Advertise Here
03.20.07
Posted in careers, commentary at 4:33 pm by Trevor
I’ve been working in research labs for the past 3+ years now. During that time, I’ve picked up on some great ways to save time when working at the bench. Here’s my 10 best tips:
1. Don’t Make It, Steal It. If you don’t have a reagent already made for your procedure, “borrow” it from the person next to you. Either put it back afterwards or make a new label for it with your name or initials.
2. Make Your Reagents Thief Proof. So if you actually went through the trouble of making your own reagent, don’t let your lab mates take advantage of your time investment. Place ambiguous labels on bottles so others have no idea what is really in the bottle. For reagents with a distinctive color or appearance, don’t use a clear bottle. It can also help to hide the most likely stolen reagents in the back of your reagent shelf.
3. Don’t Break for the Phone. I work in a lab shared by 5-6 people, and there is one phone where calls come in. Trust me, if you sit there long enough, someone else will get the phone, even if you’re closest. Be extra mindful of this and make sure to claim a bench as far from the phone as possible. If you’re already stuck in a bad spot, come up with a clever reason to have the phone moved to another location.
4. Take Advantage of Friendly People. If you have to head to another room or even to the refrigerator to pick something up, watch for someone else heading out of the lab or in the vicinity of the refrigerator. Ask them if they will grab X for you while they’re going. This is a real time saver and your “friend” will take this as a compliment that you trust them with your reagents.
Another tactic is to use the pity approach. Say you need a couple boxes of pipette tips for your assay, but they’re all the way across the lab. You have a quarter full box of tips on your bench. Using a subtle nudge, send your tips tumbling to the floor. “Oh [expletive], I dropped all my tips! Can someone grab me a couple boxes, please!?” This one is money.
5. Protect Your Investment. You’ve invested a lot of time into a procedure, so don’t get greedy with your time and hand it off midway to an undergraduate or technician. If you want it done right, do it yourself. Even a foolproof, any-dummy-can-do-this assay can be screwed up by the most experienced of technicians.
6. Eliminate Extra Distractions. Put yourself in a position to get things done with the least amount of distraction possible. Whether this means turning off the cell phone, shutting down the e-mail program, or putting a “Do Not Disturb” sign on your door, think of ways to eliminate those pesky interruptions. It can also be very helpful to work when others are not around — early mornings, late evenings, weekends, holidays.
7. Safety Is for Losers. You don’t need gloves for most things — just don’t bother. And if you have to wear them, don’t take them carefully off to save for after your lunch break. Toss them quickly and just grab new ones when you get back.
8. Make Your Things Exclusive. Are there things in your lab that are routinely shared between benches? It’s time to make them yours. Apply a brightly colored label to the item with your name and hide it in a secret drawer. This way you won’t have to go searching for it all the time when you need it. Don’t worry about others getting angry searching for it — your lab manager will eventually break down and get a new one.
9. Delegate Simple Tasks to Other People. So you weren’t lucky enough to find someone leaving the lab when you needed the reagent from across the hall. Just tell someone else to do it, particularly someone on their break or with less degrees than you. After awhile, they’ll understand that you’re busier than they are, and they should give you a hand.
10. Barter for Help. So you still can’t find free labor to help with your work? It’s time to get creative. Work out deals with your lab mates. “If you help me today, I’ll help you tomorrow.” Then make sure to reneg on the agreement.
Do you have some tips for saving time at the bench? Share yours in the comments.
Advertisement: File for your tax refund and have money in 24 hours.
Permalink
03.12.07
Posted in commentary, investors at 9:47 am by Trevor
I’ve talked before about e-mails I commonly receive from consultants, investors, and others regarding investment ideas of companies that are poised to take advantage of the research being done in epigenetics. I thought I would share a recent example of one such e-mail:
Hello Trevor-
Congrats on getting this site up. I first read about epigenetics in Discover magazine last year. It’s very interesting and intuitively seems more correct than “traditional” ideas about evolution. It’s a relief to have research that would validate the rise of cancers and “DNA gone mad” accumulated from the many internal and external toxins we have exposed ourselves to in just the past 3 (or so) generations.
