Need inspiration? Go find a gallery — or pick up a paintbrush.

What inspires you? How do you come up with the innovative surge necessary to write a grant, complete a paper, apply for a fellowship or reframe a hypothesis?

Many researchers find inspiration in wandering through artistic creations, whether they’re viewing paintings, drawings, sculpture or performance art, reading, listening to live or recorded music or creating art of any genre themselves.combat-1300519_960_720

There’s little surprise here – studies have shown that experiencing art, whether as a viewer or producer, helps to stimulate creativity. And people are beginning to take note: art-science collaborations are gaining traction as researchers explore how working with artists can stoke their productivity, give them new perspective or a more creative outlook and bolster their communication and outreach skills.

Continue reading

Big data: Collaborative science

The rise of data-intensive research is increasing the need for collaborative science.

Guest contributor Lakshini Mendis

data-naturejobs-blog

{credit}Image credit: iStock/Thinkstock{/credit}

Big data, a term thought to have originated in the mid-90s, is a current buzzword amongst scientific communities. Rather than a sole reference to the size of complex datasets, the term broadly encompasses all aspects of working with large datasets from acquisition to analysis.

Big data in science

At its core, scientific research is driven by our curiosity to understand the relationship between cause and effect. Traditionally, ‘hypothesis-driven’ experiments are designed to answer a specific question about a cause-effect relationship.

However, over the last sixty years there has been a trillion fold increase in computing performance. The per-capita capacity to store information has roughly doubled every forty months since the 1980s. These technological advances are revolutionising almost all facets of human life, including how scientific research is conducted.

In contrast to the traditional ‘hypothesis-driven’ approach, advancing technology allows us to acquire larger, more complex datasets, encompassing as many variables as possible, without bias from preconceived ideas. Powerful computation also enables us to finally realize the full potential of decades-old mathematical and statistical concepts. We can now sift through many variables and identify numerous cause-effect relationships in the same dataset, which would have previously been undetectable to the unaided human mind. These principles are now being applied to diverse fields, from astronomy to neuroscience, from particle physics to genomics.

The need for collaboration

The National Human Genome Research Institute reports that the cost of sequencing a human-sized genome was almost US$10 million in 2001, which had halved a couple of years later. The Human Genome Project took 13 years and cost about US$2.7 billion; however, human whole-genome sequencing is now more affordable and accessible than ever. Today, Illumina’s HiSeq X Ten System can sequence “over 18,000 human genomes per year at the price of about $1000 per genome”. Advances such as this have allowed scientists like Theordora Ross from UT Southwestern Medical Center to identify novel mutations in “mystery breast cancer patients” – those with a strong family history of cancer but who did not possess the BRCA mutation – using human whole-genome sequencing. Advances in human whole-genome sequencing are also paving the way for large-populations studies, which in turn is inching us toward precision medicine.

Thus, a lack of data is no longer the bottleneck to discovery. Rather, it is the effective management, analysis, and sharing of large datasets that now pose a challenge.

Initiatives such as the Open Science Data Cloud and the Multi-Institutional Open Storage Research InfraStructure provide an online repository to efficiently store large datasets and share them between different groups. Effectively analysing complex datasets requires abilities that often extend beyond a single researcher’s immediate skillset. Even the most tech-savvy researcher can struggle with some of the mathematical and computational expertise needed to correctly interpret large datasets. Thus, collaboration is key. Having a versatile team comprised of researchers, software engineers, bioinformaticians and statisticians, helps each focus on what they do best. There is no longer a requirement for the sole researcher to become a ‘jack-of-all-trades’. However, there is a need for clear communication between the experts of each field.

Current global big data projects, such as the Sloan Digital Sky Survey, the Blue Brain Project, and the Human Proteome Project, HapMap effectively demonstrate the value of collaboration.

Addressing the barrier to collaboration

However, when it comes to projects that are being conducted on a smaller scale, many researchers are still apprehensive about openly sharing their data. The reasons cited include intellectual property concerns and the fear of being scooped. These concerns have been generated, in part, by the hypercompetitive environment of research, where a high impact factor publication alone has become the ultimate goal of scientists, no matter the cost.

Journals such as Scientific Data and GigaScience help encourage researchers to share their data openly by recognizing their contributions as publications. Further, disseminating the entire dataset helps validate the interpretation of the data and the findings from it. It also opens the door to enable other researchers to reuse the data to investigate their own hypotheses, while guaranteeing proper acknowledgment of the source. For instance, different researchers can make maximal use of a large mass spectrometry dataset to investigate different proteins of interest, without the need for additional time and resources. This approach can help streamline scientific discovery with efficient use of funding.

