Monday 31 July 2017

circadian rhythms - How is human biological clock modelled in modern science?


Im an engineer by education and i program a lot, so the question sounds weird to people from other disciplines.


Im trying to better understand the human biological clock. Yet i do not really know what it is. I read about clock genes, endogenous cycles, and other observed phenomena that is time sensitive or cyclical in nature. But is there a centralized model of what the circadian rhythm is or how itis exhibited within the human body?


For example an electrical clock can be modelled with feedback loops or electrical flip flops that control the timing. Ive seen the heart modelled as Van Der Pol oscillator.


Does modern science have some notion of how the "master" clock within the human body work? Is there a feedback or an oscillator model of the master clock?


Thank you for any articles or keywords that ican use to research this question!



Answer




The situation is quite complex, and there are certain things that we do not fully understand, but I will try to give you an explanation.


First of all, at the cellular level, you have the genetic components of the circadian clock, the clock genes and their protein products.


You can divide clock proteins into positive and negative regulators: the positive regulators modulate transcription of clock-controlled genes and are inhibited by the negative regulators in a loop that lasts approximately 24 hours (in Latin: circa = around and dies = day).


For instance the Clock and Bmal1 nuclear proteins, when present in sufficiently large amount, will dimerize and act as transcription factors on a series of genes that contain a region in their promoter element called E-box. Amongst these are the Period (Per) genes.
Per is then synthesised, and exported to the cytoplasm. Here, if in a sufficiently large amount, it can heterodimerize with the Cryptocrome (Cry) proteins: the dimer will then enter the nucleus and inhibit the transcription actions of the Clock/Bmal couple. This will in turn, block the transcription of Per, that will therefore not be able to dimerize with Cry and stop the inhibition of Clock/Bmal and so on. All of this takes approximately 24 hours.


This basic loop (and some more) is nicely schematised in this review by Reppert and Weaver


Coordination of circadian timing in mammals. - Reppert and Weaver, Nature. 2002 Aug 29;418(6901):935-41.


Schematics of circadian clock - from Reppert and Weaver, Nature 2002


I report here the legend of the figure:




The clock mechanism comprises interactive positive (green) and negative (red) feedback loops. CLOCK (C, oval) and BMAL1 (B, oval) form heterodimers and activate transcription of the Per, Cry and Rev-Erbalpha genes through E-box enhancers. As the levels of PER proteins increase (P, blue circle), they complex with CRY proteins (C, diamond) and CKIε/CKIδ (ε/δ, circle), and are phosphorylated (p). In the nucleus, the CRY–PER–CKIε/CKIδ complexes associate with CLOCK–BMAL1 heterodimers to shut down transcription while the heterodimer remains bound to DNA, forming the negative feedback loop. For the positive feedback loop, increasing REV-ERBα levels (R, circle) act through Rev-Erb/ROR response elements in the Bmal1 promoter to repress (-) Bmal1 transcription. CRY-mediated inhibition of CLOCK–BMAL1-mediated transcription de-represses (activates) Bmal1 transcription, because REV-ERBα-mediated repression is inhibited. An activator (A, circle) may positively regulate Bmal1 transcription (?) alone or by interacting with mPER2. There are probably kinases (?) other than CKIε and CKIδ that participate in phosphorylation of clock proteins.



The clock machinery, however, is even more complex than this and different tissues need to integrate different signals (e.g. light, hormonal concentrations and so on).


However, as nice as this may be, our bodies are not constituted by one single cell... if we "zoom out" a little bit and we go to the tissue or the whole body level, we see that circadian rhytms are present in all sorts of tissues and involve all sorts of different physiological processes. A very interesting question is then: how do cells from different organs coordinate each other so that the interrelation of different circadian processes is always the same? For instance, the release of cortisol peaks in the morning, our body temperature has a peak in the late afternoon and a trough in the early hours of the morning, and our heart rate is higher during the daytime.


In 1972, an article by Moore and Eichler was published, showing that lesioning the suprachiasmatic nucleus (SCN) of the hypothalamus (a region at the base of the brain) resulted in the "breakage" of the circadian rhythm of corticosterone (the stress hormone).


Loss of a circadian adrenal corticosterone rhythm following suprachiasmatic lesions in the rat. - Moore and Eichler, Brain Res. 1972 Jul 13;42(1):201-6


The fact that lesioning a bit of the brain resulted in loss of circadian rhythm in the adrenal gland was obviously a very big deal: the central circadian clock of the organism had been discovered.


I will not going too much into that but, since 1972 many advances have been made and nowadays we know that, although the role of the SCN is very important, it is not the only clock in the body. Several peripheral clock exist, in organs such as the pituitary gland, the liver or the pancreas. How all these clocks communicate between each other and what is their contribution to the generation of non-circadian rhythms (ultradian and infradian) are questions that still have to be solved.


A few interesting papers on the matter:


A riot of rhythms: neuronal and glial circadian oscillators in the mediobasal hypothalamus. - Guilding et al., Mol Brain. 2009 Aug 27;2:28.



A clockwork web: circadian timing in brain and periphery, in health and disease. - Hastings et al., Nat Rev Neurosci. 2003 Aug;4(8):649-61.


Peripheral circadian oscillators in mammals: time and food. - Schibler et al., J Biol Rhythms. 2003 Jun;18(3):250-60.


copyright - If my paper is accepted in a Springer journal, can I submit my version of the manuscript to arXiv immediately after acceptance?


I have read the Springer copyrights and self-archiving policy, but they are a bit confusing. For example in the first of them, you may find this:




Author may self-archive an author-created version of his/her Contribution on his/her own website and/or the repository of Author’s department or faculty.



And here is the quote from the second source:



Authors may self-archive the author’s accepted manuscript of their articles on their own websites. Authors may also deposit this version of the article in any repository, provided it is only made publicly available 12 months after official publication or later. He/ she may not use the publisher's version (the final article), which is posted on SpringerLink and other Springer websites, for the purpose of self-archiving or deposit. Furthermore, the author may only post his/her version provided acknowledgement is given to the original source of publication and a link is inserted to the published article on Springer's website. The link must be provided by inserting the DOI number of the article in the following sentence: “The final publication is available at Springer via http://dx.doi.org/[insert DOI]”.



Do I understand correctly that I can put my own version of the manuscript at my own (or my institute's) website immediately after acceptance, but I can submit it to arXiv only 12 months later after official publication? If so, it seems to me it doesn't make sense. If the manuscript is made publicly available just after acceptance at my own website, why cannot it be made publicly available at the same time at arXiv?



Answer



The short answer is: yes, staggered posting rights like this are very common - many journals distinguish between your own website, your institutional repository, and a broader repository (eg arXiv, pubmed), with different rules about what version of the article can be posted and when; some have also begun to provide a special category for sites like ResearchGate.


The underlying answer -



Why on earth do they do this?


On the one hand, this doesn't make sense - the PDF is the PDF and once it's picked up by a search engine, it's going to be readable wherever it's hosted. But consider it in terms of discoverability and scale:



  • one hundred papers from the journal on one hundred obscure personal sites;

  • one hundred papers from the journal on twenty well-organised institutional sites; or

  • one hundred papers from the journal on one disciplinary repository


From a publisher's perspective, the first option is not something to worry about, while the second & particularly third options look quite scary. Remember, what they really don't want is everyone saying "great, we can get this all from arXiv, cancel next year's subscription please". So an embargo period gets attached to the repository copies - many journals (most prominently PNAS) manage fine on a subscription basis while still making older papers freely accessible after a year or two, and so it's well-understood that allowing delayed access in one form or another will not ruin the subscription income.


Now, mass cancellation because of self-deposited papers being available instantly is a bit of a bogeyman. No-one's really shown it would happen on a large scale (and indeed arXiv suggests otherwise); library budgets are not (yet) squeezed enough that we've had to start thinking seriously about it; and in any case "big deal" subscription models often make it impractical to cancel specific titles. But it's looming as the threat and most publishers simply don't want to risk it... so they produce very conservative guidance on what you're allowed to do, and work from there.


Over the past few years, many of these publisher limits have loosened slightly as they discover the sky didn't fall, which I suppose is something. At the time of writing, at a very loose generalisation, policies for non-medical scientific journals are mostly converging along the lines of "accepted MS immediately on your own site, accepted MS in a repository after a year, publisher/proof PDF never", but there are a thousand variations.



online learning - Can I include the completion of Udacity and Coursera classes I have attended in an academic CV?


Can I include in my academic CV that I have attended and completed the Coursera and Udacity classes I have been taking? I understand that these are not anything major, but the courses definitely gives a good overview and starting formal study on the subject becomes less cryptic. If I can include them without any negative impacts, then under what section should I include them?