This brings a sense of continuity and a more holistic element into our ultra individualistic society.
Keep up the good work.
On a side - I am also a student looking to pay my way through school. Given the emerging research and application of epigenetic research - I would like to invest in a company or research institute that will be applying the advancements to the marketplace. Would you have any advice for me as to where I can look for who is using the information and how? Would you suggest pharmaceutical company websites?
Now, here was my response:
Thank you for the comments. I am also very excited about the advancements being made through our growing understanding of epigenetic processes and our potential to understand more about cancers and diseases that have become prevalent over the past several generations. I like to point out to readers that I am literally learning about all of this just as you are — I had not taken a single genetics course when I started this site and thus my understanding of the methodologies used to increase our understanding of epigenetics was limited.
Regarding investments in companies that are applying these advancements to the marketplace, two companies I would look into are Epigenomics and MethylGene. Both companies are using publicly and privately funded research advancements to develop clinical tests and other marketable products. I have to also say that I am not an investment manager or expert and these should not be taken as endorsements of investments in these companies. I have no investment in either company nor any interest in suggesting that others invest in these companies. These are merely two companies that I know of that are ” applying the advancements to the marketplace.”
I hope this was helpful and I hope you continue to enjoy our coverage at Epigenetics News.
Trevor
It’s clear that investors are taking an active interest in epigenetics as a field that will shape market advances in the coming years.
Permalink
03.09.07
Posted in commentary, methylation, news links at 7:46 am by Trevor
In 2004, members of the American Society of Plastic Surgerons performed over 320,000 liposuction procedures (1). Who knew that the extracted fat was a potential source of stem cells for research or therapeutics.
Dr. Philipe Collas at the University os Oslo in Norway is conducting research to identify the stem cells among liposuctioned fat cells that are the best at regenerating tissue.
“Fat tissue is an underappreciated source of stem cells,” Collas pointed out. Unlike other sources of adult stem cells, such as bone marrow, fat is abundant and there is no shortage of donors. “It’s wonderful, we have litres and litres of material from cosmetic surgery clinics and end up with bucketfuls of stem cells to work with,” he notes.
Researchers ackowledge that the key to transforming adult stem cells from fat into other cell types is in their epigenetic signature, such as the level of methylation.
Epigenetic marks contribute to switching genes on and off, and stem cells rely on them heavily as they divide and mature. The Oslo team has found that low rates of DNA methylation, for instance, boost the chances of transforming fat stem cells from one cell type into another. “Look at a cell’s epigenetic profile,” says Collas, “and you may be able to predict what that cell is likely to turn into.”
These epigenetic signatures have grabbed everyone’s attention, acknowledges Ernest Arenas, a EuroSTELLS researcher at the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, Sweden. “Scientists in the stem cell field are starting to realise that for cell manipulations to succeed they need to pay attention to their epigenetic marks. Cells can’t be pushed along to become a different cell type unless they start out with the right set of [epigenetic] conditions.”
