« September 2009 | Main | November 2009 »

Archive by date: October 2009

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Photonics on the Nobel prize for physics

There's an interesting Editorial in Nature Photonics this month (November) about the 2009 Nobel prize for physics (Nat. Photon. 3, 605; 2009), won for two innovations in photonics that underpin society's adoption of information technology. From the Editorial: "What is particularly interesting about this year's choice of award is the strongly applied nature of the achievements and the prevalence of the technologies in today's society. Indeed, this is probably one of the rare instances where many of those working outside science are likely to have both an immediate familiarity with the topics of the award and an appreciation of their usefulness. After all, in developed countries fibre-optic communications underpin phone networks and the internet, and digital cameras are now considered a ubiquitous item in many households." The Nature Photonics editors are intrigued as to whether this year's award will set a Nobel precedent for honouring practical applications of scientific research.

Bookmark in Connotea

Scientists should resist the temptation to hype their results

According to an Editorial in today's Nature ( 461, 1174; 2009 - free to read online), "the temptation for scientists and their institutions to spin their research to the media, or to go publicity-mongering, is always there. And — as illustrated by the excessive public-relations campaign surrounding "Ida", a fossil presented as a missing link in human evolution (see Nature 459, 484; 2009 and Nature 461, 1040; 2009) — too many in the media will buy into the initial hype. Such behaviour is corrosive to the process of scholarly scientific communication. Research institutions must not allow it to become the norm."
The Editorial discusses the recent announcement of results from an HIV vaccine trial in Thailand, in which the trial's sponsors announced that it had been a success in that the vaccine had a statistically significant effect on preventing infection. But the full data for the claim were not made available for almost a month after the announcement - and included two other data sets in which the effects were not statistically significant.
Fortunately, states the Editorial, such stories are still rare in science. "Witness the way scientists have behaved since the beginning of the current H1N1 flu pandemic, in which the urgent threat to health creates legitimate tensions between getting results out fast and respecting peer review. Most researchers have negotiated this tension well, through a combination of fast-track publication by journals and online pre-publication sharing of preliminary data — but not through hyping their results."

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Neuroscience speaks up for young researchers

The Editorial in the November issue of Nature Neuroscience (12, 1351; 2009) emphasizes the importance of the US National Institutes of Health (NIH) policy of funding an increasing number of grants to young investigators with merit scores below the 'payline'. Early-stage investigators are "especially vulnerable to funding crisis and are often at a disproportionate disadvantage when competing with more established laboratories for R01 grants. Such actions that protect some of these young investigators are critical if we are to retain young scientists and encourage our future research base", states the journal. This problem may have been exacerbated by recent efforts to streamline the grant peer-review process, which may mean that evaluators are putting even more store on previous track-record, hence putting young researchers at a greater disadvantage. The Editorial identifies other factors that could be hindering young researchers in the cold funding climate. Although affirmative actions to help younger, less established, researchers are seen by some as unfair, Nature Neuroscience concludes: "Given the dismal projections for NIH budget growth, a step of this magnitude is necessary to support young investigators and to preserve the future of the scientific community as a whole."

Nature Neuroscience journal website.
About Nature Neuroscience.
Nature Neuroscience guide to authors.

