9:00 am – 5:30 pm, 9:00 pm – 12:30 am
- discussion with Chong about project
- washout probes from new hybes
- break down STORM run, transfer and fit data
- spot brightness analysis
- flip fly stocks (?) — not managed
New library design
- designing new probes for En and B09 (yellow ~100 kb) that alternate probes with different primers
- will synthesize these with P2 and P3 primaries.
Sequential staining control
- E08-p1-A647 + E09-p3-A750
- F06-p1-A647 + F07-p3-A750
- F07-p1-A647 + F06-p3-A750
I just read this article highlight in Nature about the distribution of publication output that is so misleading I feel compelled to write about it. The finding of the original article by Ioannidis is that only 1% of researchers publishing between 1996 and 2011 published every year. The implication/spin given to this finding is that the top 1% of scientists are contributing disproportionately (41%) of the scientific output — a ludicrous misinterpretation. The fraction is so low simply because most people who publish happen to be graduate students and post-docs (just pick any scientific paper and go through the author affiliations) and very few of those are in the game for 15 years. For example, lots of the authors in the denominator in this list were graduate students on papers published between 2000 and 2011, very few of whom were full time scientists in 1996 and thus immediately eliminated from the publish-every-year numerator. This 15 year time period is long enough to cover plenty of productive, publish every year grad students who became publish every year post docs who became publish every year junior PIs between 1997 and 2011 and still don’t make it into the numerator which requires they published in 1996 before their scientific career began.
At the very least the denomenator could have been out of researchers that started publishing in 1996, what fraction continued to publish every year there-after. This of course would still be rather unuseful statistic, since the amount of hours required to lead a project (typically denoted by first authorship, also typically carried out by a graduate student or post-doc) is vastly in excess of the amount of hours required to be senior author. Not to diminish the critical role of senior authors in funding, often designing, and usually mentoring a project. I doubt most PIs with a lab of N people believe they contribute N times more to science than their average group member, though if all group members include the PI on their publications the PIs publication rate is N times higher.
10:00 am – 5:20 pm, 10:00 pm – 11:50 pm
- prep new cells for multicolor hybe
- continue analysis of E7 data
- Ruobo presentation – see protected notes
- Jiang journal club — axon mylination in response to neural signaling
Project 2 analysis
- prepping cells fixed yesterday for hybridization
- in RNase treatment in warmroom (Hao is using new hybe oven and probably best to keep that RNase free)
- now in 50% formamide at 4C ready to hybe.
- 2 large coverslips of BXC P1 + P3 for double labeling control against movement
- 1 large coverslip of L3Eo6toE09 for double labeling control against movement
- imaging L3E09 PH in S2 cells
- 647 switching looks much better than when imaged with BX-C. Maybe should repeat BX-C
- 750 staining looks great but deactivates quickly
- might try more imaging of this slide with 750 STORM. should probably do in MEA instead of BME
- use mosaic tile to get conventional images if STORM is already inactivated (just match stage location?)
- need more COT