Epigenetics remains one of the most promising avenues of research for identifying ways to differentiate plentiful adult stem cells into other cell types for therapeutic purposes. Link
Permalink
03.07.07
Posted in commentary, investors, news links at 9:23 am by Trevor
The National Institutes of Environmental Health Sciences (NIEHS) is under fire. Effect Measure, a blog written anonymously by public health experts and practitioners, has written a critical review of David Schwartz’s two year term as director of the NIEHS:
Schwartz, like other Bush appointees, has a penchant for outsourcing public functions to private concerns, and under his boss, NIH Director Elias Zerhouni, even the peer review function was put out for bids. Schwartz has been dismantling the flagship environmental health scientific journal, Environmental Health Perspectives (EHP), moving to outsource it, gut its news and comment sections and eliminate the foreign language editions. EHP is an open access journal, but if it is outsourced it may not remain that way. The biggest losers are the many scientists in the developing world, whose environmental problems dwarf those in the developed world. Schwartz had given his word that EHP would not be privatized, an assurance forced on him by congressional pressure. But one of the most disheartening aspects of his reign is that his word cannot be relied upon. Link
The comments from Effect Measure were primed by an article in the LA Times indicating that Sciences International, a private consulting firm, is being questioned by Congress regarding its role as an advisor to the NIEHS and potential conflicts of interest. The potential conflict of interest in question is that in 2006, Sciences International had clients that were among the largest names in the chemical industry, which produces compounds that have been shown to be damaging to reproductive health.
“The most significant project at our firm is the management of the National Toxicology Program’s Center for the Evaluation of Risks to Human Reproduction,” the Sciences International website says. It says half its clients are from the private sector, but its health studies are independent and it “is proud of its reputation for objective science.”
Its current website contains no list of industry clients. But a 2006 version names BASF and Dow Chemical — which manufacture the plastics compound BPA — as well as DuPont, Chevron, ExxonMobil, 3-M, Union Carbide, the National Assn. of Manufacturers, and 45 other manufacturing companies and industry groups.
In 1999, Sciences International represented R.J. Reynolds Tobacco Co. in fighting an Environmental Protection Agency proposal to regulate a pesticide used on tobacco crops. In 2004, its vice president, Dr. Anthony Scialli, who is identified as the federal center’s “principal investigator,” co-wrote a study with a Dow Chemical Co. researcher on how to extrapolate data from animal tests to humans.
In addition, another Sciences International employee who works at the federal agency, Gloria Jahnke, has collaborated nine times on chemicals research with another company that gets funding from the plastics industry, according to a Times review of medical publications. Link
Director David Schwartz has written letters in the past indicating his support of epigenetics research, and his 5-year plan for the agency highlighted epigenetics as an important avenue of investigation.
Update: Additional information on Sciences International and the debate on “privatizing science” is available at The Pump Handle, a relatively new blog on public health. The article is written by Dr. David Michaels, who heads the Project on Scientific Knowledge and Public Policy (SKAPP) and is Professor and Associate Chairman in the Department of Environmental and Occupational Health, the George Washington University School of Public Health and Health Services. Link
Permalink
03.05.07
Posted in chromatin, commentary, methylation, news links, research articles at 6:54 am by Trevor
Nature has published a letter from researchers at the German Cancer Research Center involving their implication of the gene Gadd45a in one of the black boxes of epigenetic mechanisms: demethylation.
DNA methylation is an epigenetic modification that is essential for gene silencing and genome stability in many organisms. Although methyltransferases that promote DNA methylation are well characterized, the molecular mechanism underlying active DNA demethylation is poorly understood and controversial. Here we show that Gadd45a (growth arrest and DNA-damage-inducible protein 45 alpha), a nuclear protein involved in maintenance of genomic stability, DNA repair and suppression of cell growth, has a key role in active DNA demethylation. Gadd45a overexpression activates methylation-silenced reporter plasmids and promotes global DNA demethylation. Gadd45a knockdown silences gene expression and leads to DNA hypermethylation. During active demethylation of oct4 in Xenopus laevis oocytes, Gadd45a is specifically recruited to the site of demethylation. Active demethylation occurs by DNA repair and Gadd45a interacts with and requires the DNA repair endonuclease XPG. We conclude that Gadd45a relieves epigenetic gene silencing by promoting DNA repair, which erases methylation marks.
Link
One of the experiments from this paper seem to support the recent finding that demethylation of the proximal-promoter region is required for active transcription.