Bookmark in Connotea

Two views of the Lindau Nobel chemistry laureates' meeting

Each year since 1951, young researchers and Nobel laureates have gathered on the shores of Lake Constance for a unique scientific conference. In 2009 the meeting was dedicated to chemistry, and laureates and students all came away enriched by their experiences. Martin Chalfie, one of the three recipients of the 2008 Nobel prize in Chemistry, reports what they learned from each other in the November issue of Nature Chemistry (1, 586-587; 2009) He writes:
"From their reading or from simply listening to my talk, the students generated a large number of fascinating questions. They wanted to know details of the experiments and they wanted to discuss potential future experiments. Conclusions about my research that had taken me years to realize (and which I have not written about or described in my talk) were instantly suggested by several of the students at the session. Seeing their excitement and quickness was humbling, but also invigorating.
The meeting allowed the students (as well as the laureates) to broaden their horizons, to have a chance to meet, exchange ideas, and learn about new areas of research from investigators from all over the world (the conference participants came from 67 different countries). The word 'exchange' is important here, because I don't believe that the real benefits were associated with hearing advice from a bunch of older scientists who had been fortunate enough to get some recognition for their work." The meeting's significance is "the acknowledgement it gives to young scientists, especially at a time when they do not get much recognition, that they are on their way to succeeding in science, and that we think that they are important. Although they really do not need any seal of approval, everyone likes to get the occasional pat on the back."
In a companion article in the same issue of Nature Chemistry (1, 587-590; 2009), Jeffrey R. Lancaster, a fourth-year graduate student in the Department of Chemistry, Columbia University, looks back at what he got out of the Lindau meeting: "two subtle points have ultimately distinguished the Lindau meeting for me as a unique event of which I was honoured to have been a part.
First, conversation and the sharing of ideas were fostered not solely between scientists with comparable levels of experience, but also across scientific generations and geographies. I had worthwhile discussions with my peers from Australia, China, India, the Netherlands, Poland and Spain (to name but a few), and was able to speak to scientists at various stages of their careers, from undergraduate to graduate students, postdocs, professors, governmental scientists and, of course, Nobel laureates. Second, the activities pursued by scientists outside of publishable, academic research also featured prominently at the meeting. That scientists might have a life apart from, and in addition to, their research is most often a topic best reserved for conference happy hours, not keynote addresses."

Bookmark in Connotea

Goodbye from Nature Reports Stem Cells

We are sad to announce that this month brings the last update of Nature Reports Stem Cells.
When we launched in June 2007, we wanted to support the stem cell field and the interested public by providing freely available content. Stem cell research was then - and is still - exciting and expanding. It requires highly varied experts to think and work together, and it requires the support and understanding of non-scientists. We believe we have been successful in creating a venue that highlights and explores the many facets and implications of stem cell science. It is now time for us to move on to fresh publishing challenges.
We have been helped by many contributors and experts who have generously given their time and insight. We give a heartfelt thanks to everyone who wrote articles or gave interviews, advice, and words of encouragement.
NRSC and its blog, the Niche, will continue to remain online as an archive. Nature and its sister titles remain committed, as ever, to publishing new research and news about stem cells.
Monya Baker, Editor
Natalie DeWitt, Editor at Large

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature special: Climate of compromise

The road to Copenhagen. With the UN Climate Change Conference just six weeks away, Nature this week (22 October issue) assesses how much - or little - progress is being made on tackling climate change in a set of Opinion articles and News Features, all free to read online for one month from the date of issue, as well as an Editorial (free to read online). The latest round of negotations shows that the gulf between rich and poor nations is as great as ever, and hopes of a strong agreement are rapidly fading. Raúl Estrada-Oyuela, a diplomat who guided the Kyoto negotiations, argues that success in Copenhagen will depend on the skills of the lead negotiator (Nature 461, 1056-1057; 2009) Meanwhile, Rajendra Pachauri, chairman of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, comments on the Indian negotiation stance (p. 1054), while Jiahua Pan, of the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, examines the Chinese perspective on reducing global emissions (p. 1055) . A pair of news features take us around the world to look at efforts to adapt to climate change in Bhutan (pp 1042- 1046), and a project in Peru to monitor forest carbon (pp 1048-1052).
Successful international negotiations share some important characteristics with scientific research, argues an Editorial this week (Nature 461, 1027-1028; 2009). Both are iterative processes, in which results from one step help to determine the path forward. They require time and perseverance. And they rarely travel in a straight line. Countries should endeavour to build on the positive actions of the past year, both before and after the Copenhagen summit.
See also: more articles, the free Nature podcast and more online extras.

Bookmark in Connotea

Five years on for the Allen Brain Atlas

In their Perspective 'The Allen Brain Atlas: 5 years and beyond' (Nat. Rev. Neurosci. 10, 821-828; 2009), Allan R. Jones, Caroline C. Overly and Susan M. Sunkin of the Allen Institute describe an experiment on a massive scale: a web-based, genome-wide atlas of gene expression in the adult mouse brain The development of this atlas faced a combination of great technical challenges and a non-traditional open research model, they write, and it encountered many hurdles on the path to completion and community adoption. Having overcome these challenges, it is now a fundamental tool for neuroscientists worldwide and has set the stage for the creation of other similar open resources. Nevertheless, there are many untapped opportunities for exploration.
The Perspective, in the November issue of Nature Reviews Neuroscience, looks back on the 5 years from the inception of the Allen Brain Atlas to the present, highlighting challenges and the contributions that it has made to neuroscience. The authors discuss the advantages and caveats of using this unique resource, how it is currently being used and point to opportunities for further exploration. They conclude by describing the ever-expanding suite of related resources that have become available since the atlas was launched, and comment on those that will be coming in the next few years.