Answer



No. Specific coursework (whether formal or informal, online or in-person) does not belong in an academic CV.


botany - How would a plant sprout and grow in a zero gravity environment?


Have any experiments been carried out involving sprouting and growing plants in a zero gravity environment? If so, what was the outcome? How did the plants sprout out of the soil without gravity? Did they grow outward or toward light sources?



Answer



There have been several experiments in growing plants in microgravity (strictly speaking, we do not achieve "zero-g" since astronauts remain in orbit about the Earth).


Changes in plant growth due to the influence of a gravity field is sometimes called gravimorphogenesis. More specifically, gravitropism is a differential growth response of plant organs to gravity. For example, roots grow downwards (positive gravitropism) and shoots grow upwards (negative gravitropism) on Earth.


Studies (e.g. 1) suggest that in micro-g, there is no preferred direction; roots may grow "up" and shoots "down".



It is thought that this growth response is due to the relative distribution of auxin in the plant. On Earth, auxin will preferentially move down into the root-tips due to the location of amyloplasts in the root-cap cells. In micro-g, amyloplasts do not settle at the "bottom" of the plant, therefore there is a more generalized distribution of auxin, and therefore there will be no preferred growth direction.


In addition, changes in plant gene expression as a response to micro-g environments are also being investigated (2) and suggest that auxin transport inhibitors may block the activation of the auxin responsive promoters in Nicotiana spp. (tabacco).


(1) Mechanisms in the Early Phases of plant Gravitropism CRC Crit Rev Plant Sci. 2000 ;19 (6):551-73 11806421 Cit:65


(2) Transcription Profiling of the Early Gravitropic Response in Arabidopsis Using High-Density Oligonucleotide Probe Microarrays, Plant Physiol. 2002 October; 130(2): 720–728. doi: 10.1104/pp.009688


phd - Consequence of declining an accepted offer after the universal deadline 15th April



This is my cousin's problem. In the first week of March he was offered a PhD offer (Upper Middle ranked School in USA) in Physics and he received his I-20 to get the visa.The admit was fully funded. He accepted the offer because he didn't have any offer at that time. But few days ago, a top ranked school admin said to him that, he might be admitted as a lot of students haven't accepted their offer (it is not guaranteed though plus admission is completed ).


He was always expecting to get admitted in that school. The deadline of the offer letter from first school is 15th April (He accepted the offer already).


Will it be possible to decline the first offer later/admission if he gets the offer after around two weeks from the top ranked school? I want to know the consequences of this situation.


EDIT:


I have received another suggestion from academia. He suggested to defer the admission (if he gets from the second university) from the Top ranked school. After a semester completed in the first admitted University, If my cousin feels that he should change the department, he will be able to do it. How reasonable is this?




disreputable publishers - What is the consenus of IntechOpen, open access books, are they predatory?



I have received an unsolicited request to write a chapter for a book relevant to my research. I have searched the current editors and they are actual people but not very well known in the field. On their website they show various logos, including web of science.


They do not seem to ask any money, but I see that sometimes go Intechopen was listed in the predatory editors. Is it still the case? Or is it because it is an open access editor that big publishers are trying to work against it?



Answer



Yes, IntechOpen is a disreputable publisher. Do not send them your work or pay them money.


journals - How to respond to peer review - a step by step guide to my first response?


I'm in the process of responding to my first peer review (major revisions). There seems to be a lot of advice out there, (even some stuff here: How to write good Response Letters for the reviewers) but there are still a few etiquette and structural things I'm not sure about.




  1. How do you structure your response? Do I respond to the comments chronologically in the order they appear in the paper, or do I create two separate sections for each reviewer? Maybe a "general" section, followed by separate comments for each reviewer?





  2. Do I write a cover letter thanking the reviewers for their helpful comments?




  3. How casual/formal should I be? Should I use contractions and a conversational (yet professional) style, or keep it as formal as the article itself?




  4. Any dos/don'ts that would be helpful for me to know?






Answer



Variations are possible, but I have found that the following seems to be a fairly typically form of a response to reviewers:



  • Begin with a letter to the handling editor and reviewers, in which you thank the reviewers for their useful feedback (even if it wasn't) and say you believe you've addressed all comments. If you've made any really major changes, a sentence or two here is a good to address them.

  • Quote the reviews as sent and address each comment inline, either saying how you've done what they wanted or explaining why you haven't. I always organize by reviewer and address in the order of their comments (rather than the structure of the paper) because the goal is to clearly show that you have addressed all comments.


I recommend adopting a polite and semi-formal style. You can be a bit more informal than the paper, but I still don't use contractions.


Do not get argumentative with the reviewers, and do not blow off their criticisms. Even an apparently crazy criticism should be treated politely, and as a matter of confusion rather than as a personal attack.


Sunday 30 July 2017

Cell life: division for immortality or reproduction with aging



Are the two cells that are derived from one cell, ‘twin sisters’ or a ‘mother and a daughter’? In other words, can a cell really be divided to live an "immortal" life or is cell reproduction the reality of cell life that accounts cell age difference between two successive generations, cell aging-associated senescence in cell reproduction, and cell line survival after the death of old cells.




theoretical biology - Is it possible to get (an estimation of) reaction rates from the Michaelis constant?


I want to apply the Gillespie Algorithm to a biological system so I need to know the reaction rates for the relevant reactions. However, for all those reactions, I only know the Michaelis constant $K_M$ and the maximum rate $V_{max}$ (see Wikipedia). Is it possible to derive (an estimation of) the reaction rates $k_f$, $k_r$ and $k_{cat}$ (see image below) given $K_M$ and $V_{max}$? If so, how can it be done?


reactions rates k_f, k_r and k_cat



Answer



$K_M$ is a ratio and for QSSA it is $\dfrac{k_{cat}+k_r}{k_f}$ and for equilibrium approximation it is $\dfrac{k_r}{k_f}$.



It is clear from the formula that you cannot obtain all the constants simulataneously. If you know two (in case of QSSA) you can get the third.


Applying for grad school without undergraduate background


Is it possible to apply for a graduate program in theoretical physics without having a bachelor's degree in physics or mathematics? I'm completely self-taught. I'm half way through Jackson electrodynamics and Peskin QFT. These books are taught to students at a graduate level, let's say that I can pass the GRE exam and graduate level examinations. Is it possible that this would substitute for an undergraduate degree?




species identification - What is the name of this fruit?


I have attached a photo. I know the Nepali name for this fruit but not its common name in English and its scientific names. In Nepal we call it as 'lahare Aanp' (meaning Climber Mango). This fruit is a climber type like cucumber.


Does anybody know its common name in English and its scientific name?



Fruits to be identified




Etiquette when unable to attend a conference


I'm supposed to give a presentation at an academic conference in the coming days but have fallen ill. What is the best way to send my regrets? Should I also send a doctor's note? It doesn't provide details of my condition but does have other personal information such as date of birth and home address. I just wonder if any of this is the conference organiser's business. At the same time, sending an email without proof that I am truly incapacitated doesn't seem like it's enough either. I'm still not sure what to do about the presentation I'd prepared - whether or not to send it anyway etc. I'm trying to focus on getting better, but I am worried that this medical issue will ruin my good name. Any advice would be appreciated.



Answer



Just tell the convener that you will be unable to present due to unforeseen circumstances. That is enough and will be understood — there can be many reasons and it won't be a first time. He/she will be glad that you inform him/her at all — it happens all to often that people simply don't turn up without giving any information at all. The convener shouldn't need a doctor's note.


That being said, is any co-author travelling to the conference, or perhaps a colleague familiar with your work? If yes, you could ask one of them if they are willing to take over your presentation. I've done this for colleagues and although I wasn't able to answer detailed questions from the audience, it's still beneficial both for me (visibility to experts in the field) and to the first author.


Saturday 29 July 2017

publications - What does it mean when an editor needs additional reviews despite a status of "reviews completed"?


I have submitted a paper to an Elsevier journal. After two weeks of required reviews completed status I have sent and E-mail to the editor. He replied: Your paper is still under review. We need 1 or 2 more review comments and make the decision within a month.



So, I have to ask... What does he mean by we need 1 or 2 more review comments? If the paper is still under review what is with the status of required reviews completed?



Answer



An educated guess is that the manuscript handling system by default expects two reviews. The number of reviews required for a decision can usually be changed by the editor. A reason for adding reviews is that you receive, for example and in the worst case, one accept and one reject from the two reviewers. It is therefore reasonable for an editor to search for additional reviewers to provide a better basis for a decision. Another reason can be that one or both of the original reviewers left reviews but they were deemed unconstructive and the need for additional reviews arose from the lack of reasonable feedback. There can be many other reasonable explanations as well, these are just examples.