ScienceDaily offers a summary of this research adapted from a press release from the German Cancer Research Center. Link
Permalink
03.03.07
Posted in commentary, news links at 12:15 pm by Trevor
Here’s some of the best science links I’ve come across over the past couple weeks:
- Volunteers at LibriVox have created a free audiobook of Charles Darwin’s On the Origin of Species by Means of Natural Selection (1859). Total running time: 24:22:37, total download size: 702.2 MB. (HT: Boing Boing).
- Neurotopia hosts the 74th edition of Tangled Bank, which offers some of the best science writing from around the blogosphere over the past couple weeks.
- Migrations brought my attention to an excellent cell biology animation with a voiceover explaining the processes you are seeing illustrated. If you do any cell biology teaching, this may be a great video to play in your class.
- You may feel like you’re underpaid. This New York Times article provides Web sites that offer information on average salaries based on job title and description, education, and experience. If you happen to work at Washington State University, you can peruse the salaries of any non-student employee at Cougster, which obtained the information using a public information request (click Cougster Files, then WSU Pay). I’ve talked before about tips for getting employed as an undergraduate researcher.
Permalink
03.01.07
Posted in commentary, site news at 6:16 pm by Trevor
In the last week, two more sponsors have chosen to purchase a text link at Epigenetics News: Surgeon’s Advisor and HealthTalk.
Surgeon’s Advisor is a marketing firm that asists cosmetic surgeons, plastic surgeons, and doctors increase their visibility on the web through search engine optimization (SEO), site design, link building, and other techniques. If you’re a medical professional looking to increase your Internet visibility and build clients, check out Surgeon’s Advisor. Link
HealthTalk is a sensibly designed web site offfering information and resources for various diseases, including Alzheimer’s/dementia, Crohn’s disease, multiple sclerosis, and rheumatoid arthritis. The site offers scheduled webcasts and teleconferences with doctors discussing therapy options, and a host of blogs devoted to sharing advice and experiences for those that live with or with people that suffer from these diseases. Link
Now, on to the big idea: I am seriously contemplating changing the theme of Epigenetics News. I chose the Ocadia theme because it offered a professional look and subtle tones, which I like. But the downside is that the theme has a number of graphics that cause slow loading, especially on the home page.
Now, this will probably come as a surprise to the majority of our readers, because site statistics indicate that the majority of Epigenetics News readers are on broadband connections — undoubtedly lots of university and corporate connections. But I know how slow it actually is because until a few months ago, I was stuck with dial-up access from home.
I think that perhaps changing themes will offer the opportunity for faster page loads, a fresh new look, and encourage new visitors on slower connections to stick around. If you have any comments on the current theme or things you’d like to see stay or go, respond in the comments.
Permalink
Posted in commentary, news links at 7:00 am by Trevor
I recently got word that there is an active forum available for researchers in epigenetics; mainly DNA methylation and chromatin modification experiments. Protocol Online maintains a DNA Methylation, Histone and Chromatin Study forum that is fairly active. The majority of the posts seem to deal with bouncing ideas between technicians for troubleshooting problems in common assays such as bisulfite conversion and ChIP assays. This could be a lifesaver for a graduate student or technician looking for assistance in troubleshooting problems with an assay.
Most importantly, these forums provide anonmyity for the participants to allow for seeking advice on simple protocol troubleshooting issues. These kinds of active forums are hard to come by, and one specific for epigenetics researchers could be a helpful resource for many of our busy readers. Link
Permalink
02.26.07
Posted in cancer, commentary, environmental alterations, imprinting, methylation, research articles at 3:02 pm by Trevor
The journal Cell has released a special review issue, “Epigenetics and Chromatin Organization.” The issue contains 11 review articles, beginning with a review of one of the most exciting aspects of epigenetics: its effect on evolution.