Allen Brain Atlas portal.
Allen developing mouse brain map.
Allen Institute human cortex study.
NeuroCommons project.
Mutant mouse regional resource centers.
Nature Reviews Neuroscience.
About Nature Reviews Neuroscience.


Bookmark in Connotea

The Nature Autumn '09 Debate - Science in Cinema

From the prescient visions of space travel in 2001: A Space Odyssey, through to the apocalyptic warnings presented in The Day After Tomorrow, science fiction cinema has examined many of the theoretical possibilities and consequences of science and technology. But just how plausibly does the genre interpret such possibilities and how accurately can it predict what the future holds? Have the futuristic celluloid visions of film-makers inspired scientists to fulfil some of these visions? And are movies the best way of promoting environmental awareness to contemporary societies? Join a lively debate organized by the weekly science journal, Nature.

Speakers
Adam Rutherford (chair) is an audio video editor at Nature, science writer and presents television and radio programmes, most recently Cell for BBC4.
Henry Gee (panellist) is a senior biology editor at Nature. He also edits the ‘Futures' science fiction column in Nature, and has written several non-fiction and fiction books.
Mark Henderson (panellist) is science editor of The Times and a double winner of the Norwich Union / Medical Journalists' Association awards. He is the author of 50 Genetics Ideas You Really Need to Know.
Gia Milinovich (panellist) is a technology writer and broadcaster as well as a new media consultant for the film industry. She has worked on various films, including Sunshine, 28 Weeks Later, X Files: I Want To Believe and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.

The Nature Autumn '09 Debate - Science in Cinema is at Kings Place, London on Monday 9 November at 19:00. For further details and to book, see the Kings Place website.

Bookmark in Connotea

Being communicative but careful with the media

Bad journalism is best met not with red-faced indignation, but with good journalism. The truth is the best revenge. So concludes an Editorial in the current issue of Nature (461, 848; 2009) about an email campaign to a US climate scientist who backed out of participating in a documentary when he realized that the film-makers had not been clear with him about their intentions. Occasionally, scientists have been hoodwinked by the media, but these are rare events compared with the vast majority of programmes and other media articles. From the Editorial:
"Most journalists and documentarians are honestly trying to report the facts, and scientists have a responsibility to tell the public about their work — especially if it is supported by public money.
Fortunately, scientists can do much to protect themselves. When someone asks for an interview, for example, a scientist should enquire about starting assumptions, the intended audience and the identity of the project's backers. And, if possible, researchers should check the earlier work of the journalists and any companies behind the film for a partisan tone, or unacceptable levels of sensationalism.
But if these efforts fail, and it is discovered too late that the film-makers are bent on using an on-tape interview to promote a view that seems unscientific, the question becomes what steps to take. There is rarely a way to withdraw an interview that was given on the record, for good reason. In any case, making a fuss can be a gift of publicity to film-makers. Schneider admits that he might have spared himself the deluge of e-mails had he just ignored the makers of Not Evil Just Wrong.
A better approach might well be to complain to the television channels and broadcasting regulators, many of which have standards for their programming. The Great Global Warming Swindle was censured by Ofcom, Britain's broadcasting regulator, for breaking several rules in its broadcasting code. And when the same documentary was aired by the Australian Broadcasting Corporation, it was followed by a point-by-point debate and rebuttal."

Bookmark in Connotea

Free poster on the transcriptome at Nature Reviews Genetics

Nature Reviews Genetics presents a free poster, 'The pervasive and interlinked transcriptome', in its November 2009 issue. Our knowledge of the eukaryotic transcriptome is being transformed as we come to realize that the proportion of the genome that is transcribed is far greater than expected. New insights into the diversity of transcriptional products are rapidly emerging. Technological advances, such as RNA deep sequencing, are driving an increased knowledge of how transcripts are encoded in intricate and overlapping ways and are processed into myriad RNAs.
Using snapshots at different levels of resolution – from chromosomes down to a few nucleotides – this poster provides a window into the layers of complexity and introduces transcriptional phenomena and types of RNA that are key topics in current research.
More about Nature Reviews Genetics.
Featured articles on genetics from across the Nature Publishing Group journals.
NPG '-omics' gateway.