Anyway, in this case, it is possible that the editors have not bothered to change the number of required reviews to 4 (which I assume the total would be). The system then shows that all reviews are in and that the manuscript should be decided upon. So hopefully, the editor will try to get speedy reviews and get back to you with useful feedback on your manuscript.


Friday 28 July 2017

Should I review papers for a nameless conference?


I received an invitation to review papers in a conference that is not very famous. However, the conference has a web site, and it has been held less than 5 times. Should I review papers for this conference? What is a judging criteria for deciding whether or not do the paper review for conferences?




Answer



Does it help you?


A good criteria are the people organizing the conference. Have you heard any of their names? Do you want them to know your name, too?


Also look at the papers published the previous years. Is there anything you like? Because that is probably the good papers you get to review (there will always be much worse submissions additionally that do not get accepted). If you don't see anything interesting for you & in your expertise, then don't review.


Beware of 'pay to publish' conferences (is the publisher on Beall's list of predatory publishers?). There are companies that live of publishing article no matter what quality. To give at least the impression of being legit, they need names on their program commitee - and they reach out to low-ranked people and invite them. They want to abuse your name!


Don't get me wrong, there are really good small conferences (in particular some with 20+ years of history). But usually they have A) top names on the board, B) very interesting articles and C) no shady publisher, but e.g. Springer, ACM, IEEE, and some just put the papers on the website, or host them at a university library.


cardiology - Why do people perceive blood pressure as the force that moves the blood forwards (see details)?


For example "Veins contain a lot of valves because the blood pressure inside them is low.". This wouldn't make any sense unless if blood pressure was perceived as the force that drives the blood forwards. But in reality blood pressure is the force exerted by the blood on the inner walls of the blood vessels so can someone explain to me why low blood pressure results in increased likelihood of back flow of blood ?



Answer



In the vascular system, pressure is what moves blood forwards, at least in an analogous manner to voltage...just like voltage, pressure itself doesn't move things, but a pressure gradient does. You are correct that the pressure applies in all directions, but the resistance of the blood vessels means that the pressure can only be relieved by flowing in one direction: down the pressure gradient.



Although blood pressure is often medically reported at a single site(i.e., 120/80mmHg), this is only the pressure in the larger vessels. The pressure originates from the heart forcing blood out into the major arteries, and the compliance/elasticity of those vessels keeps a sort of "reservoir" just like a capacitor would in an electrical circuit. The pressure drops over time from systolic to diastolic as that reservoir drains out into the body.


Importantly, and most relevant to your question, blood pressure also drops significantly through space, through the arterioles and capillaries, down to near zero in the venous system:


enter image description here


(from https://legacy.owensboro.kctcs.edu/gcaplan/anat2/notes/APIINotes5%20cardiac_equations.htm)


This pressure drop occurs for the same reason that you get a voltage drop over a resistance in an electrical circuit: the rules of Ohm's law for electricity are analogous to the Poiseuille's Law for fluids.


Sidenote: there are some exceptions to the pressure drop over space in the arterial system because of hydrostatic pressure (i.e., the pressure from gravity, for example see this question, though the better answer is definitely not the accepted one or the one with the most up-votes). However, that hydrostatic pressure difference is offset by gravity in the same direction, so you can effectively ignore it. It is also much less significant once you get to the smallest vessels.


I'm not sure where you got the quote in your example:



Veins contain a lot of valves because the blood pressure inside them is low.




..but I would say this statement isn't really false, though it could be stated better and the full causation is missing. Veins use valves because a lot of the pressure in the veins is coming from muscle contractions that squeeze the vessels from the outside, not from a pressure wave caused by forced blood volume from the heart. Venous valves ensure that the flow caused by this external pressure travels in one direction.


The Wikipedia page on hemodynamics may be helpful, though I noticed some poor wording in a couple places; any physiology textbook from a major publisher should be a good reference as well.


For a more "ELI5" answer, if the concepts I discussed so far are foreign, try this: In the arteries, blood is moved because the heart fills the big vessels with lots of blood, and the only place it can go is through the vessels into the capillaries. However, because the capillaries are all so thin and skinny, it takes a lot of pressure to push through them, and all the pressure is lost by the time you get to the veins.


So how do we get blood back to the heart? Well, we could try a vacuum, and have the heart "suck" blood back the way it "pushes" out the other side. However, this would collapse the veins. You can suck through a plastic straw because its rigid, but if you make it less rigid, such as by crushing a section, when you suck it will collapse, and sucking harder won't help the situation. Not good!


Okay so it's better to pump, but all the vessels are so small it would be hard to have them each have their own pump. So instead, the veins go through and around various muscles, and when those muscles move, the veins get smushed. Imagine you have a hose full of water, and you jump in the center...oops! Water goes out both ends! Okay, what if you put your hand over one side? Now it only goes out the end you want. That's essentially what a valve does: only lets the flow go one way when things are squeezed. Then the blood stays in the next compartment and over time works its way back to the heart.


terminology - Does the term "Biophysics" have two different meanings?



Some sources (including the current Tag-info at biology SE) state; biophysics is the adoption of techniques / methodologies from physics to study biological systems.



The use of methods from the physical sciences to aid in the study of biological systems…




Bio-SE- Tag .



Biophysics or biological physics is an interdisciplinary science that applies the approaches and methods of physics to study biological systems…



Wikipedia (permalink).



Biophysics — the branch of biology that applies the methods of physics to the study of biological structures and processes…



Dictionary.com






According to other sources, biophysics is the subject concerned with how the laws or phenomena of physics work in living systems.



“The subject of biophysics are the physical principles underlying all process of living systems.”



Google Book: Biophysics, An introduction, By Ronald Glaser (permalink).



Biophysics is a bridge between biology and physics. ... Biophysics looks for principles that describe patterns. If the principles are powerful, they make detailed predictions that can be tested. ---




Biophysical society




These two, although apparently quite similar (and I agree, have overlapping areas) basically indicate completely different things.


The first group of definitions refer to techniques and methodologies; such as “how does an electron microscope work?”, or “what could be the best strategy to separate membrane-lipids?”, or “how could you identify cells with the expression of certain RNA”; etc.


The second group refers to the physical principles applicable to living systems. Such as “why do phospholipids form a bilayer?” or “how do brain waves reach the scalp?” or “how does a humming bird move its wings when it hovers in a stationary manner?” or “what are the mechanisms working in the path of transport through phloem?”.


Now my question is: Is there a dual and different meaning, or use of the term ‘biophysics’?



Answer



In brief, you are correct. Although there may be a spectrum of uses, the sources that you quote illustrate two distinct meanings for the term, ‘biophysics’. Your interpretation of the first class is a little off-target (see comment by Charles E. Grant) but, in essence, you have answered your own question.


What is there to add? Perhaps, “Don’t judge a book by its cover”.


You may not be aware of the factors leading to the naming of new ‘disciplines’. Although they arise as the result of genuine developments in existing disciplines, the need for a name to be distinctive and attractive (for a new chair, society, journal or course) may outweigh considerations of accuracy. And once the name is coined, anyone can confer it on their own newborn, or discover that they were a systems biologist or a practitioner of translational medicine all along. And nobody will sue you for saying you are a molecular geneticist, even if you have no idea what a backcross is.



So what about biophysics?


In fact it would seem that the main usage is in the first sense defined in your question. Although the physicist, Max Delbrück, made a major contribution to ‘biology’ his initial motivation — that processes in living organisms might require new physical insights to explain them (biophysics in the second sense of the question) — was not borne out by his subsequent studies. It is ironic in this context that the institute he established at the University of Cologne did not bear the name ‘biophysics’, but ‘molecular genetics’, and the institute named after him in Berlin bears the name ‘molecular medicine’ (Max-Delbrück-Centrum für Molekulare Medizin) — whatever that may mean.


It is worth looking inside the covers of the Biophysical Journal to see what biophysics is in practice. The contents of the first and subsequent issues indicate a focus on electrophysiology, photosynthesis and the use of different types of electromagnetic radiation and spectroscopic techniques to study biological systems. A more recent issue is much wider in scope, but is subdivided mainly on the basis of the biological system being examined. As mentioned, the fit is more with the first sense of the use of ‘biophysics’ in the question.


Finally, I note that one of the first university departments to bear the moniker ‘biophysics’ — ‘The Astbury Department of Biophysics’ at the University of Leeds (1962) — was named after William Thomas Astbury, who studied X-ray diffraction of fibres, notably wool. However, it has since been renamed ‘The Astbury Centre for Structural Molecular Biology’. How fickle is taste!


evolution - Why does human facial and head hair continue to grow?