According to classical evolutionary theory, phenotypic variation originates from random mutations that are independent of selective pressure. However, recent findings suggest that organisms have evolved mechanisms to influence the timing or genomic location of heritable variability. Hypervariable contingency loci and epigenetic switches increase the variability of specific phenotypes; error-prone DNA replicases produce bursts of variability in times of stress. Interestingly, these mechanisms seem to tune the variability of a given phenotype to match the variability of the acting selective pressure. Although these observations do not undermine Darwin’s theory, they suggest that selection and variability are less independent than once thought. Link
A nice summary of this review article is available at Gene Expression.
The other review articles include:
- The Mammalian Epigenome by Bernstein BE, Meissner A and Lander ES.
- The Epigenomics of Cancer by Jones PA and Baylin SB.
- Chromatin Modifications and Their Function by Kouzarides T.
- The Role of Chromatin During Transcription by Li B, Carey M, and Workman JL.
- Chromatin Challenges During DNA Replication and Repair by Groth A, Rocha W, Verreault A, and Almouzni G.
- Genome Regulation by Polycomb and Trithorax Proteins by Scuettengruber B, Chourrout D, Vervoort M, Leblanc B, and Cavalli G.
- Genetic and Epigenetic Regulators of Pluripotency by Surani MA, Hayashi K, and Hajkova P.
- Noncoding RNAs and Gene Silencing by Zaratiegui M, Irvine DV, and Martienssen RA.
- Noncoding RNAs and Intranuclear Positioning in Monoallelic Gene Expression by Yang PK and Kuroda MI.
- Beyond the Sequence: Cellular Organization of Genome Function by Misteli T.
This special review issue from Cell is a clear indication of the role that epigenetics is playing in changing the scope and direction of scientific research in many different areas. My hope is that epigenetics will continue to inspire more articles in the press and will become well known among both those in science and the general public. Link
Permalink
02.20.07
Posted in commentary, site news at 7:38 pm by Trevor
In my view, the Just Science week was a success. Yeah, we didn’t really meet the challenge. Mr. Rekow and I were able to cover a few epigenetics research articles, and then the inevitable hit: preparation for three exams. On the same day.
To be honest, I was impressed that Rekow and I were able to generate the posts that we did and still come out (mostly) unscathed after the exams were final. I was hoping to get more accomplished in preparation for the event, but the blog has to take a back seat to a lot of things, including my classes and my work. It’s a difficult balancing act.
I would like to give a lot of credit to all of the blogs that participated in the effort and produced a lot of great content. The organizers of Just Science Week have promised to do it again next year, and we’ll probably give it a go again. Until then, all of the content written for Just Science will be available for your viewing pleasure.
Link
Permalink
02.05.07
Posted in commentary, environmental alterations, methylation, research articles at 12:01 am by Trevor
Reader Israel Barrantes recently commented on what he considered to be the “most memorable epigenetic moment of the year” for 2006, which was a groundbreaking paper by Cropley et al. that appeared in Proceedings of the National Academy of Science in November (1). I couldn’t argue with that nomination, so I decided to write about the paper to kick off the week of Just Science.
The paper, titled “Germ-line epigenetic modification of the murine Avy allele by nutritional supplementation,” uses a mutant mouse strain known as viable yellow agouti, or Avy. As shown previously, mice carrying the viable yellow agouti allele exhibit yellow fur, obesity, type II diabetes, and predisposition to tumors. Those that carry one Avy allele and one normal allele (referred to as Avy/a) exhibit varying degrees of the Avy phenotype, ranging from fully yellow and obese to lean and fully agouti. In previous studies, it has been shown that pregnant Avy females that receive a diet supplementation containing folate, choline, betaine, and vitamin B12 from two weeks prior to gestation to birth produce Avy offspring that are shifted toward the agouti phenotype. This shift was also highly correlated with an increase in cytosine methylation. In other words, nutritional supplementation during gestation seemed to cause an epigenetic alteration in phenotypes of offspring.
