23 August 2013

Using textbooks you wrote in your own class

I have a little e-book that you can buy on Amazon called Presentation Tips. (If you get it through this link, you’ll support my friends at the Science... Sort Of podcast.)

I also teach a class about presentations from time to time: BIOL 4100 Biology Seminar. There’s a lot of demand for it, because it’s a required course for all our majors.

There is nothing to stop me from assigning my own book as a textbook in that seminar class, and requiring all the students buy it. I am willing to bet that this happens routinely, because faculty are given a lot of freedom in choice of learning materials.

That is a conflict of interest. I have a financial gain that I can make by selling my own book as a textbook.

That might not sound so bad. After all, students are expected to buy textbooks. You could make a good case that if a faculty member has written a book on the subject, she wrote it because she thought it would be the best book on the subject out there.

This post started because I received a report that sounded like a professor at another institution was doing something like this. As I understand it, the professor is asking students to pay for a manuscript of a book that is supposed to be published by a small publisher later. The publisher is so small, it’s nowhere to be found through a Google search. The students were instructed to use a PayPal account.

This seemed to me to be very strange and suspicious.

Textbook pricing is notoriously opaque to begin with. And as distribution moves to the digital realm, more and more sorts of shenanigans are possible.

Let’s consider my book for a second. Because it’s an e-book, I could set the price to whatever I wanted. I could gouge each student for $30 instead of $3. (When I talk about it, I say, “The version on Amazon is for people who want something that looks good on their Kindle, but the ideas in are free. You can find them on my blog or a PDF on my website.” But nothing obliges me to do that.)

While a professor might not get rich doing this, a hundreds or maybe even thousands of extra bucks in the pocket is nothing to sneeze at, either. And the amount of money raised isn’t the issue; it’s about the ethics of charging a captive audience.

If a student felt an instructor was abusing her power to choose textbooks, who would provide the checks and balances on textbook selection?

Additional, 26 August 2013: Some people seem to think I am suggesting that no professor should use her own textbook, ever, even if it’s the best or only one available. No, that is not what I am saying.

When a professor makes a decision about textbook use, if she stands to profit if she decides to use her own, that is a conflict of interest, plain and simple. But there are plenty of good ways to manage conflicts of interest. For example:

  • Transparency: Does the professor explain why she adopted this book over all others? Can she demonstrate that the price is in line with the rest of the books on the market? Does the professor recognize that there is a conflict of interest, and invite colleagues to review the decision to ensure that it is fair?
  • Oversight: Does anyone else review the textbook decision? Do students have any mechanism to say, “I don’t like this book, there are ones out there that are better.”

Update, 22 November 2017: This story is the first time I have seen a university take action against instructors for requiring students buy their book. The instructors wrote their own $50 ebook, and the only way students could take many of their exams was through the book.

Requiring students to buy stuff to do assessments is common, but having that book be from the instructors themselves, and not through a publisher? Looks mighty dodgy.

20 August 2013

Tuesday Crustie: Shrouded in secrecy

Guys always wonder why women go to the washroom in groups...


Now we know.

Photo by insunlight on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

19 August 2013

Riding rollercoasters

I blame Foghorn Leghorn.

When I lived in Australia, I visited Movie World. One of their rides is a rollercoaster called the Wild West Falls Adventure Ride. Now, I was not much of one for thrill rides. But near the end of the day, I saw a sign with Foghorn on it, saying something like, “You got to, I say, you got to face your fears, son.” That goaded me into going on the ride. I didn’t rate it as a particularly enjoyable experience.

It wasn't until several years later when I had a little extra time at an SICB meeting in Orlando to visit Walt Disney World with my buddy Suzy Renn. She conned me into going first on to Thunder Mountain, and then Space Mountain. Still didn’t like Thunder Mountain. I was grabbing on to the handrails, hard, all the way through. But Space Mountain? Space Mountain I enjoyed a lot.

The difference was all in the seats. The other rollercoasters I’d been on had quite a bit of wiggle room; indeed, I suspect that a lot of them are designed to be bumpy to be more thrilling. On Space Mountain, though, there was only one seat in a row, and you were in there tight. I didn’t feel at any time like I would shake loose, so I was, for the first time, able to enjoy the ride and was laughing a lot of the way through.