Many people can grow extremely long head hair and facial hair. Are there evolutionary theories as to why this is the case? It seems like having long hair could be a disadvantage, and extremely long hair seems to be rare in other mammals.



Answer



How humans evolved to have head / beard hair that continues to grow longer than other animals is a topic that many anthropologists & biologists are still not sure about & there is no general consensus as to "why" yet.


The three main views that I am aware of however are :


1) Evolution of the "Aquatic Ape." (Ingram, 2000: Morgan 1997; 1982)



  • Infants, in order to hold onto their mothers in the water, would latch onto her hair. Limiting separation from the mother & increasing chances of survivability

  • Longer hair meant that infants / small children would need to swim less in order to get to their mother


  • Believed to be supported even further when you consider that aquatic mammals are almost always hairless, indicating that at one point, humans were highly "aquatic" mammals.


2) No real benefit, but used as a tool for "mate selection." (Darwin, 1871; Cooper 1971)




  • The view held by many of the Darwin school of thought (I do not mean that as a derogatory), is that at first, "hairiness" was sexually attractive, but eventually "hairlessness" became more sexually attractive in most places (i.e. the face to see facial expressions & socialize better; Wong & Simmons 2001)




  • A sign of "virility" & "health" as can be seen in the mate-selection behavior of lions. Which is true even today as human diagnostic material for health (Klevay, 1972).





3) Practical evolutionary benefits for the human species specifically




  • A lot of body heat escapes from the head, probably the most important part of your body. Hair is a good insulator that can keep in heat. This increases survivability in colder climates. (Wong & Simmons 2001; Bubenick 2003). (A disputed but considered credible reason, especially when you compare hair length and types across different regions throughout history)




  • Protection against damaging UV rays (while still permitting adequate Vit.D3 to come through) & some protection from free-radicals or other harmful particles. Because we became bi-pedal, the head was the main area exposed to the sun (as well as some of our back). Extending hair's usefulness to even hot environments, while other body hair became less important with the development of sweat glands (Wheeler 1985).





  • Heightened "Situational Awareness" through "Touch sense." A concept that may seem silly at first but has some evidence to support the theory. Though the hair is not "alive," it is connected to the follicles & your nerves. In a nutshell, it may help to increase "sensory awareness" & "data gathering" of your environment, which would favor longer hair. This would be an asset in survivability (Kardong 2002; keratin.com 2010; Sabah 1974; washington.edu)




  • Though not a collegiate Journal article, if reasonably credible, this small article is an interesting case for supporting hair & "Touch sense" in "recent history" & in combat-survival : http://www.sott.net/article/234783-The-Truth-About-Hair-and-Why-Indians-Would-Keep-Their-Hair-Long.




I personally lean 90% "Evolutionary benefits" & 10% "Mate selection" as to reasons why humans' hair continues to grow longer than other animals. Beard & head.


Hope this info was a little helpful. There are copious amounts of other respectable articles on each point, but I only referenced a few.


human biology - Is global life expectancy normally distributed?



I am trying to find out what the world distribution of life expectancy looks like.



Answer



Let's see!


I took the most recent WHO data from here and did a quick an dirty analysis in R. Here is the histogram as well as a normal distribution with the same mean and standard deviation as the actual data:


enter image description here


Does not look very normally distributed. In fact, the shapiro test confirms this impression:


Shapiro-Wilk normality test

data: df$life_expectancy
W = 0.94141, p-value = 4.338e-07




Edit


Commenters requested to weigh the life expectancy by population size.Well...the result is pretty ugly:


enter image description here


Apparently, the large populations of China and India produce disproportionally high bars. However, keep in mind that we are using averaged values which means that all the variation within countries is not represented by the histogram. We would actually have to have data on individual ages of death for a random sample of the world population to finally settle the question. :/


Thursday 27 July 2017

ethics - KAU is accused of hiring well-known professors to boost university rankings by adding affiliation. Is it ethical to accept this kind of offer?


For those unaware of the situation, here are some links:



Messerly, Megan. 'UC Berkeley Professor Critiques Saudi University's Recruitment Process Of World's Top Researchers'. The Daily Californian. Last modified 2014. Accessed March 16, 2015.
http://www.dailycal.org/2014/12/05/citations-sale/.


Yahia, Mohammed. 'Are Saudi Universities Buying Their Way Into Top Charts? : House Of Wisdom'. Blogs.Nature.Com. Last modified 2012. Accessed March 16, 2015.
http://blogs.nature.com/houseofwisdom/2012/01/are-saudi-universities-buying-their-way-into-top-charts.html.



KAU is asking people to claim KAU affiliations on papers where no collaboration exists, thus boosting KAU's metrics in the easily-fooled US News university rankings. The existence of ancillary benefits, such as collaboration with local KAU researchers, seem to have been somewhat debunked by now, but this was not clear before. (There are some such benefits, but largely they fail to materialize.)



$72k per year is a lot of money, and there are some very accomplished people who have accepted this association. In a situation not too different from the one I am in now, I could easily see myself selling this part of my reputation for $72k. By no means can I stand above this deal on moral grounds.


Is it ethical to accept this kind of offer? What is the impact on prestige and reputation of the researchers who have accepted this offer, now that its primary motive of citation-gaming is unambiguous?




phd - How to maximise one's chances of getting a good postdoc position?


I am at the beginning of my PhD studies. Although that is a bit too early to plan one's carrier after thesis defence, one should still have some long-term goals in mind. Hence the question - what can one do during one's PhD (mainly as far as long-term activities are concerned) to maximise the chances of getting accepted for such a position?


Few things that come to mind:





  • High quality research published in high reputation journals (obviously).




  • Creating a contact network at conferences, research visits and through scientific collaborations. One might get to know one's potential postdoc supervisor or recommendation letters from established researchers.




  • Online visibility through blogging, social networking etc.





  • Good teaching experience. PhD students often have to teach but some might try to get on with the necessary minimum. Having a good record (e.g., from student evaluations) can be advantageous.




  • Experience with grant administration - helping one's supervisor with grant proposals, reports for grant committees etc.




  • Maybe some experience with paper reviews (towards the end of the PhD). Or is it still early for that?




Are there any other things I missed? I am looking specifically for the situation in theoretical physics and PhD without coursework but experiences of others might be relevant and interesting as well.




Answer



I am also in your current situation and look for the same. Here is something I have learnt so far which are important to get postdoc job in good quality institutes. Here is the list without order:



  • Publish in under-spot conferences and seminars

  • Reference letter from pioneers of the domain (if you can liaise)

  • International collaboration, research, and publication

  • Face-to-face visit. If possible try to make an appointment with potential postdoc supervisors and visit them in person. It helps both of you to better evaluate and decide.

  • Search among friends of your friends for an open position. I use Microsoft Academic portal "http://academic.research.microsoft.com/" to search co-authors of my supervisor or academician friends of mine to see if there is any potential postdoc supervisor in their network. So you can give a try and if found, ask your supervisor or your academician friends to play a role and introduce you to potential boss. I think it should work well.

  • Upload your papers everywhere you can (take care of copyright issues) and try to increase their visibility and citation; the higher citation, the better chance.

  • Make your professional account in Google Scholar and keep that up to date.


  • Enroll in academic organizations like IEEE and get membership. It gives lots of benefits and is like a mark of attachment and care to the society.

  • Collaboration invitation. Try to prepare a paper and get in touch with potential postdoc supervisors to invite them collaborate. This can be a venue to exchange couple of emails and get to know each other more. You can later use this opportunity to request for position.

  • Try to get chance to visit potential labs as visiting scholar. some institutes welcome visiting PhD students under different schemas like student exchange or international collaboration.- Volunteer job in varied community; not necessarily academic environment. Try to show your passion to work independently in every workplace regardless of the details.

  • Online Connectivity. Active participation in online networks like Linkedin, Researchgate, stackexchange(here), and so on.

  • Patent is also important since institutes are increasing concern about patents and desire their postdocs to produce patent beside publication. It also enhance your industrial career too.

  • Keep sending application for advertised positions and don't get disappointed.

  • Keep sending email and follow up to potential postdoc supervisors with potential postdoc projects (it depends on your field) even if they have no current position. Your messages may impress them and motivate them to hire you to work on a project you define. If yes they can apply for funds (I know one of my friends in CS got offer in this way).


I hope these points help you better hunt a good postdoc in good research group.


EDIT: Patent is modified to address some concerns on wording. EDIT2: Some change in the order to better highlight their importance.



time management - Do you have any paper academic calendars or planners to recommend?