Bookmark in Connotea

Polymath Project and Google Wave: open-source science

Two examples of open-source science are the subject of Opinion articles in this week's Nature. In the first of these, Timothy Gowers and Michael Nielsen describe their 'Polymath Project', which showed that many minds can work together to solve difficult mathematical problems, and reflect on the lessons learned for open-source science (Nature 461, 879-881; 2009). In the other article, Cameron Neylon says that Google Wave is the kind of open-source online collaboration tool that should drive scientists to wire their research and publications into an interactive data web (Nature 461, 881; 2009).
"Solving the current problems in science communication requires the intervention of strong companies such as Google", he writes. "But it will take more than technical advances to provoke scientists into taking full advantage of the web. We need pressure, and perhaps compulsion, from journals and funders to raise publishing standards to the new level made possible by such tools. Google Wave may not be, indeed is probably not, the whole answer. But it points the way to tools that build records and reproducibility into every step. And that has to be good for science."
Both these articles are free to read online for one week from the publication date (15 October).

Bookmark in Connotea

Editorial opportunity at Molecular Systems Biology

Molecular Systems Biology has a vacancy for a full-time research Editor. This exciting position involves working together with the existing editorial team on all aspects of the editorial process including critically reading submitted research, organizing peer-review, commissioning and editing reviews, and developing the content and editorial policies of the journal.
Molecular Systems Biology was launched by Nature Publishing Group and EMBO (the European Molecular Biology Organisation) in March 2005, and has rapidly become the premier journal in the fields of systems biology, synthetic biology and systems medicine.
This is a great opportunity to continue to work in science and to be intensively exposed to high quality research in the rapidly developing discipline of systems biology.
Qualifications and Experience: To meet the challenging tasks of this role, the ideal candidate will have a strong research background, a PhD in molecular biology and a keen interest in systems biology. Other essential attributes include a broad knowledge in cell and molecular biology, excellent written and verbal communication skills and a commitment to the communication of scientific ideas. An important aspect of the job is interaction with the scientific community and attending international conferences. Successful candidates must therefore be dynamic and outgoing, be prepared to travel, and have excellent interpersonal skills.
For more details, see the job posting at the EMBO website (scroll down the page).
Molecular Systems Biology journal website.
About the journal and the editors.
Guide to authors.
Open access policy.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Communications is open for submissions

Nature Communications is an innovative online science journal launching in Spring 2010, providing a unique forum for the rapid publication of high-quality research in all areas of the physical, chemical and biological sciences. Nature Communications offers:
- An online publishing arena for the entire scientific spectrum
- Rigorous peer review
- High-quality papers reporting fundamental scientific advances
- Rapid dissemination of accepted research to a broad audience
- An open-access publishing opportunity
You can now submit your research to Nature Communications using the journal's online manuscript tracking service.
We advise reading the journal's Guide to Authors before submitting your paper, for information about content types, how to submit, and the editorial process. Here is some more detail for authors:
Nature Communications is an online-only, multidisciplinary journal dedicated to publishing high-quality research in all areas of the biological, physical and chemical sciences. Papers published by the journal represent important advances of significance to specialists within each field.
Nature Communications encourages submissions in fields that aren't represented by a dedicated Nature research journal; for example developmental biology, plant science, microbiology, ecology and evolution, palaeontology, astronomy and high-energy physics. The editors particularly welcome submissions from cross-disciplinary fields, including biophysics, physical chemistry, environmental science and mathematical biology, although no area is excluded from consideration. In all cases, papers published in Nature Communications will be of high quality, without necessarily having the scientific reach of papers published in Nature and the Nature research journals.
Nature Communications is committed to providing an efficient service for both authors and readers. A streamlined peer-review system, together with the support of an Editorial Advisory Panel, allows a team of independent editors to make rapid and fair publication decisions. Prompt dissemination of accepted papers to Nature Publishing Group's wide readership and beyond is achieved through a programme of continuous online publication. Published manuscripts are enhanced by innovative web technologies, including interactive browsing and efficient data- and text-mining.
Further information:
About the editors of Nature Communications.
Open Access options.
Frequently asked questions about Nature Communications (PDF).
Contact the journal.
Nature Communications Nature Network forum, where you can read, post and discuss matters relating to the journal with the editors and other Nature Network users.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Medicine and Nature Biotechnology announce the SciCafé