There are already discernible changes to the scientific research landscape that address the challenges of big data projects. However, the rise of data-intensive research requires a change of mind-set amongst scientists. There is an increased need for multidisciplinary research teams, with clear communication between experts of different fields. Scientists also need to be innovative and become more aware of the tools that will enable them to widely collaborate and openly share data. These changes will help us fully grasp the potential of big data and accelerate understanding.

Lakshimi-mendis-naturejobs-blog

{credit}Image credit: Lakshimi Mendis{/credit}

Lakshini Mendis is a winner of the 2015 Scientific Data writing competition. She is also a PhD student at the Centre for Brain Research in Auckland, and studies how the human brain changes in Alzheimer’s disease. She is passionate about good science communication and is a strong advocate for women in STEM, and volunteers as the Editor-in-Chief at The Scientista Foundation! Follow her musings on Twitter!

The ‘I’-deal science environment

Esther Cooke

{credit}Image courtesy of Esther Cooke{/credit}

Introducing Esther Cooke, one of the winners of the London Naturejobs Career Expo journalism competition

Esther Cooke is a 4th year PhD student at the Leeds Institute of Cardiovascular and Metabolic Medicine, University of Leeds. Her research interests include molecular mechanisms of haemostasis and thrombosis. Outside of work, Esther engages in various outdoor pursuits such as walking and climbing. She also enjoys music, spending time with friends, and is actively involved with her local church. With a keen interest in writing, Esther aims to start her own blog in the near future.

—-x—-

There can be a real sense of excitement in science from actively making new discoveries. Despite some apparent drawbacks – most notably job instability, salary and work/life balance – the majority of scientists claim to be content with their research, according to the Naturejobs career survey from 2010. Interestingly, guidance and mentoring from senior staff were deemed the strongest contributors to satisfaction score, followed by salary and independence.

Dwelling on my experience as a PhD student, studying cardiovascular medicine at the University of Leeds, there is one aspect that I believe epitomises the ideal working environment for scientific researchers: teamwork.

Many of us enter research with an unadulterated purpose of advancing our field of interest – a purpose which is easily distorted within such highly competitive frameworks. Motivation to combat heart disease or unveil the mysteries of the universe soon contest with a mounting pressure to advance your personal career, group or institution. We observe the bottleneck of PhD students and postdocs journeying to that prized permanent position. Continue reading

Preliminary look at GWAS articles including dbGaP accessions

{credit}NCBI {/credit}

In this month’s Editorial (doi:10.1038/ng.3088) we mention 66 articles in this journal published between 2008 and 2013 that cite dbGaP accession codes and we took a preliminary look at citation of 13 pairs of GWAS articles with and without a dbGaP accession published on the same trait on the same day in the same journal (in the case of more than two simultaneous articles, non-overlapping pairs were assigned by sequential DOI number). Here are the references and some of the citation information for readers who want to investigate this area further.

Simultaneously published articles with citation data:

Screen Shot 2014-08-25 at 4.33.49 PM

citationdataAll Nature Genetics articles with dbGaP accession:

DOI Scopus citations up to 8/1/14
10.1038/ng.249 212
10.1038/ng.364 184
10.1038/ng.362 174
10.1038/ng.416 128
10.1038/ng.311 468
10.1038/ng.269 396
10.1038/ng.291 583
10.1038/ng.290 305
10.1038/ng.386 111
10.1038/ng.384 464
10.1038/ng.381 534
10.1038/ng.377 169
10.1038/ng.456 86
10.1038/ng.466 137
10.1038/ng.474 270
10.1038/ng.432 141
10.1038/ng.716 87
10.1038/ng.714 131
10.1038/ng.520 628
10.1038/ng.523 86
10.1038/ng.521 211
10.1038/ng.517 134
10.1038/ng.501 191
10.1038/ng.493 75
10.1038/ng.602 46
10.1038/ng.604 68
10.1038/ng.537 148
10.1038/ng.568 198
10.1038/ng.567 80
10.1038/ng.571 281
10.1038/ng.573 223
10.1038/ng.686 761
10.1038/ng.666 91
10.1038/ng.642 197
10.1038/ng.1017 52
10.1038/ng.1013 56
10.1038/ng01113 13
10.1038/ng.859 85
10.1038/ng.803 374
10.1038/ng.801 387
10.1038/ng.970 69
10.1038/ng.922 75
10.1038/ng.934 31
10.1038/ng.941 77
10.1038/ng.223 43
10.1038/ng.2250 103
10.1038/ng.2466 18
10.1038/ng.1108 124
10.1038/ng.1051 45
10.1038/ng.2354 95
10.1038/ng.2344 35
10.1038/ng.2213 60
10.1038/ng.2274 71
10.1038/ng.2285 22
10.1038/ng.2272 40
10.1038/ng.2368 23
10.1038/ng.2360 30
10.1038/ng.2385 63
10.1038/ng.2564 42
10.1038/ng.2505 23
10.1038/ng.2529 51
10.1038/ng.2554 38
10.1038/ng.2792 17
10.1038/ng.2794 6
10.1038/ng.2764 42
10.1038/ng.2702 36