I wanted to ask if you have any specific paper calendars or planners which cover an academic year (October - September) and which you can recommend for PhD students? Thanks a lot!




Wednesday 26 July 2017

genetics - Did the eugenics program in Nazi Germany have a measurable effect?



Did the killing or sterilisation of people considered as living a "life unworthy of life" in Nazi Germany have any measurable effect on the "average health" of Germany? Is there any statistical evidence that the rate of (a specific) mental or physical illness is lower in Germany compared to other countries that were not affected by the Nazis (I guess you would need to have data on the rate of that illness from before the eugenics program as well)?


P.S. Please note, I'm neither interested in discussing the ethics of eugenics, nor in condoning what has happened in its name under the Nazis. I just want to know what the result on average health (if there is such a thing) was.



Answer



As most of the comment have pointed it out, It's nearly impossible to find out. This is my try:


Dr. L Alexander wrote in his paper, Medical Science under Dictatorship:



Hitler issued the first direct order for euthanasia in Germany on September 1, 1939, as his Panzers moved on the Blitzkrieg of Poland. Organizations with humanitarian-sounding names were immediately set up to execute "health" programs, again, under deceptively, euphemistic terms. For example, questionnaires collected by a "Realm's Work Committee of Institutions for Cure and Care" gathered and reported information on patients who had been ill five years or more and who were unable to work. "On the basis of name, race, marital status, nationality, next of kin, whether regularly visited and by whom, who bore financial responsibility, and so forth," decisions were made at key universities about which patients should be killed by psychiatrists who had themselves never seen the patients.Likewise, the "Realm's Committee for Scientific Approach to Severe Illness Due to Heredity and Constitution" was exclusively devoted to the killing of children with congenital anomalies or chronic illnesses. In all, 275,000 people were put to death in these killing centers before the Nazi Holocaust.




enter image description here


Law for the Prevention of Offspring with Hereditary Diseases (July 14, 1933)



Anyone suffering from a hereditary disease can be sterilized by a surgical operation if, according to the experience of medical science, there is a high probability that his offspring will suffer from serious physical or mental defects of a hereditary nature. Anyone suffering from any of the following diseases is considered hereditarily diseased under this law:


1. Congenital mental deficiency,


2. Schizophrenia,


3. Manic-depression,


4. Hereditary epilepsy,


5. Hereditary St. Vitus’ Dance (Huntington’s Chorea),


6. Hereditary blindness,



7. Hereditary deafness,


8. Serious hereditary physical deformity.


Furthermore, anyone suffering from chronic alcoholism can be sterilized.



If anyone is trying to get the statistical evidence that Eugenics have even remotely successful, have look at this table:


enter image description here


Current Top 50 death causes of Germany. (Rate = $\frac{death}{1000}$)




They have started various ways to brainwash people, one of them was movies.


$\text{Ich klage an}$




(source: filmportal.de)


Plot: A woman suffering from multiple sclerosis pleads with doctors to kill her


Current Scenario: Germany Rank $18^{th}$ in the world in death due to Multiple sclerosis


Source:



  1. Alexander L. Medical science under dictatorship. N Engl J Med 1949;July 14.

  2. http://www.life.org.nz/euthanasia/abouteuthanasia/history-euthanasia6

  3. Table: WHO, World Bank, UNESCO, CIA and individual country databases for global health and causes of death.



Tuesday 25 July 2017

dna - Does an annealing temp higher than primer's Tm contribute to primer dimer?


I am attempting to reproduce results from a number of journal articles all referring to the same SNP. In doing this I'm using the same primer set outlined in the articles. When I attempted a run the other day I experienced what I can only assume was primer dimer (~40bp product, bands not visible at expected bps.) While the primers and restriction enzyme were the same among numerous articles, the annealing temperatures in the reaction varied a fair amount (52-59C). All were above the individual Tms of the primers which struck me as odd.


Calculating the Tm via primer blast here are the numbers:


Forward Tm: 50.14 [5'-GCTCTACTTCCTGAAGACCT-3']


Reverse Tm: 51.67 [5'-AGTCTCACTCACCTTTGCAG-3']


Other sites gave slightly higher numbers (54-55) but they are still below the 57C that I used in my reaction. I do not have access to a gradient thermocycler otherwise I would have tried a range myself.


If an annealing temperature is chosen above the individual Tms how do the oligos have a chance to anneal with the template and eventually extend? I remember hearing the Tm calculation is more involved and includes finding where the melting curve changes direction. But on the surfance I would think the primers would never have a chance to anneal at such high temperature? What is wrong about my interpretation?




mathematics - What are the ethics of getting help from online forums?


As an engineer, sometimes in my research I come across a mathematical problem that either is beyond my mathematical skills, or I know that someone, somewhere must have seen something like it before and can point me in the right direction, hence saving me time.



Asking on math.stackexchange often does the trick, but I wonder what the ethics involved are. For instance, if someone provides a complete answer, and the result turns out to be integral to the paper, should I offer them authorship?


PS: I'm not talking about a result that is novel in itself - i.e. it would not be considered as a contribution to mathematics. The result will be an application of standard mathematics to a particular engineering problem.



Answer




Asking on math.stackexchange often does the trick, but I wonder what the ethics involved are. For instance, if someone provides a complete answer, and the result turns out to be integral to the paper, should I offer them authorship?



If someone else made an integral contribution to your work, it seems appropriate to offer them coauthorship, yes. You go on to say:



I'm not talking about a result that is novel in itself - i.e. it would not be considered as a contribution to mathematics. The result will be an application of standard mathematics to a particular engineering problem.




I see what you're getting at, but still: if you did not have the knowledge to write the paper, then asked someone for help, then based on their help you can write the paper, then it seems that they deserve to be offered coauthorship even if what they provided was from the perspective of their discipline completely routine and well-known.


One example that springs to mind is the Hardy-Weinberg Principle: this is a famous (and, in my understanding, rather important) law of genetics whose mathematical content really does seem to amount to: if p+q = 1, then p^2+2pq + q^2 = 1. The history of this is not what I had assumed it to be: it is not a collaboration between Hardy and Weinberg (Weinberg was a German physician who had independently discovered the law at about the same time). Rather Reginald Punnett was having trouble defending Mendelian genetics against an argument of Udny Yule that dominant alleles would weed out recessive ones and thus genotypic frequencies would not remain stable in the population. Punnett brought this up to (the great analytic number theorist) G.H. Hardy who happened to be his cricket partner, who duly submitted a letter to the journal Science. As the wikipedia article points out, Hardy makes his take on his "contribution" pretty clear, e.g. in the phrasing "a little mathematics of the multiplication-table type is enough to show...." It is interesting that this is not called the "Hardy-Punnett Law" (though there are Punnett squares, which seem to my inexpert eye to be pretty much the same thing). One striking thing about this example is that the mathematics here is really trivial: it is hard to imagine any mathematician (or engineer, etc.) who would not have been able to answer the question.


Of course, just because you offer someone coauthorship does not mean that they will take it. Most mathematicians I know are not interested in being coauthors of papers in other disciplines for which their contribution was purely mathematical and is regarded by them as "trivial", "well-known" or both. If someone declines coauthorship then it seems largely agreed upon that you can go on to write the paper by yourself and include a clear acknowledgement of their contribution.


evolution - Does it make sense to classify all humans in a single species?


For what biological reasons do we consider that all human beings belong to the same species?




A Thai and a Nigerian share a common ancestor that is 140,000 years old (see Gravel et al. 2010 and this post). Would, for example, a mixed Thai - Nigerian baby suffer from any outbreeding depression?



Answer



Actually, we not only consider that all human beings belong to the same species (Homo sapiens) but even that we belong to the same subspecies (Homo sapiens sapiens). So, does it really makes sense?


Concept of species


First, please note that the concept of species is more arbitrary than the most layman would think. I wrote my opinion about the concept of species in this post.


Concept of species in sexually reproducing lineages



In sexual lineages, the existence of different species is generally defined by the existence of a reproductive barrier (see reproductive isolation and see UnderstandingEvolution > biological species concept).


A reproductive barrier can be caused by either pre-zygotic or post-zygotic isolation. I will mainly disregard potential case of pre-zygotic reproductive isolation in this answer because such isolation depends highly on the culture and not only on human genetics. I do not mean that pre-zygotic isolation does not matter or are irrelevant, I just decide to focus on post-zygotic isolation because, as being very independent of the culture, it makes its study much easier.


Reproductive isolation might be partial typically leading to cases of outbreeding depression (when it comes to post/zygotic isolation).


If we had many documented cases of outbreeding depression, it would suggest that we should reconsider the decision of considering all human being. So the question is really: Do we have documented cases of outbreeding depression?


Do we have documented cases of outbreeding depression?


