@aemonten
Molecular Biologist (aemonten.github.io) 丨Chief Editor @ CSH Protocols (cshprotocols.cshlp.org) 丨Head of the Integrity in Publishing Group at CSHL Press 丨Chair "Molecular Biosystems Conference" (molbiosystems.com) 丨(Oxford) Comma King 丨Central Dogma Police
"Trust becomes more valuable, not less, when the information environment degrades. The more noise enters the system, the more researchers will retreat to sources w/ human accountability. The question shifts from “what does the evidence say?” to “who is telling me this, & why should I believe them?”"
This is from a paper from 2010: "The Edges of Understanding"
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
"GRNs, which should provide mechanistic explanations, are increasingly reduced to statistical correlations — ‘hairballs’ that fail to capture molecular causation"
By Maizels and @jamesbriscoe.bsky.social
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
"we developed Multiplexed Error Robust Fluorescence In Situ Hybridization 2.0 (MERFISH 2.0), an optimized spatial transcriptomic imaging chemistry to enhance profiling of fragmented and highly crosslinked RNA"
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...
Plant salt-tolerance mechanisms: Classic signaling pathways, emerging frontiers, and future perspectives
www.cell.com/molecular-pl...
LOL, so their tagline was actually "We Want to Cheat on Everything"?! 😅
Let me guess. An AI company?
(*googles*) Yup, AI company.
techcrunch.com/2026/03/05/c...
“Hiring, promotion, and funding decisions often still revolve around traditional journal publications.”
www.science.org/content/arti...
I'm sure @pmelsted.bsky.social can comment on this :)
I'm sorry, 50 what now?
"We present a GPU implementation of kallisto for RNA-seq transcript quantification (...). For a large dataset of 295 million reads, runtime drops from 40 minutes to 50 seconds"
www.biorxiv.org/content/10.6...
I'll go to your lab if you'll have me 😊
Great Zoom meeting today with @bloodgenes.bsky.social.
We have some things cooking!
Yes, maybe, but it would not be about whether they have agreed or not to review before. Or it shouldn't 😅
Agreeing to review for a journal does not improve your chances of getting your own paper accepted there.
Further, recommending acceptance does not reduce your chances, as if a 'slot had been taken', and recommending rejection does not increase them, as if a 'slot had opened up'
This is all fine and good.
But please, sign your editorials.
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
#ThankYourEditor♥️
New paper out in Nature Communications:
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
We found >250 metabolic enzymes on chromatin.
Only ~20 had been reported before.
This means hundreds of metabolic enzymes may have unexplored nuclear roles.
We do it because we care 😊
"Non-scientists with pet theories should ideally be directed away from arXiv"
www.nature.com/articles/d41...
bioRxiv: "Hypotheses without new data...are considered out of scope and will not be posted"
www.biorxiv.org/about/FAQ 1/n
👀
Congrats, this is great. Maybe you can join us next year at @molbiosystems.bsky.social to tell us more about your work 😊
This piece discusses seven frontiers in RNA modification research. The examples cited highlight technological advances, regulatory principles both unique & broad-spanning, & questions about how biological information is post-transcriptionally encoded in chemical marks comprising just a few atoms.
"Here, we have established a robust genetic screen to detect paternal mitochondrial inheritance in tobacco (Nicotiana tabacum)"
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
👀
"Equally important is sustained & inclusive dialogue among all stakeholders in the research ecosystem, including publishers, researchers, funders, institutions, & scholarly societies. The challenges facing scholarly publishing are systemic & cannot be addressed through isolated or unilateral action"
Yup. If people don't read what they cite (and many don't), or only access papers via LLMs (which many do, and that number will continue to grow), they may not be aware (or care) that a paper has been retracted, and will continue to cite it as if nothing has happened.
Which is terrible.
I have seen a lot of cursed stuff in my time in academia but this is among the *most* cursed.
Grammarly is generating miniature LLMs based on academic work so that users can have their writing ‘reviewed’ by experts like David Abulafia, who died less than two months ago.
And there's also this
bsky.app/profile/mkru...
Interesting, and this also just came out
academic.oup.com/pnasnexus/ar...