Becoming a global researcher

Posted on behalf of Hywel Curtis

What would it take for your research to go global? At Vitae’s international researcher development conference, held in Manchester in the United Kingdom last week, several speakers offered advice on how to boost your international profile. It’s an expanding area of interest: Emma Gillaspy, Vitae’s north-west hub manager, explains that institutions throughout academia are looking at how they can support the development of truly global researchers, and half of respondents to a recent Naturejobs poll said it was ‘very important’ for young researchers to work abroad early in their careers.

Furthermore, an increasing focus on international collaboration in funding calls and the development of new platforms and technologies mean it is easier than ever before for researchers to operate internationally. Adopting a global outlook is also highly beneficial for careers in a growing number of fields — not solely in disciplines that traditionally expect it, such as astrophysics. So how do you take those first steps towards gaining international credentials?

Work on ‘international’ research

Most fields of research offer scope for you to gain international experience. “Research is inherently a global endeavour,” says Claire McNulty, adviser on life sciences and science policy at the British Council. To start with, find out which areas of research your current institution recognises as being of international significance, as you are likely to receive more support in these areas. “International ties lend greater prestige to institutions,” explains Julie Reeves, the early career researcher (ECR) training coordinator at the UK’s University of Southampton. Quite simply, if you aren’t working in an area that offers international opportunities, you’ll need to consider moving into one that does.

Make connections, seize opportunities

Your network of contacts is potentially the best source of international opportunities. Lynn Clark of the graduate skills team at the UK’s University of Liverpool says that making connections with those who have a “global mindset” and value international collaboration could be the catalyst for your global experience. As with all aspects of your research career it is vital to identify and develop meaningful relationships with those in your field — whether they are someone you met at a conference, a previous collaborator or a personal connection. In addition, opportunities may arise in calls for funding, research partners or collaborations that have international elements, so be aware of these. Also watch out for industry research and development projects and exchanges.

Explore working abroad

If you’re considering working in another country, be sure this is really the right choice for you. Seek advice from those with experience and consider your family, financial situation and career prospects when evaluating options. “It is about your physical mobility to some degree,” says Clark.

You need to be willing and able to travel and live in a foreign culture for extended periods. Employers “are looking for someone who can cope with diversity”, explains Reeves. Consider whether you will really be able to thrive in a new environment despite professional or cultural differences. For example, “one particular problem for UK researchers is the language barrier,” says McNulty of the British Council, which is why many choose to gain international experience in the US.

Move successfully

To prepare for an international move, find out what support your home institution offers and query the internationalisation strategy it has in place. Additional help may be available at national and international levels; in Europe, for example, a scientific visa programme, coordinated by EURAXESS, helps researchers from non-European countries to work in the region. As part of the programme, research organizations sign hosting agreements with individual researchers. “The hosting agreement is fast-track immigration for researchers,” says Magdalena Wislocka, hosting agreement scheme manager at the Irish Universities Association. Support such as this can simplify your relocation significantly.

Succeed overseas

Once you have acquired a position, there are many ways to make your international experience a success. One area to focus on is preserving the same standards and professional integrity that you maintained previously. Cross-cultural supervision issues are a key concern for those managing researchers internationally, says Vitae’s Gillaspy, so it’s important to foster self-management skills. These can also benefit your career in general (see ‘Getting a pay rise in academia’).

In addition, operating effectively abroad will require you to develop global awareness and think beyond literature reviews to the people, institutions and cultures that those citations represent. This approach is used in Japan to improve graduate education, helping to foster researchers with a “comprehensive and panoramic” view of their field, particularly in the natural sciences, says Mutsuhiro Arinobu, comptroller of the University of Tokyo.

Finally, an important aspect of an effective global research experience is the new relationships you develop while abroad. Working alongside successful researchers in other countries will enhance your own international standing and benefit your career both during and after the placement.

If you have any other advice for researchers looking to gain international experience please feel free to share it below.

Strategies for success in open innovation

Posted on behalf of Christof Fellmann and Nisha Narayan

The potential of open innovation to revitalize the R&D industry will only be realized if organizations provide the right environment and support, according to speakers at this year’s BioVision forum in Lyon, France.

Open innovation, in which researchers team up with external collaborators to help develop and market technologies, can help bridge the gap between industry and academia and offers opportunities to scientists who combine research with management and policy-making. But innovation can be stifled by scientific conservatism, said Leroy Hood, president and co-founder of the Institute of Systems Biology in Seattle, United States.

