The existence of functional, non-protein-coding DNA is all too frequently portrayed as a great surprise uncovered by genome sequencing projects, both in large media outlets and in scientific publications that should have better quality control in place. Eric Lander, writing a Human Genome Project 10th anniversary retrospective in Nature, explains the real surprise about non-coding DNA that was revealed by big omics projects.
This isn't news anymore (see here, and here), but Bruce Alberts, Editor-in-Chief of Science has weighed in on the out-of-whack system of incentives in the biomedical sciences:
In honor of the 150th anniversary of the publication of the Origin of Species, The Star has decided to trash Darwin.No, they're not going creationist on us, but Stephen Marche argues that Genesis beats the Origin hands down as literature:
Sunday Science Book ClubThe Voyage of the Beagle, by Charles Darwin
I have to delay the Sunday Science Book Club and my discussion of Voyage of the Beagle until next week. In the mean time, I'm initiating the first Post-Apocalyptic Sci-Fi Corner. Over the next few months, I'll share my experiences as I work through my list of post-apocalyptic sci-fi, one of my favorite fiction genres. Post-Apocalyptic Sci-Fi CornerFar North, by Marcel TherouxFarrar, Straus, Giroux, 2009
Welcome to the 17th edition of the Carnival of Evolution. This month, we celebrate not only great evolution blogging around the web, but also some of the best evolution writing of all time. 150 years ago, in November of 1859, The Origin of Species was published. For our sesquicentennial celebration of this major turning point in the history of biology, I've taken a virtual voyage on the Beagle through the vast expanse of the blogosphere. And like Darwin on that first trip in the Beagle, I've kept a journal of my observations, with a little posthumous help from Charles.
Harvard Magazine excerpts Louis Menand on "Professionalization in the academy. If you're thinking of going to graduate school, you need to read this.This is the premise behind academic scholarship:
The recent report of a set of fossils of geniune significance for our understanding of human evolution highlights just how scientifically pathetic the PR circus over the primate fossil Darwinius masillae really was. Paleontologist Jørn Hurum, who purchased the fossil from a collector, clearly thought he had made the find of his life, and so he decided to milk it for all it was worth. The result was science via PR blitz.
The Strangest Man: The Hidden Life of Paul Dirac, Mystic of the Atom, by Graham FarmeloBasic Books, 2009When Niels Bohr calls you strange, you know you're in rare company. Niels Bohr, as director of one of the great institutes of theoretical physics, came to know almost every one of the oddballs who populated the early 20th century physics community, and he rated Paul Dirac as "the strangest man" he ever met. Hence the title of Graham Farmelo's excellent new biography of this major physicist.
I don't hate computational biology, but I've got my issues with the way the field is often practiced. Most of my complaints boil down to this: if a computational biologist is not contributing to our understanding of biology, and not contributing to fundamental computer science either, then what's the point? What are we learning from the research?The problem usually crops up when computational biologists don't seem to care whether their computational results correspond with any biological reality. If a computer model or algorithm is able to (more or less) recapitulate existing data, then that's considered sufficient. But then what is your model contributing? We already knew the existing data, and chances are, your model hasn't contributed anything new to computer science.
Most years, we generally don't worry about the flu (unless we're paid to worry about it, or we belong to an especially susceptible population). Yet some years, like this one, threats of a pandemic flu virus make it on everyone's radar screen. So exactly what is it that makes a flu virus reach pandemic proportions?A group of researchers at the US Centers for Disease Control, Mt. Sinai and Harvard recently used engineered versions of the disastrous 1918 flu virus (don't try this at home!) to learn just what makes a flu virus go global.
Very sound advice from systems biologist Uri Alon:A common mistake made in choosing problems is taking the first problem that comes to mind. Since a typical project takes years even it if seems doable in months, rapid choice leads to much frustration and bitterness in our profession. It takes time to find a good problem, and every week spent in choosing one can save months or years later on.
Peter Lawrence in PLoS Biology writes about the story of K.:
