Road, South Kensington, London SW7 2DD, UK.
Please RSVP by email. It is essential to RSVP in order to confirm that a seat is available.
From the Nature review of Annie's Box (Nature 411, 739-740; 2001), by Bruce Weber:
Keynes sees in Darwin's relationship with his daughter threads that tie together disparate aspects of his life and thought. He makes a compelling case and reveals an aspect of Darwin that should be incorporated into our total picture of him. The writing is graceful, the illustrations are apt and affecting, and the thesis is convincingly presented.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 08, 2009
Categories: Communication, Public and media | Permalink | Comments (0)

The cell biology literature contains manipulated data that distort findings, usually in an attempt to 'beautify' and, rarely, to commit fraud, states the September Editorial in Nature Cell Biology (11, 1045; 2009, free to read online) According to the Editorial, a National Academy of Sciences (NAS) report, 'Ensuring the Integrity, Accessibility, and Stewardship of Research Data in the Digital Age', "arrives at no hard and fast rules; the panel found that different fields have quite different requirements. In the words of panel chairs Phillip Sharp and Daniel Kleppner, "the report provides a framework for dealing with the challenges to the community generated by the onrush of digital technology." Nevertheless, the key tenets that researchers are responsible for ensuring the integrity and accuracy of their data and appropriate training in the management of research data, that all data and experimental details from papers be publicly accessible and carefully archived to allow verification and to facilitate future discoveries, and that field-specific standards have to be developed by researchers, funders, societies and journals, benefit from being spelled out in one document."
Many of the recommendations in the report already are the policy of Nature Cell Biology and the other Nature journals: the Editorial provides further information about these, including references to past Editorials, with particular emphasis on various aspects of data manipulation and plagiarism -- which, although widely unrealised, extends to concepts as well as to copying text and illustrations.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 07, 2009
Categories: Access, Data availability, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

Metagenomics sprang from advances in sequencing technology, and continued improvements are providing data in quantities unimaginable a few years ago. But without concerted efforts, the amount of data will quickly outpace the ability of scientists to analyse it. The September Editorial of Nature Methods (6, 623; 2009), 'Metagenomics versus Moore's law' draws attention to some articles in the same issue of the journal that illustrate some of the dangers and problems, as well as the solutions that are being sought.
Three years ago, the Editorial continues, the first two second-generation metagenomes were reported at less than 40 megabases each. Now, there are more than 4,000 sequenced metagenomes that would take years or tens of years to analyse (depending on the processing power used). Major initiatives are needed to avoid metagenome-analysis gridlock: according to the Editorial, funding agencies need to increase support for data analysis; and the community needs to improve data-sharing through standards and centralized coordination and by aggregating computationally intensive operations. The conclusion:
"This summer, after discussions at the International Conference on Systems for Intelligent Molecular Biology, community members formed the M5 (metagenomics, metadata, metaanalysis, multiscale-models and metainfrastructure) Consortium under the roof of the Genomics Standards Consortium to devise a solution to the coming gridlock. Their proposed 'M5 Platform'—to be announced later this year—deserves the support of the community, funding agencies and those who hold the keys to the high-performance computing centers. Unless major efforts are taken immediately, researchers will find they have a wealth of data but no way to interpret it."
Readers' comments and discussion of this Editorial are welcomed at Methagora, the Nature Methods blog.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 04, 2009
Categories: Data availability | Permalink | Comments (0)

Personal GenoME & Medicine: Hype or Reality? So runs the title of the next Talkscience evening at the British Library in London on 23 September. As usual, there is a Nature Network forum to provide more details of the event and to start the discussion going online before the meeting itself, so readers are encouraged to check that out and contribute ideas. How is cheaper, faster DNA sequencing helping or hindering our ability to understand disease, treatment and prevention? Which of the many single-nucleotide polymorphisms that have been identified in genome-wide association studies might be causal to a disease? How will advances in genome technologies lead to better diagnosis and treatments? What are the legal, ethical and other issues concerning "direct to consumer" personalised genomics?
These and other topics will be debated on 23 September, in an evening beginning with a talk by Alan Ashworth of the Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre of the UK Instiute for Cancer Research.
SIgn up here to attend the Talk Science evening on 23 September.
Join and contribute to the associated Nature Network forum.
Other Nature Network forums.