Following on from yesterday's post about schemes to involve the general public in the daily lives of scientific researchers, Nature Medicine and Nature Biotechnology announce an initiative to connect commercially oriented academics with their local business community (Nat. Med. 15, 1095; 2009). The SciCafé is a series of networking events in Boston and San Francisco that help researchers connect with investors and serial entrepreneurs.
The SciCafé is intended to provide a showcase of the work of investigators publishing cutting-edge work to an invited audience of 30 or so business people. The first SciCafés were in Boston and San Francisco because each area not only produces a prodigious amount of high-quality science, but is also home to a large number of sophisticated, early-stage life science investors/entrepreneurs. Starting next month, the journals are extending the concept to Europe, with a SciCafé in planned in London. Nature Medicine writes:
"Academics are selected on their publication record and on the potential commercial interest of their research. Editorial responsibility for selection rests with the participating journals, which take an ecumenical approach, looking at the whole literature—not just papers published in Nature journals. Those selected are given one-on-one coaching by the editors on how best to present their research to an investor audience. We also invite the technology transfer offices of any selected academics to send a representative to the SciCafé.
In announcing the SciCafé to the broader biomedical community, we would like to also invite applications from investigators in the Boston, San Francisco or London areas who are interested in presenting. Applications should be sent to scicafe@us.nature.com outlining in 1,000 words the applicant's contact details, the three peer-reviewed papers most relevant to their work, a clear but brief description of the commercial potential and any associated intellectual property.
We acknowledge that many in academia have no interest in seeking closer ties with the investor community. But for those who do wish to commercialize their work, we hope SciCafé offers a new opportunity."

Bookmark in Connotea

NSMB on payoffs of engaging with the public

In its October Editorial, Nature Structural & Molecular Biology (16, 1003; 2009) asks researchers if they know how it feels to have 2,500 pairs of eyes watch them work. "Imagine the crowd staring intensely at you as you set up a PCR, admiring your smooth pipetting action and wondering what on earth is so fascinating about the DNA sequence you have in front of you. Hold on, they don't have to just wonder, they can buzz on the intercom to ask you what you're doing. That is the daily experience of hundreds of scientists who work at the Natural History Museum in London. It probably takes some getting used to." The Darwin Centre is pulling in the crowds as the United Kingdom's latest—and perhaps bravest—approach to communicating science. Researchers are on show as they prepare specimens for analysis, sequence DNA and compare and classify species. Scientists also take turns to give daily talks on their work in the new Attenborough studio.
The Darwin Centre is a fascinating exhibit, but it follows a long trend of efforts to demystify science. This phase of science communication began in the late 1980s with the well-meaning, but sometimes high-handed, approach of trying to teach the public what scientists thought they should know. But through trial and error a more informal and more equal way of talking about science began to dominate, particularly through the Café Scientifique movement - described in more detail in the Editorial.
The Editorial concludes that In the tough times ahead, science needs all the support it can get. Without constructive engagement with the public over subjects such as cloning and the use of embryonic stem cells, scientists risk ceding control to special interest groups with political agendas. "Engagement and listening to the public do pay off, and now is the time to prove that not only do we value the intellectual pursuit of science, but we understand its implications for society."

Bookmark in Connotea

Essential reading for Copenhagen at Nature Reports Climate Change

At the UN Climate Conference in Copenhagen this December, talk will turn to scientific, political and economic issues with a global reach and a long history — not easy to pick up from the daily news. Nature Reports Climate Change asked select experts on climate change what books we should be reading ahead of the big event. See Nature Reports Climate Change for the selections made my Mike Hulme, Tony Juniper, Mark Lynas, Oliver Morton, Ron Oxburgh, Rajendra K. Pachauri, Roger Pielke, Jr, Andrew Revkin and Joseph Romm, which range from popular scientific accounts to technical reports; and from explaining the controversies to passionate accounts of solutions. Some quotations from the recommendations:
--"a must-read book for those who want a primer on all the key solutions countries will be considering at Copenhagen."
--"Policymakers will have to forge a highly ambitious deal to avoid the crisis."
--" 'Climate change fatigue' is said to be an ailment slowly spreading through the media. As Copenhagen takes over the headlines, Bryan Lovell's lively new book — peering into the doubts, concerns and prejudices that have dogged climate negotiators — is an instant tonic for this malady."
--"The painful truth is that no one knows how to decarbonize the global economy.....— it's a lesson of history."
--"As governments head grimly into negotiations determined to avoid a policy failure, it's worth keeping in mind that the system they're hashing out is not the only possible one or even the best."
--"a grand agreement is less achievable than a set of specific deals on particular issues."
--"Beyond the frequently invoked battle-line between climate change 'believers' and 'sceptics', there is a deeper, and in the end more important, division of thinking."
--"This book is not going to help anyone get to grips with the intricacies of the UN climate negotiations, but if you want to lift your head from the trenches for an overview of the twenty-first century, it's a great place to start. "
--"it clearly maps out the serious consequences of inaction, as well as the feasibility and affordability of action both to adapt to the impacts of climate change and to mitigate emissions of greenhouse gases."