Many cases of inbreeding depression have been documented in humans (McQuillan et al. 2012, Strauss et al. 2013, Lettic et al. 2008, Gellera et al. 1990) but cases of outbreeding depression seem much rarer if any!


I spent some time screening through the literature searching for potential evidence of outbreeding depression. The only paper I found is Udry et al. 2003.


Udry et al. 2003:





  • First, note that they do not place their results in the context of our present discussion and do not talk about outbreeding depression.




  • They report that children of "mixed-race" in US colleges report having more behavioral troubles. One would obviously note that there could well be true that "mixed-race" children experience a different environment (incl. social environment) than "non-mixed-race" children. Such results, therefore, does not suggest the existence of any outbreeding depression.




  • They also report more skin problem in mixed-race children. Unfortunately, 1) their p.value is only slightly significant and 2) they track tens of variables without correcting for multiple comparisons and only one came out significant causing the expected family-wise false positive rate to be higher than the observed family-wise positive rates (see false positive and related concept in statistics).




So, in short: No, there is little to no evidence of outbreeding depression in humans



Potential publication bias and taboo


It is not impossible that there is a publication bias in which researchers looked for inbreeding depression more than for outbreeding depression. One would note also that it would probably be quite taboo to attempt to suggest that there are several species of humans for social reasons and such taboo could cause a publication bias too.


I personally doubt it would be the case that such publication bias exists. Note also that if the evidence of outbreeding depression were obvious and common, then we would not have a problem telling that there are several species of humans. In essence, if there is a publication bias that is causing us to fail to see existing outbreeding depression, it must mean that existing outbreeding depression would be relatively rare and with small effect anyway.


Other definitions of species and taboo


Well, the issue is that there is no other commonly accepted definition of species. Typically, above I only considered outbreeding depression and I did not consider a potential pre-zygotic barrier that would result from geographic isolation or from cultural reasons (e.g. maybe on the ethnic group does not like the appearance of people of another ethnic group and vice versa). I don't doubt that for social reasons, we tend to be quite happy that our only definition of species support the idea that all humans belong to the same species.


It is hard (for me at least) to tell whether we might tend to be more permissive in other lineages and naming two sister lineages as belonging to different species.


Why same subspecies and not only species?


Under the biological species concept, H. sapiens and H. neanderthalis should belong to the same species. This is why we now rather call them H. sapiens sapiens and H. sapien neanderthalis. I suppose it would feel painful to many to not highlight our differences with H. neanderthalis and so, we decided to discriminate.


Again, it is hard (for me at least) to appreciate how this subspecies discrimination in the Homo lineage compares to discrimination among potential subspecies in other lineages.


Related posts




career path - Does ORCID matter for a person who would like to work in academia?


I just noticed the following words from arXiv:


"You are encouraged to associate your ORCID with your arXiv account. ORCID iDs are standard, persistent identifiers for research authors. ORCID iDs will gradually supersede the role of the arXiv author identifier."


I thus wonder if a person's profile in ORCID is really that important, given that the person would like to pursue a career in academia?



Answer



While I largely agree with Ian's answer (ORCID might matter in the future, but doesn't right now), I see one place where it may already matter and a reason why it should come to matter more in the future.


Right now, there is a strong implicit presumption of the uniqueness of a scientist's name, and all of the literature searches and citation databases, etc, of the world get rather confused when you have a person who either a) shares the same name as other practicing scientists or b) has a name that changes over time (e.g., marriage, gender identity change) or is represented differently (e.g., transliterated) in different papers.


On this site, we have a number of good, difficult questions dealing with the problems that name change and transliteration cause, which is particularly acute for academics in countries that don't use the Latin alphabet (e.g. this excellent question). These problems will grow in importance as the number of practicing scientists grows and becomes more diverse, and as the duration of the readily searchable literature grows as well.


In short: there is a rapidly growing need for something like ORCID that makes it easy to distinguish scientists without context-sensitive text mining. Whether ORCID is that thing, and how long it will take for it to be widely adopted and effective, are both open questions.



molecular biology - Do we see protocells forming in nature today?


I understand that the current theory of chemical evolution (aka origin-of-life, abiogenesis) involves lipid-based protocells that enclosed RNA and perhaps some other compounds as a first steps to life.


I'm wondering if we see them forming today in nature, and if not, why not?


Are there successful experiments creating them in the lab? If so, what are the required conditions?




bibliometrics - How many people read an individual journal article?


General background


Some time ago, I was reading a blog post, where there was some discussion about how many people read journal articles. I think that such an estimate is important when trying to assess the impact of research on society. However, whereas internet sites readily track usage. Such information seems a little more difficult to come by when it comes to readership for a particular journal article.


Initial Ideas



  • Articles vary: Obviously journal articles vary in many ways and just as with citation counts, readership is likely to be highly skewed, perhaps something like a power function. In addition to academic impact, presumably articles that are available for free on the internet are read more.

  • Time since publication: The number of reads increases over time, but the rate of readership presumably varies over time (perhaps a spike on initial release, and then gradual decline as relevance dissipates).


  • Definitions of reading vary: Read counts would also increase or decrease based on how reading is defined. At the low end is a glance at an abstract. At the high end is carefully reading the entire article. I'd be happy with a working definition that involved reading at least two pages.


Initial Data



  • PlosOne article statistics: As a very rough guide, it suggests that mean views per article is around 800 per year.

  • Journal of Vision: this article reports some download statistics: "In the most recent accounting in July, 2008, the top five articles were each downloaded between 1,993 and 3,478 times."

  • Some journals list subscription counts


Initial Guess


I find it useful to have a ball park estimate of these things. My own initial guess, based on minimal data, is that readership is between 50 and 1000 times the citation count for the article. Linking the estimate to citation count makes it easier to estimate for a given article and should incorporate effects like time and journal prestige.



Question



  • What is a good estimate of how many people read a given journal article?

  • What data and sources of information justify this estimate?

  • Is there any established literature that can inform such an estimate?



Answer



Sounds like a Fermi Problem :)


A question I asked myself recently, based on the many cases of plagiarism by top-politicians in Germany in humanities, was, are in humanities more articles/texts published than scholars can actually read completly. The amount of copied text in single phd thesis showed by plagiarism-detection communities in Germany like Vroniplag or Guttenplag is shocking to me. Often 50% of text is not marked correctly as citation. Even the supervisors at the local universities look like they never read some of these thesis completly. I really hope this is not representative, but fear it might be the tip of the iceberg in humanities (in Germany).


Personally, coming and working in a STEM field, I did a very specialized thesis, there are often less than a dozen groups worldwide working on such a narrow-specialized topic (matter of scientific competition/finding a niche, time, expertise and lab hardware in such fields). So there will be articles in peer-reviewed journals that are not really interesting to more than 20-50 researcher and probably a similar number of industry-researchers worldwide in STEM (competition between companies and research groups being not that different due to economic contraints). Without modern search engines, most non-scholars/private men would have a hard time to find such articles. This is another point in your estimation. The reader count for nature/sciene vs. very specialized journals varies a lot, I don't think any average number really helps you a lot or is that interesting. If you know your specialized field, you should notice pretty fast studying some journals, how many scholars have really a interest in that field.



Your PlosOne link is interesting. I can back this up a bit to give you at least a rough magnitude of order, what the reader count of top, specialized, ... journals is. I think it's quite normal, to read articles not completely (even if you cite them), but I take a close look on articles I downloaded, often due to the fact that I use many keywords and google operators to really filter out the stuff I'm looking for. This is something that varies also a lot between different scholars/students. I'm often shocked how students make use of search engines, if it is laziness or ignorance of search operators. This can save you so much reading time. Therefore, I think the extrapolated reader count based on citation factor might be more representative and reliable than using site views/downloads due to scholars, private people, laymen often downloading articles with information they didn't look for because of bad search engine use. Growing redundancy/plagiarism is a further factor here.