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 03, 2009
Categories: Communication, Conferences, Ethics | Permalink | Comments (0)

September's Editorial in Nature Chemical Biology (5, 601; 2009) addesses the question of how to foster open scientific dialogue in the digital age while respecting the integrity of the scientific process. The publication of peer-reviewed papers in scientific journals is the primary means by which discoveries are disseminated through the scientific community, with the most exciting being subsequently communicated to the public through the scientific media. The Editorial continues:

"New media such as blogs and Twitter can greatly facilitate scientific communication, and may offer a route for engaging scientists more directly with the public. Yet the 'scientist as journalist' model that is supported by these technologies presents challenges as a general mechanism for distributing scientific information. Transmission of unpublished data on the Internet circumvents the peer-review process that serves as our primary quality control mechanism to ensure that scientific studies are technically sound before they are communicated to the public. Presenting unpublished results from meeting presentations and posters as established facts may create misunderstandings between scientists and could lead to major misconceptions of ongoing research discoveries by the general public, who may have a limited understanding of the scientific method and peer review.
The first step toward a more open system of scientific communication is an enhanced public understanding of the scientific method and the peer-review process. Scientists understand this, but they must play a greater role in these educational efforts. In the meantime, we maintain that embargoed press coverage of newly published scientific studies serves an important purpose to ensure that science reporting occurs only after peer review. Press embargoes also provide adequate lead time for journalists to prepare informed news stories to coincide with publication of a new research study (for example, see Nature Publishing Group's embargo policy). Scientists who wish to engage with the online community should draw on the positive aspects of this system as they aim for greater openness.
Scientists should experiment with new communication styles and technologies, which offer potential benefits for collaboration, data sharing and the advancement of scientific thinking. As these technologies gain wider acceptance, scientists must agree on guidelines for their appropriate use in the context of scientific discourse, and these guidelines should be consistent with our common goal of ensuring the integrity of the scientific information that we share among scientists and communicate to nonscientists."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 02, 2009
Categories: Communication, Pre-publicity | Permalink | Comments (0)

Are the days of print journals numbered — and if they are, what will that mean for how we interact with the scientific literature? These questions are asked in Nature Chemistry's September Editorial (1, 421; 2009). The Editorial is sparked by The American Chemical Society's announcement that, with the exception of the Journal of the American Chemical Society and two review journals, "ACS titles publishing primary research will be printed in a landscape fashion that puts two article pages side-by-side on a single physical page. These changes are accompanied by new pricing schemes that will eliminate discounts for hardcopy journals, while offering subscribers incentives to upgrade from print to digital formats." This is inevitably seen by several observers as a precursor to eliminating the print editions of these journals.
Although, as the Nature Chemistry Editorial notes, there are many advantages to the online journal format, both in terms of the content itself and in terms of the financial and environmental cost of the printed medium. The Editorial concludes: "in all likelihood, it will probably come to pass that as this century grows older, printed journals will be consigned to history. And in some ways, that would be a shame. Printed materials have their own charm and practicality — no batteries required! — and will always have a loyal following. Whereas some individuals may be happy to replace their dusty bookshelves and their contents with a plastic electronic reader of some description, many would shudder at the thought.
Moreover, should chemistry publishing become an online-only endeavour, the concept of 'issues' also comes into question. With the ability to dynamically group articles on a website using criteria such as dates or keywords, does journal content need to be collated into bite-sized chunks if print is no longer a consideration? And without issues, what becomes of cover images? These serve to advertise both the journal and people's work — many conference talks are proudly emblazoned with journal covers, as doubtless are many people's offices.
Assuming sustainable models, the continued co-existence of print and digital editions of journals (especially for those that publish more than just review and research articles) would satisfy the needs of all readers — but whether this is a realistic goal in the long term remains to be seen."

Posted by Maxine Clarke on September 01, 2009
Categories: Author services, Publishing | Permalink | Comments (0)