The picture below shows samples of the varying degrees of the yellow to agouti mice and their corresponding scores. The scores are used in this study as a quantitative way of determining the degree of tranmission of the Avy allele, comparing results when the mutant allele is contributed by the male (sire) or female (dam). The authors found that the previously mentioned shift to the agouti phenotype occurred only when the Avy allele was contributed by the sire, which provides evidence that the male germ line may play a role in transgenerational epigenetic alterations.
The authors then used this evidence of male-specific transmission of the Avy allele to propose that the altered phenotype could be passed to a subsequent generation without further diet supplementation. Further, they wanted to determine if diet supplementation was required throughout gestation to induce the epigenetic alteration. The authors proposed that supplementation was only critical during the period encompassing the point at which primordial germ cells differentiate and reset epigenetic marks. Therefore, the period of supplementation for pregnant a/a dams mated to Avy/a sires was set at E8.5 (embryonic day 8.5, or 8.5 days past conception) to E15.5. (Gestation in mice is about 21 days.) Interestingly, this midgestation exposure was very similar to the timepoint used in another study identifying a transgenerational epigenetic effect in mammals (2).
The authors found that when the F1 generation whose mothers received diet supplementation during gestation were mated, the F2 generation exhibited a similar shift in color score as the F1 generation. It is worth emphasizing that the F2 generation embryos were not directly exposed in utero to diet supplementation as the F1 generation embryos were, but the germ line of F2 animals was affected by the diet supplementation given to the previous generation.
This study was groundbreaking in that it provides the first direct evidence of a mechanism in a transgenerational, epigenetic alteration. However, it would be interesting to see if the shift to the agouti phenotype would continue into the F3 and F4 generations, as would be expected if the epigenetic germ line was permanently reprogrammed.
References:
1. Cropley JE, Suter CM, Beckman KB, Martin DIK.
2006. Germ-line epigenetic modification of the murine Avy allele by nutritional supplementation. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 103:17308-17312.
doi:10.1073/pnas.0607090103
2. Anway MD, Cupp AS, Uzumcu M, Skinner MK. 2005. Epigenetic Transgenerational Actions of Endocrine Disruptors and Male Fertility. Science 308:1466-1469.
doi:10.1126/science.1108190
Permalink
01.26.07
Posted in cancer, commentary, imprinting, methylation at 6:32 am by Trevor
The Greally lab was really easy to find. They linked to me. I have access to a nice stats package through my Web host that shows every referrer to Epigenetics News. So if any Web site links to any page of this site, I’ll eventually see it. Eventually, because there are now hundreds (if not thousands) of sites that link to Epigenetics News. And Dr. Greally, or presumably the person that updates their lab’s web page, decided to add a nice link to “Trevor Covert’s Epigenetics News site, a really valuable blog of all things current in the world of epigenetics.”
So, why should anyone care about the Greally lab? Well, as it turns out, they’re doing some fantastic epigenetics research. Based at the Albert Einstein College of Medicine in Bronx, New York, Dr. John M. Greally “has a long-standing interest in gene regulatory processes that extend over large regions of the genome and give rise to human diseases.”
Our major projects are centred on the discovery of DNA sequence characteristics that discriminate genes undergoing genomic imprinting, using these to find new imprinted genes that are candidates for causing human disease.
The technologies required for this research include innovative molecular assays and bioinformatics techniques. This combination provided the foundation for our recent new avenue of study into cytosine methylation patterns in large regions of the genome.
We use these techniques to learn the rules of normal epigenetic gene regulation through cytosine methylation, creating the foundation for understanding how it is disrupted in disease.
The disease-relevance of epigenetics is now being appreciated. The core dogma of medical genetics is that genes cause disease through mutations. However, this assumes that the gene is switched on appropriately to start with. In the field of cancer research in particular, it is now appreciated that inappropriate silencing of tumour-suppressor genes or activation of oncogenes through epigenetic dysregulation is a major contributor to neoplasia.
We study how the epigenome is altered in cancer, type 2 diabetes mellitus, aging, and as a response to diet and other influences. It is our belief that epigenetic dysregulation will prove to be a much more common cause of complex human diseases than DNA mutations.