New organizational structures may be required to support innovation as bureaucracy impedes innovative solutions. “In the end, innovation comes from one person,” said Hood. “Its success will depend on whether this person is embedded in an environment that fosters the development and translation of new ideas.”

Organizations looking to innovate need to allow disruptive thinking and carry out high-risk, unconventional research, added Bernard Munos, founder of the US-based InnoThink Center for Research in Biomedical Innovation.

Open innovation can help keep ideas flowing in an established institute, and there are a variety of ways to implement the strategy. Energy company Total Gas & Power, for example, is trying to enter the ‘clean-tech’ sector by collaborating with start-ups. Vice-president of R&D Vincent Schachter explained that researchers from a dedicated internal R&D division work alongside the start-up company’s employees at their place of work. This strategy allows Total to circumvent the problems associated with outsourcing research and enables them to be at the source of innovation potentially driving their next-generation business model.

Making innovation a priority can also have financial benefits. While focusing on small, incremental improvements to a product or technology is often expensive, “breakthrough innovation is much cheaper”, said Munos.

Hood, Munos and Schachter were speaking at the “How to solve R&D’s challenge with Open Innovation?” session alongside other expert speakers at the BioVision forum.

Related article: Funding outside the box

Research collaboration

The Editorial in the February issue of Nature Methods discusses the critical role that interdisciplinary collaboration plays in modern biomedical research. Although there are certainly notable exceptions, researchers seem to be increasingly using collaborations with experts outside their own area of expertise to bring new insights and technologies to their research projects. Increasing numbers of studies claim to back up the assumption that collaboration is beneficial.

As highlighted in a 2008 News Feature in Nature, collaborations can also go horribly wrong and an accompanying editorial urged researchers to take some basic steps to avoid unforeseen complications.

At Nature Methods we were curious if the methods papers we had published showed any evidence of benefits arising from interdisciplinary collaboration. We calculated the number of citations per year that each of our research papers published between 2004 and May 2010 had received and analyzed the author patterns of those in the top and bottom quartiles. As briefly described in the February Editorial we detected what seemed to be a positive effect of interdisciplinary collaborations on the apparent impact of the work. This was by no means a rigorous study and there are many caveats, but it certainly suggests that even in methods development, collaboration is beneficial.

Do you have anything to share about your experiences with collaboration? We’d love to hear them.

How to be a successful scientist

At a recent scientific careers event in London, University of Kent geneticist Darren Griffin – also a career development fellow for the UK’s Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) – presented his ten commandments for being a successful scientist in academia. We’ve reproduced them below for your reading pleasure along with further advice that Griffin gave at the event. Have a read and tell us what you think – do you agree with the list? Do any ring particularly true for you? Are there any others you would add? Share your views in the comment box.

Darren Griffin’s ten commandments for succeeding in academia

1. The only way to do good research is to get on with it

“There’s no point having really good ideas if you don’t put them into action,” says Griffin. “Write those grants, write those papers.”

2. When opportunity knocks, open the door

Be prepared to take risks with new ventures: “If there’s an opportunity there for you and it’s in your interests to pursue it, then get on and do it.”

3. With good people you can do anything

Griffin says interacting with his team is one of the most rewarding aspects of his work, and he’s not afraid of high achievers. “You should only take someone on if they can do something you can’t,” he says. “Your whole operation will only grow if you’ve got people who are better than you are, and you shouldn’t be ashamed or insecure about that.”

Man in reflective pose - Punchstock4. It’s not about your knowledge – it’s about imagination and ideas

Although a certain level of knowledge is essential, Griffin says you can always look up anything else you need to know – what you should focus on is coming up with new ideas. And as well as drawing on the talent in your team, you should also turn to your peers for inspiration. “Science is very much a social activity – you’ve got to get out there, network and have collaborators,” says Griffin.

5. Always bring something to the party

It takes two to collaborate – if you don’t have something to contribute, your partners will move on.

6. It’s not the size of your gun, it’s when you shoot

“It’s a popular misconception that you just throw money and lots of people at an idea and it will work,” says Griffin. Not always true, he says – you need to shoot at the right time to hit the target.

7. If the system doesn’t work for you, change it, do something else or don’t complain

Fairly self-explanatory, this one – be proactive and decisive, because “nobody likes a whinger”.

8. Don’t ask why, ask why not

“If you’re a scientist, do not take no for an answer, because every no is one step closer to a yes,” says Griffin. Be persistent and find out what you need to do to get that yes.

9. The journey is usually far more rewarding than the destination

So remember to enjoy the ride: “It’s such a wonderful thing, being a scientist, because you’re in the process of discovery, and that’s a lot of fun.”

10. Be nice to people

Of all the commandments, Griffin says this is ultimately the most important – not only because it’s the right thing to do, but also because you never know when someone will have something that you want.