The people you thought mattered in 2011

At the end of 2011 we published the Nature 10: ten people who mattered in science that year. We explained how we reached our choice, through discussion (and arguments). We also asked readers to tell us in a poll who they thought had a significant impact in science that year. Readers could vote for the people in the Nature 10 as well as ten others, some of whom had been nominated on Twitter. Seeing as we’re now well into 2012, it’s past time we reported the results.

The clear winner, with nearly 55% of the 1,631 votes, was Tasuhiko Kodama, who challenged the Japanese government’s handling of the Fukushima disaster. It’s a worthy choice, particularly with the anniversary of the earthquake, tsunami and nuclear disaster next week as a reminder of the damage that was wrought. However, we can only suspect that some kind of mini-voting campaign by Kodama fans pushed votes for him so much higher than any other name on the list.

The next favourite was Dario Autiero, whose team claimed to have found faster-than-light neutrinos (10.6%), followed by John Rogers, the engineer with a knack for turning physics into technology (5.2%). Rosie Redfield, Mike Lamont and David Attenborough more or less tied for fourth place. Aside from Sir David, all of these were also on the original Nature 10 list.

Autiero was back in the news this year when his team pointed to possible errors in the its measurements that cast the neutrino claims into doubt. Lamont and the Large Hadron Collider are guaranteed more news time if, as expected, scientists there either confirm or rule out the discovery of the Higgs boson later this year. So perhaps they’ll be candidates for the Nature 10 this year, too. Thanks for voting in our poll, and we’d be happy to hear nominations for the people who matter in 2012 anytime via Twitter (@NatureNews) or Facebook.

IDRC-Nature science journalism fellowship

Canada’s International Development Research Centre is offering a six-month, full-time, fully-funded science journalism fellowship to an English-speaking Canadian citizen or permanent resident of Canada. The successful applicant will be at an early stage of his or her career, but with at least three years experience as a journalist. He or she will receive training in the London office of the leading international science journal Nature and then spend between two and four months reporting science stories from developing countries.

Candidates must have a keen interest in science and technology, particularly relating to development; outstanding reporting and writing skills and strong ideas for news and features suitable for publication in Nature. The fellowship is expected to begin during the first quarter of 2012, with a total duration of approximately six months.

To apply, please e-mail a covering letter explaining your suitability for the fellowship, a resume and three recent news and feature clips to m.peplow@nature.com.

Deadline: Friday 2 December 2011

About IDRC

IDRC is a Canadian Crown corporation that works closely with researchers from the developing world in their search for how to build healthier, more equitable and more prosperous societies. Further details about IDRC can be found at: www.idrc.ca

About Nature

Nature is a weekly international journal publishing the finest peer-reviewed research in all fields of science and technology, and is the world’s most highly cited interdisciplinary science journal. It has an international news team covering the latest science, policy and funding news in both online and print formats. See www.nature.com/nature

About the fellowship

IDRC will award up to CAD$54,000 to the fellow to cover travel costs, living expenses, research expenses, visa or other related costs, in London and in other countries visited during the fellowship. The award will also cover the cost of participating in a conference relevant to the fellow’s professional development as a journalist.

Nature Podcast

natpod.GIFThis week, we put brain training to the test, learn how the Red Sea could help refill the Dead Sea, hear how a look into an exoplanet’s atmosphere has revealed unexpected results, and learn why loopholes in the Copenhagen Accord could mean we overshoot our targets on global warming. Plus, a round-up of what’s hot elsewhere in Nature.

Nature Video – Brain training: does it work?

Brain-training computer games are a multimillion pound industry. But this week, a study published in Nature suggests they may not live up to their promise. Neuroscientist Adrian Owen teamed up with the BBC popular science programme ’Bang Goes The Theory to recruit more than 11,000 volunteers for a massive online experiment. The results demolish the widely held belief that the regular use of brain-training games improves general cognitive function. To read the story in full, go to: No gain from brain training.