Some possible heuristics:



  • comparison of published aricles per month and web site/interface visitors per month on download platforms like PlosOne, arxiv, nature.


arxiv has around 6000 published articels per month, unique visits 100000, 12,4 million downloads by academic institutions, 50 million overall vs. 12x6000 articles 2011 means downloads/view of abstract of around 170 (I used 12,4 million here), of course, that doesnt count articles not published in that year, so the average read count of a single arxiv article is probably lower than 170 and more touching the 20-50 mark I explained above. But here you have IMO a reasonable and quite objective minimum and maximum limit for a scientific article other scholars are really interested in, 50-170


nature has 900000 unique visits per month, around 200 articles per month, so you see why having an article published in nature is probably more worth than 10 articles on arxiv, PlosOne or many other specialized journals in a distinct branch, even if they are peer reviewed ;)



  • looking up bibliographies of a some phd thesis in your field at your local university, the number of cited articles is in STEM often in the range of 50-200 (You see even here it varies a lot what a single phd student will/has to read). Of course you do not cite all articles you read, but the factor shouldn't be higher than 2 between (or your search engine use is imho suboptimal) cited and read articles. Considering the phd student will publish 3-5 (in STEM reasonable number or 1 nature article :) ) articles during his phd work and multiplying 3-5*20-50 (average read count by institutional scholars) you also get the number of articles in a phd thesis bibliography of 50-200. Pure Chance?! Looks like a strange calculation, but there is a link between how much article input a average scholar needs and how much output he creates (thats why I multiply both values) and it strengthens my experience/analysis above that 10-100 readers is a reasonable magnitude of order for people being really interested in an single average article. To me it doesn't look like pure chance, but that's the main problem with Fermi questions and answers :)



PS: notice this analysis is focused on STEM, I believe the average read count is much lower in humanities and side-effects like different languages and plagiarism seem to play a bigger role to make a really objective guesstimate


Monday 24 July 2017

human biology - Can general soap kill bacteria?


I have read that general soap can kill bacteria by opening holes in the bacterial membrane.


http://questions.sci-toys.com/node/90


However, I found some articles as well saying that it cannot.


http://goaskalice.columbia.edu/answered-questions/does-soap-kill-germs


There seems split answers among experts, so I would like to know which one is correct.


Could anyone advise me?



Thanks.



Answer



Soap kills nearly all the bacteria it comes into contact with by dissolving the bacterial membrane. Some viruses with protein coats can resist soap, but many viruses have similar membranous coats (like HIV) and are usually disrupted by soap. I'm sure it washes some away too, but to say they don't kill bacteria is misleading. In the end, though, they are gone.


Antibacterial soap with triclosan does not kill bacteria on contact and are no more effective than if they had no triclosan at all. That's actually a good thing since really using an antibiotic would probably accelerate antibiotic resistant bacteria which is a serious - probably catastrophic public health failure. A recent study showed that killing bacteria by soaking with triclosan took 9 hours to start showing an effect.


To achieve full sterility, surgeons bathe their gloves in iodine (see details in the comments below) and their instruments will be sterilized by heating them beyond the boiling point in an autoclave under pressure. That's useful when you are breaching the skin in surgery, but the skin needs some bacteria to be healthy long term and works well to fend off bacterial infections.


Your confusion seems to come from finding a page full of errors. Alice didn't really do her homework.


human biology - Do men and women have the same number of genes?


As far as I know, humans have 23 pairs of chromosomes, each one which contains a particular amount of genes. But in the "last" pair, men have a XY pair chromosome, and women have a XX pair chromosome. Does the missing "leg" of the XY pair make men to have fewer genes than women, and if so, how many genes do each sex have?



Answer



It is true that the Y chromosome is shorter than the X chromosome and that there are more genes on the X chromosome.



Do men have fewer genes?




One could (mis)understand three things in the expression "number of genes".



  1. Number of gene copies (see Copy Number Variation)

  2. Number of genes

  3. Number of alleles


Thanks to @GerardoFurtado for correcting my semantic in the comments.


1. Number of gene copies


From the statement that there are fewer genes on the Y chromosome, one can conclude that men have fewer genes copies than woman.



This is the intuition the OP seemed to have.


2. Number of genes


Men also have an X chromosome. So men have the standard genes present on the X chromosome (but they only have a single copy of it while women have two copies; btw you might be interested in dosage compensation).


Because women do not have a Y chromosome and because there are a number of genes on the Y chromosome that are not present on the X chromosome, men have genes that female don't have at all. Therefore women have fewer genes than men.


3. Number of alleles


There is not much reason to expect that one gender would be more heterozygote than the other at autosomes (=non sexual chromosomes). Some may hypothesize that women may have more heterozygosity than men if there is stronger selection among sperm than among ovules or things like that but let's not get down this complicated path.


One one hand women have more gene copies and therefore might experience more heterozygosity, one the other hand, men have more genes and would therefore eventually carry more alleles. I don't know which side wins!


Did you mean number of genes per cell or per individual?


So far I assumed you were interested about the number of genes (or gene copies) per cells but if you want to compare whole individuals than it is a different story!


Men are on average taller and therefore have more cells. Therefore if you compare the body-wide number of gene copies, women will have fewer gene copy on average (Thanks to @JM97 comment).



citations - Is it ethical for authors to reference another paper, but not cite it formally, because they consider it unscientific?


I found in a medical paper from the 1990's a non-citation like this:



The results and terminology by John Smith, Jane Poe, John Doe, Richard Roe, Larry Loe, Journal of Scientific Papers, 12345-698 (3), are unscientific [Brown, 1997; Lawrence 1985]



So, they want to unequivocally reference the paper by Smith et al; but as they consider it bad, they don't want to give them a citation. I have never seen that before. Also, I am not familiar with the field, so I can't say how bad that paper is.


Citations are considered as a measurement of the impact of a paper, and as such, a proxy for its quality. On the other hand, people cite papers even to criticise them (you did it all wrong, people!).


Is this non-citation ethical? How bad would the paper have to be to justify it?




Answer



As editor I would not accept this in a publication. If it is published it should be referenced. Yes, it bumps the references for the authors and yes, bad science may attract a fair amount of citations for all the right?/wrong? reasons. But, it is not up to the authors to decide how referencing should be made, journals have guidelines that should be followed. Having the citation properly referenced makes it easier for others to find the article and see it for themselves.


Furthermore, from another point of view the statement that something is "unscientific" is not appropriate either. It is an opinion. The cited paper can be unscientific but the academic way to show this is not to just say it but to prove it.


Your quote is a specific case, of which I know nothing, so the reply concerns the general case but I would react if I saw something like that in a paper I edit and I would ask the authors to stick to facts.


One last point is that if a paper is really bad, then it should be considered for retraction. That is how scientifically extremely poor, bordering on dangerous, papers are handled.


Sunday 23 July 2017

senescence - Do crocodiles age?


I was watching a talk by Michio Kaku and he mentioned that crocodiles (or possibly alligators, I forget offhand) don't actually age -- they can die, but they essentially go through no aging process beyond adulthood


Can anyone link me any sort of detailed information on this?




molecular biology - Where do the H+ ions come from in light reactions?


In the light-dependent reactions of photosynthesis, H+ ions pass to the thylakoid space. Where do these protons come from?




professors - Post tenure job search in the humantities: a waste of time?



I've searched many forums and websites and I am hoping to find a more direct answer to my question.


I am a tenured, associate professor of humanities at a SLAC (yes, I do appreciate this). My family is very unhappy where we are living. I would have gone on the job market before getting tenure but had a confluence of personal crises that went on for over a year. Anyway, I looked for a job last year but noticed that all except one or two in my field are for assistant professor.


Is it "not done"/completely a waste of time to apply for assistant professor positions?


Last year, I had one campus interview, and they said they would hire me as associate but not tenured. Didn't get that job, obviously. I am actually okay with moving without tenure, due to wanting to improve things for my family. I am just a humanities prof, however -- I don't bring grants, funding, all that jazz with me. I'm not a hotshot in publications, either. I don't want a different job or a different university (a move up), just a different location where my family might be happier.


Am I wasting my time?




evolution - Is natural selection a tautology, and therefore not truly falsifiable?


I've heard the argument from a lot of creationists that all the evidence for natural selection (and by extension, evolution) in general is worthless because natural selection is so flexible that it could cover all the data, no matter what we discovered. In essence, that natural selection is a tautology:


Survival of the fittest. What is 'fit'? What survives.


There are other creationists, however, that admit that natural selection could be falsified. These are split into two groups:



  • The ones that say, if you rephrase natural selection as a non-tautology, it becomes obvious that it doesn't work:



Natural selection has been criticized as a tautology. This would be a major problem for evolutionary biology, if true, because tautological statements can't be falsified and, therefore, can't be scientific. There is merit to this critique insofar as the theory of natural selection is indeed generally described in a tautological manner. However, natural selection can be described non-tautologically if we’re careful. Natural selection should be defined as the theory that attempts to predict and retrodict evolutionary change through environmental forces acting upon organisms. However, this re-framing comes at a cost: it reveals, based on our current knowledge of evolutionary forces, the lack of ability to make accurate predictions about expected changes except in the most simple of circumstances.