I’d like to thank the Greally lab for their ongoing research because, without it, epigenetics would not be where it is today. Greally research articles Link
Permalink
01.24.07
Posted in commentary, reviews at 9:47 am by Trevor
When Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press announced the release of the new epigenetics textbook, I knew that I had to get my hands on it. After receiving it earlier this month and getting a chance to read specific portions, I am going to offer some initial, “first look” comments on this highly specialized textbook.
For starters, the textbook is about the same size as your average genetics textbook: 24 chapters, 502 pages. While the book has its fair share of diagrams and illustrations, it is fair to say that the book is dominated by text. Perhaps the best way to describe much of the book would be to call it a fantastic compilation of reviews in every specialized area of epigenetics.
The book’s contributors are largely the foremost experts in their various fields. Cancer, small and interfering RNAs, epigenetics research specialized for various model organisms — these topics are all covered in CSHL’s Epigenetics. It is clear that the editors did a fantastic job of recruiting the best and the brightest to bring their expertise to a wide audience of researchers and students.
Even better, the text is still very approachable for even the novice undergraduate. The authors do an admirable job of educating the reader about important background information necessary to understanding the concepts presented. And the book has already attracted attention from postdocs and other researchers in my lab, who are intrigued by all of the specialized areas of epigenetics that fall outside their own knowledge of this rapidly expanding field.
With that said, I plan to share additional thoughts on the book as I am able to read more of its contents. Until then, I would highly recommend that anyone interested in the field of epigenetics grab the new “must-have” for your reference book shelf. Link
Permalink
01.17.07
Posted in commentary, news links, site news at 8:52 pm by Trevor
There is a movement afoot, known as the Just Science Challenge, that aims to have science bloggers post only about science for the week beginning Monday, February 2 and ending Sunday, February 8.
During that time each blogger should post about science only, with at least one post per day. Furthermore, issues which are favored by anti-scientific groups (creationism, global warming, etc.) should be either avoided, or discussed without reference to anti-scientific positions.
Since the challenge calls for at least one post per day and this site’s curator is a full-time student, half-time researcher, full-time husband and father, I have asked Stephen Rekow (aka Shane) to assist with the week-long event. (I just realized that Mr. Rekow has all of those same responsibilities, plus his son is much younger than my 13-year-old. Good thinking, Trevor.) Shane is also an undergraduate researcher at WSU, and has been working at the lab and on our project for much longer than I have. You should go ahead and jot down his name if you’re a researcher looking for molecular biology grad students. His publications, oral presentations of research, and awards/scholarships as an undergrad are nearly unheard of, and he will most likely teach your postdocs a few things about good wet lab work.
With that said, we plan on covering some of the latest epigenetics research articles, and will most likely traverse some terrain that this site has never been across before (such as the wide world of epigenetics research in plants). Hopefully these posts will be informative and educational for both the students (that would be us) and the readers (that would be you).
If you write a science blog, I would encourage you to accept the challenge. So far, it looks like the following blogs have also accepted the challenge:
Link
Permalink
01.16.07
Posted in commentary, news links at 9:16 pm by Trevor
Bora Zivkovic of A Blog Around the Clock has announced the release of The Open Laboratory: The Best Writing on Science Blogs 2006. The inaugural anthology hopes to capture the best that the science blogosphere offered in 2006, and the results are pretty impressive. Even more impressive is the fact that Bora had only three weeks from conception to print. It’s no surprise that most are calling for him to edit the anthology’s second edition.
Some of my favorites from the book include It’s not just the genes, it’s the links between them (Pharyngula) and the best and worst parts of scientific life (The Daily Transcript).
The book is available through Lulu.com as a
paperback (US$19.99) or downloadable PDF (US$8.69). The list of links to the 50 science blog posts that are included in the book are available
here.
Link
Permalink
« Previous entries · Next entries »
