Congratulations to Nick Newkirk, an amazing graduate student from the lab, on the latest story that supports a model in which helicase-domain methylation and Dicer phosphorylation act together to regulate Dicer conformation and effector recruitment.
www.nature.com/articles/s41...
In August, Jay Bhattacharya said “Training future biomedical scientists” was the 1st priority for his version of NIH.
But talk is cheap. Let’s see how JB’s doing. 🤔
NIH supports trainees mostly via fellowship (F), training (T), and career development (K) awards.
Here are funding curves for each.🧵
This is more broadly generalizable: If you don't do the research yourself, you have no idea if AI is making stuff up. And if you do the research yourself, then AI isn't saving you much labor, if any.
My quote of the day
We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run over.
Ambrose Bierce
Please do not use AI to review a scholarly manuscript. I absolutely do not care what Claude or whoever thinks about the rise of emu farming in Omaha 1850-1864. I asked you because I care what you think about it.
This is one reason I am glad NComms publishes the peer review comments and responses. It's helpful to show that in MOST cases, everyone involved during peer review acts with good intentions. We all care about the field; my job is to balance speedy publication against scientific rigor.
One hard thing about being an editor is that because of confidentiality, we can't respond to The Discourse about our work. It's fun (and justified!) to take shots at the big bad publishing houses. But pile-ons about specific papers from those not involved are tough to watch silently.
57 of my fellow students were arrested, academically disciplined, and barred from campus 2 weeks before finals.
And then the visas of some of those students were quietly revoked.
And then the DEI office was killed.
And then we watched our mentors’ grants evaporate over “woke”.
Shameless plug, but I’m excited to see work in model organisms submitted to @natcomms.nature.com. Model organisms, non-model organisms, stem cell models. There’s room for all of it.
Sometimes the punchline is a gut punch
Noted. Authors beware.
Thank you for submitting your Joke "Asphalt-guided Directional Locomotion of Gallus gallus" for consideration in Advances in Jokes. We have now received comments from three reviewers with appropriate senses of humor. Considering their advice I regret to inform you that we cannot publish your Joke.
I have a conference joke - actually it’s really more of a comment?
Yes, readers will understand if you make tdTomato magenta. No, the colors from your antibodies/FPs are not what is actually captured by the (black-and-white!) camera.
I cannot force authors to modify their color choices (yet), but watch me try.
Once again shouting into the void to say that there is no excuse for using red/green for immunofluorescence images. Obviously 4+ color imaging is difficult to present, but any reason someone gives for using red/green in 2-3 color images is trash.
Just full-on outing myself as a chaotic good professor here. I do have deadlines, but otherwise slowing down, doing things by hand, and focusing on critical thinking skills (observation, curiosity, connection) has been more fun for me and my students have had better learning outcomes.
I’m glad someone said this to his face and more of these CEOs need to hear it: If the conversation around tech seems negative now it’s because you, your products, and what they’re doing to our society fucking sucks. You stopped making optimistic technology and unleashed MechaHitler the job killer.
NIH leadership wants to strip worker's rights from the majority of scientists on its campuses.
But, the NIH does not get to say whether we are a union or not. We do, and we are no strangers to having to fight for our union. Time for a short history lesson. 1/n
Disclaimer: all views are my own.
One question (of many) I have is whether opinions change if researchers are asked if they think AI scientific reviews should be relied on for their colleagues' papers. Often, what researchers want differs depending on whether they are the author or the reviewer.
I'd posit that getting input on a manuscript in prep from a real human colleague could serve the same purpose, while also deepening interpersonal connections that have secondary positive effects. The value of this cannot be understated, but it does take more effort.
For example, the consensus that AI scientific reviews are most useful as part of the manuscript preparation process fits with my current feelings. This is a great way to identify blind spots to sort out before peer review, which may save time in review and reduce reviewer burden in the long run.
There will be lots to consider on this topic going forward and this provides a useful framework as well as some baseline impressions. As an editor, it's also good to know that my current opinions are in line with where authors are at the moment.
This is a really cool approach to both evaluating AI scientific reviews and determining how authors think and feel about having AI tools in the loop.
Props to @reviewcommons.org and @qedscience.bsky.social for making this effort!
link.springer.com/article/10.1...
In addition to the medical ethics violations, the leadership have stained otherwise important research programs. According to the files, CEO Davis was actively soliciting Epstein with presentations from research directors as late as 2017!
As an alumni of Mount Sinai, I am horrified by this reporting. Sadly, the culture of prioritizing money and prestige above all else was strong at Sinai. I’m less surprised than I would like to be. These doctors and CEO Kenneth Davis need to go. Now.
Holden Thorp’s slides from a recent talk.
The fundamental flaw with @holdenthorp.bsky.social’s argument is thinking that organizations and people can only do one thing at a time (even though he is really close to acknowledging it!)
Let’s break it down, bc I’m tired of this. 🧵
(cred: @ianlmorgan.bsky.social)
Headed to @keystonesymposia.bsky.social on Stem Cell Models in Embryology tomorrow! Looking forward to hearing what’s new at the interface of #stemcells and #DevBio and finding promising stories for @natcomms.nature.com. Want to chat? DM me or find me there!
Feel like this is a good lesson to keep generative AI far from your editorial process as a matter of policy. Ars is a great website. If it can happen there it can happen to anyone that allows these tools in
My quote of the day
Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science.
Charles Darwin
Society for Developmental Biology logo Society for Developmental Biology 2026 Award Winners Edwin G. Conklin Medal Headshot of Lee Niswander Lee Niswander, University of Colorado Boulder Society for Developmental Biology Lifetime Achievement Award Headshot of Alexandra Joyner Alexandra Joyner, Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center Viktor Hamburger Outstanding Educator Prize Headshot of Roberto Mayor Roberto Mayor, University College London Elizabeth D. Hay New Investigator Award Headshot of Jeffrey Farrell Jeffrey Farrell, National Institutes of Health Society for Developmental Biology Trainee Science Communication Award Headshot of Nicholas Desnoyer Nicholas Desnoyer, The Sainsbury Laboratory
Congrats to the 2026 SDB Award Winners!
Conklin Medal: Lee Niswander
SDB Lifetime Achievement Award: Alexandra Joyner
Hamburger Outstanding Educator Prize: Roberto Mayor
Hay New Investigator Award: Jeffrey Farrell
SDB Trainee SciComm Award: Nicholas Desnoyer
bit.ly/4afnjiC