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature special issue on human genetics

The flow of human genetic information is growing into a deluge: from high throughput sequencing to genome wide association studies to copy number variation to personal genetic tests. In today's (8 October 2009) issue, Nature assesses their biological and medical value so far and asks - where should the field go next?
Nature 's special issue on human genetics can be found here.
Selected content is free to access online for one month from date of issue:

Opinion: An agenda for personalized medicine
Nature 461, 724-726 (2009).
Pauline C. Ng, Sarah S. Murray, Samuel Levy and J. Craig Venter find differences in results from two direct-toconsumer genetics-testing companies. They therefore give nine recommendations to improve predictions.

News Feature: Human genetics: Hit or miss?
Nature 461, 712-714 (2009).
Genome-wide association studies have identified hundreds of genetic clues to disease. Kelly Rae Chi looks at three to see just how on-target the approach seems to be.

Review Article: Finding the missing heritability of complex diseases
Teri A. Manolio et al. Nature 461, 747-753 (2009).
An examination of the potential sources of missing heritability and possible research strategies to enhance the potential of genetics of complex diseases for effective prevention or treatment.

And this week's Nature podcast features an interview with Pauline Ng in which she discusses personal genomics and other highlights from the special issue.

More from Nature's human genomics special issue.

Join Nature at the American Society of Human Genetics, 20-24 October 2009 in Honolulu. Visit booth #803 to pick up your free copy of the special human genetics themed issue and ask a representitive at the booth about our special 30% conference discount rate.

Other Nature news special collections.
Nature web focuses.

Bookmark in Connotea

EMBO reports vision of impact futures?

Everyone loves to hate citation metrics, but EMBO reports ( 10,1067; 2009) perhaps goes further than most in Howy Jacobs's October editorial vision of where it all may lead, which starts:

Unalaska, 2045. The announcement by the government of the Pacific Union that it will start to tax academic scientists according to their Impact Factor (IF) points has unleashed a storm of controversy. As the field that has traditionally, and for more than half a century, led the citation ratings, molecular biologists consider themselves to be at the forefront of this battle against such a blatant attack on academic freedom.
In the latter half of the twentieth century, a trend began to emerge, initially in the former USA, where scientists were expected to raise a substantial proportion—eventually the entirety—of their salary from competitive research grants. In return, academic institutions freed their professors from the formal responsibility to teach, while recouping enormous financial benefits in the form of what were then called 'overheads'. In the first decades of the present century, scientists and their personal financial advisors began to realize that this system made them, in effect, self-employed managers of small businesses.

The article continues at the EMBO reports journal website.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Methods celebrates methods (and being 5)

Nature Methods is five years old. To celebrate this anniversary, the journal looks at methodological development and its role in scientific inquiry in its October Editorial, In celebration of methods (Nat. Meth. 6, 687; 2009) and a special focus of commentaries discussing the impact and progress of methodological developments in the life sciences. The focus also includes a fun selection of papers and covers from the past five years.
Nature Methods' Chief Editor, Daniel Evanko, writes on Methagora, the journal's blog: "It's hard to believe that five years have gone by since Veronique Kiermer, Nicole Rusk and myself saw the first issue of Nature Methods go out the door. In some ways it doesn't feel like it was that long ago while in others it feels like much, much longer. But it has certainly been a rewarding and stimulating five years and we are thrilled with the success that Nature Methods has enjoyed. To help celebrate, Veronique asked a local pastry shop run her friend called "How Sweet It Is" to bake a cake using the cover image of our inaugural issue. It turned out spectacularly and tasted just as good. I'm hoping to convince Veronique to post a blog entry describing the undertaking with accompanying pictures." Check out Methagora for the mouth-watering cover images and updates about the anniversary celebrations.