  • And those that say that the falsifying options provided by natural science are impossible to actually use. Here are some of those falsifying options:





  1. Charles Darwin himself proposed a rather strong test of evolution: "If it could be demonstrated that any complex organ existed, which could not possibly have been formed by numerous, successive, slight modifications, my theory would absolutely break down." [Darwin1859, pg. 175]. This is the basis of claims by various intelligent design writers that various biological structures, such as the vertebrate immune system or the bacterial flagellum, are "irreducibly complex" -- they consist of multiple components that could not develop in the absence of the others. However, these structures have been exhaustively studied in the scientific literature, and scientists have demonstrated entirely plausible evolutionary pathways. See Complexity.

  2. Famed biologist J. B. S. Haldane, when asked what evidence could disprove evolution, mentioned "fossil rabbits in the Precambrian era" [Ridley2004, pg. 66]. This is because mammals, according to current scientific analysis, did not emerge until approximately 40 million years ago, whereas the Precambrian era is prior to approximately 570 million years, when only the most primitive organisms existed on earth.

  3. Biologists had long conjectured that human chromosome number two was the result of a fusion of two corresponding chromosomes in most other primates. If DNA analysis of these chromosomes had shown that this was not the case, then modern evolutionary theory would indeed be drawn into question. This "fusion hypothesis" was indeed confirmed, rather dramatically, in 1993 (and further in 2005), by the identification of the exact point of fusion. For additional details see DNA.

  4. Modern DNA sequencing technology has provided a rigorous test of evolution, far beyond the wildest dreams of Charles Darwin. In particular, comparison of DNA sequences between organisms can be used as a measure of relatedness, and can further be used to actually construct the most likely "family tree" hierarchical relationship between a set of organisms. Such analyses have been done, and the results so far dramatically confirm the family tree that had been earlier constructed solely based on comparisons of body structure and biochemistry. For additional details see DNA.



Is there any way to save natural selection? To do so, we need to:




  • Prove it can be explained non-tautologically

  • Prove that it does make useful predictions

  • Give falsifying experiments that are reproducable and actually possible.



Answer



I think @Remi.b's answer is great and really the only way to answer your questions is with a comprehensive introduction to evolution. However, I wanted to address the tautology issue more directly.


First, the "survival of the fittest" seems like a tautology with "natural selection" because it is not a description of how natural selection works, rather, it is a phrase meant as a synonym for natural selection, to help describe the result to someone unfamiliar with the phrase.


Let me use an analogy: it would be like if you were a very new learner of English, and I told you "Joe's truck has more mass than an elephant!"


If you aren't really familiar with the term "mass" in English, this phrase could be confusing. So I explain instead that "Joe's truck is heavier than an elephant." If you know the word "heavy" this is easier to understand.



However, there is a tautology there! the car is actually heavier because it has more mass, but that does not make either phrase untrue or untestable: it's just another way of saying the same thing within a context (i.e., those statements are the same if they are exposed to the same gravity).


The testable hypothesis that natural selection makes is that, given 2 things: 1) a population where individuals have traits that give them different chances of survival, and 2) some way for offspring to inherit traits from their parent(s), then the population over time will consist of individuals who are more likely to possess the traits that gave a high chance of survival.


Following this, should the environment change in some way such that a different trait is now beneficial, that trait will increase in prevalence.


There are way too many experiments to summarize here that show 1), 2), and a combination of 1) and 2), as well as experiments that show that indeed, when you have 1) and 2) you get natural selection.


cheating - Writing a recommendation letter for a student I reported for academic dishonesty


A few years ago, I reported a student for academic dishonesty (in a graduate-level mathematics course, they were copying solutions off the internet, nearly verbatim). After acknowledging their wrong-doing with the Academic Integrity office on campus, they were allowed to drop the course.


The next year, the student re-enrolled in my course, and did reasonably well. I had no qualms about the originality of their work this time.


They recently asked me whether I would be willing to write them a recommendation letter for PhD programs in mathematics.



If I write a letter, am I obligated to write about the academic dishonesty incident? It appears to me that the student has already faced the consequences of their actions (they had to drop the course); however, this was a significant part of my interactions with the student and it seems dishonest to not mention it.


(I am aware that I could simply tell the student that I am not comfortable writing a letter, but I am curious to know what one should do in this situation if one did write a letter.)


Some facts: when the incident occured, the student was in their first semester of our masters program. They are also an international student, and this was their first semester in the US.




ETA: Look, I framed the question to be as general as possible so that it can be useful to the community as a whole. Since some commentors are choosing to attack my teaching practices, below are some more specifics, where once again I am trying to not reveal the identity of this student, myself, the course, the university, etc. I am actively trying to do what's best for the student here (note that I clearly state that I think the student has faced consequences for their actions; I am also not using my usual ac.se account to post this), and I don't understand where comments about "shutting down a student's career" are coming from.


I clearly state in my syllabus and on the first day of class that copying solutions off the internet (or any written source) is not allowed. I do this because I encountered this situation as a TA in graduate school. In particular, students are allowed to talk to anyone they like about problems, but I believe that when they just copy a solution, they are not learning. You are welcome to disagree with my policy, but it is my policy and my class, and it was clearly stated in two separate venues.


The copied solutions were virtually indistinguishable from the solutions online. This was not a matter of simply "being inspired". This was not isolated - three out of six solutions were copied, and those were just the ones I spotted. When I noticed this, I asked the student to come talk to me. I told them that I had noticed similarities between their work and solutions I had found online. I told them that I was not accusing them of anything, and they did not have to tell me anything; I reiterated that copying solutions from the internet was not permitted; I invited them to come to my office hours to talk about future problem sets; but that if I noticed such similarities again I would report them to Academic Integrity. They did it again on the next problem set (four out of six solutions).


Although they denied everything once via email, after talking with Academic Integrity (where they owned up to everything), they did find me and apologize. I was cordial to them throughout this event, and continued to be so afterward. We remain on good terms now. I consciously try to ensure that I do not let this incident color my interactions and behavior with them. They made a mistake once but people make mistakes and I am trying hard not to take it personally.


In summary, the incident itself was pretty blatant, the policy was clearly stated, and they had an opportunity to stop such that I would not have reported them if they had. I did not take reporting the student lightly. Nonetheless, I think academic dishonesty is a serious matter and it is our responsibility as faculty members to not turn a blind eye to it.



Answer




TL; DR: The student probably wants you to write a letter to mitigate the harm of the incident because they already expect admissions committees to know about it. In that case, mention it briefly and move on to your standard letter.




There are only three reasons I can think of why a student would ask you to write a letter in this situation. How you respond depends on the reason.




  1. Despite, or perhaps because, of the incident you have become a mentor to the student and genuinely know the student very well. The student knows that they have regained your trust and confidence, and that you're in a good position to give them a solid recommendation.


    A. If this is the case, and you truly do now trust the student and want to offer a strong recommendation, you can mention that the two of you got off to a rocky start, and allude to the issue without going into detail (you don't need to use the words "misconduct" or "cheating"). You could say that the student worked hard to regain your confidence, and that you are now happy to strongly recommend etc.
    B. If this is only sort of true, and you don't think very highly of this student and/or have reason to think they might cheat again given the right circumstances, you should decline to write the letter.





It doesn't sound like your situation falls into the first category, however, which brings us to the second possibility.




  1. The student knows that this incident will appear on their record, and that their prospective programs will see it. They believe they have at least somewhat redeemed themselves in your eyes, and are hoping that a generally positive letter from you will mitigate the harm of the incident. I suspect that this is what's actually going on. If so, you should confirm this. Ask the student specifically whether the incident will already be known to admissions committees.
    A. If the answer is yes, write whatever letter you would have written absent the misconduct but with an additional paragraph noting that you were involved in the incident and believe that the student has faced sufficient consequences, and that your letter focuses on their performance in the subsequent class. If you have reason to think the student has learned from the incident and it's not likely to be repeated, include that in the paragraph acknowledging the misconduct, but don't dwell on it.
    B. If the answer is no, the misconduct is sealed or otherwise unlikely to become know to prospective programs, we come to the third possibility.




  2. The student is extremely naive, and doesn't realize the potential harm you could do to their admissions chances by writing about the misconduct.
    A. In this case, absent any particularly strong admiration for the student, I would decline to write the letter. At the very least, you need to strongly caution the student about how bad a letter from you could be for them.

    B. If you really still want to write the letter and your student still wants you to write it after being warned: You could take either approach above, depending on what feels more comfortable to you—either allude to the issue in the most general terms, or mention it but state specifically that it is not the focus of your letter. You should definitely warn your student about this beforehand, though, and perhaps allow them to see the letter before you send it.




evolution - Are there any multicellular forms of life which exist without consuming other forms of life in some manner?

The title is the question. If additional specificity is needed I will add clarification here. Are there any multicellular forms of life whic...