Bookmark in Connotea

Data producers deserve citation credit, says Nature Genetics

Datasets released to public databases in advance of (or with) research publications should be given digital object identifiers to allow databases and journals to give quantitative citation credit to the data producers and curators, according to the October Editorial of Nature Genetics (41, 1045; 2009) .
After reviewing the arguments for assigning a citable credit to data, particularly those which are released publicly before formal publication in a journal, as is increasingly the case in some fields (and required by some funders), the Editorial asks: "What form should citable data identifiers take? They must work with existing unique resource identifier conventions and with the existing well-funded stable repositories used by research communities. However, these identifiers are not just for locating data but are for stably identifying the data units and versions with particular data producers, curators, funders and affiliations in a citable form. Because publications are currently the main source of scientific credit and because publishers have already developed citable digital object identifiers (DOI), it would seem to be their opportunity to grasp or to fumble. We propose citing DOIs that tag a combination of repository, database, accession, version, contributor and funder.
Of course, precise citation of all research output represents the bare minimum of respect for colleagues and competitors. This journal also endorses communication between data producers and data users. Whereas it is impossible for journals to restrict the use of data already in the public domain, we can show evidence of communication between producers and users to referees. Many funders of large resource projects now require a data release policy and plan for global analysis by the data producers. These parts of the successfully refereed grant should be published as a 'marker paper' or deposited in a citable preprint archive such as Nature Precedings. At very least, the details of the producers' work and intents should be available to users in a citable form in the database holding the data. Data users can submit an email demonstrating that they have contacted the data producers with their plan for use of the data and showing that they have read the producers' data release policy, conditions and plan for analysis."

Please see also the continuing Nature Network online discussions about pre-publication and post-publication data release. We welcome your views there.

Bookmark in Connotea

Fundamental scientific research is a vital endeavour

Obtaining financial support for scientific research is generally more difficult for work that is fundamental in nature rather than applied. In the October issue of Nature Chemistry, Bruce C. Gibb of the University of New Orleans contemplates how topics such as complexity might get their share — and why it is vital that they do (Nat. Chem. 1, 513-514; 2009). As he puts it: "The deeper and more fundamental the work, the further the bubbles of ideas and discoveries have to rise to the surface of contemporary life, and the more things become unpredictable. For example, was the Swedish physiologist Ulf Svante von Euler-Chelpin thinking about the mechanism of action of Aspirin when he was isolating compounds (prostaglandins) from sheep sperm? I think it's safe to say that he wasn't. Indeed, most scientists would probably agree that it doesn't necessarily take very long for life to throw up a completely unexpected use for the knowledge created by a fundamental discovery."
The "ideal" relationship between fundamental and applied research is explored in the article - but however one may look at it, the balance of funding is skewed in favour of applied work. Complexity is one example of fundamental chemical research, and there are welcome signs that funding agencies are beginning to recognize the importance of this discipline. Fundamental research may be harder to justify in a 30-second soundbite, but it is the "feeder system" for eventual economic benefits and societal advances.

Bookmark in Connotea

Nature Milestones in Light Microscopy

Nature Milestones in Light Microscopy is published today, 1 October 2009. Nature Milestones in Light Microscopy is a collaboration from Nature Methods, Nature Cell Biology and Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology, focusing on ground-breaking advances in light microscopy research. The field of light microscopy has revolutionized our understanding of cell biology and is continuing as new imaging tools and techniques are developed. The Nature Milestones in Light Microscopy supplement contains a series of short articles, called Milestones, presenting key developments in the field, written by editors from the Nature Publishing Group. In addition, selected content from Nature Milestones in Light Microscopy are freely available online.
Print copies of the supplement will be available at the NPG stand at the Society for Neuroscience (SFN) conference in October 2009 and the American Society for Cell Biology (ASCB) conference in December 2009.
Also of interest is Nature's recent News special on microscopy, consisting of a slideshow, News Features, opinion and various other articles. Microscopes are biologists' window to life — and advances in microscopy over recent years are revealing some breathtaking new views. The Nature special profiles five microscopes that are changing the ways that researchers see the world, and examines the challenges involved in collecting and interpreting the microscopic image.