If, about a decade ago, you’d told me that there would be a time when I would seek out rollercoasters, I don’t think I would have believed you. And I certainly wouldn’t have believed that I would voluntarily go on a rollercoaster that did a full 360° loop, taking you upside down (California Screamin’). And not only did I do that last week at Disneyland, I did it twice.

The moral of the story? Not sure. Maybe, it’s that sometimes, things that you think are scary turn out not to be so scary after all. Sometimes, they can even be fun.

Even if my trip on Splash Mountain destroyed my phone. (“You will get wet”? More like “You will be soaked as completely as if you jumped into the lake if you’re sitting in front.”)

California Screamin’ photo by andy castro on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

16 August 2013

Comments for first half of August, 2013

Girls are Geeks has a few things to visit in Japan, if you happen to find yourself there.

Small Pond Science looks at whether you can do research on model organisms successfully while working at a teaching institution. He also looks at where offices and labs should be.

I spent a lot of time in the last couple of weeks actively trying to spread some science about crustacean nociception / “pain” on social media. This was prompted by this blog entry at Nature News, where I commented. Also left some comments at Peaceful Dumpling, which also covered crustacean pain.

Dr. Isis takes on an editorial about peer review.

14 August 2013

What a student learned from a conference: “Go away”

Some time ago, a former student of mine went to a national scientific conference. After returning, over lunch she said to me that she learned two things.

Do not, under any circumstances, do a Ph.D. This was basically advice and the underlying message she got across the board. Nobody should do a Ph.D., because the number of people getting jobs that need a Ph.D. was, according to some estimates she heard at the meeting, 10%.

PIs are horrible people. Didn’t matter what the career stage was. Every grad student and post-doc was unhappy with their supervisor.

I hear this and think... holy crap. How has this all gone so wrong?

13 August 2013

Tuesday Crustie: Summer vacation


Doesn’t this crab just look like it’s relaxing at some holiday spot?

Picture by location: unknown on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

12 August 2013

Pain and politics

James Taranto accuses Popular Science magazine of having an agenda in a tweet that expanded into a longer article in the Wall Street Journal. This is relevant to me, because one of the two articles that he mentions is the Popular Science article in which this blog is mentioned.

When Popular Science published the post covering the Nature News article on crustacean pain, around the same time they published an article about the debate over fetal pain.

Elwood “concludes that crustaceans should be protected from the kind of ‘extreme procedures’ they are currently subjected to – things we wouldn’t do to mice, such as lobsters having their legs removed while still alive or crabs being kept tightly bound for days before being sold.”

But McDonough insists no such precautions are due in the case of unborn human beings. Do you think maybe the guys at Popular Science have an agenda?

On the crustacean pain piece, Taranto says the evidence “sounds highly equivocal.” I agree with this. (This is why I like the Popular Science piece: because it does put in caveats like “probably” in the title. I like nuanced reporting.)

The research on crustacean pain is about five years old, and research takes time. If you look at any scientific debate five years in (especially in fields with few labs tackling the problem), it’s likely to sound equivocal.

In contrast, Taranto does not criticize the science reported in the fetal pain piece. I wager that the study of human development, including pain, has been going on considerably longer than five years, and there is probably more confidence about fetal pain than crustacean nociception. Rather than addressing any of the evidence in the piece, Taranto questions the credibility of the author, calling her a “feminist polemicist.” He suggests the magazine has an unspecified “agenda.” The suggestion of an “agenda” is strange given that the two articles are by two different authors.

An alternate hypothesis is that the people at Popular Science accurately reported the current state of the science in two distantly related scientific fields. Even if the author lacked credibility and the magazine did have an agenda, that does not automatically make the evidence presented in the articles wrong. 

External links

Shot to the heart
Fetal pain and neuroscience
Fetal Pain Is A Lie: How Phony Science Took Over The Abortion Debate

09 August 2013

Immortality... sort of

I appear on the Science... Sort Of podcast, episode #178, “Wetter is Better.” I (mostly) talk about the “lobsters are immortal” meme.

I had a ton of fun doing this podcast. I hope everyone who listens has as much fun hearing it as I did recording it.

At one point in the podcast, I mention that even bacteria might age. The paper I was trying to remember was this one: “Aging and death in an organism that reproduces by morphologically symmetric division” in PLOS Biology.

I also mentioned that crustaceans don’t get cancer. That’s based on this paper: “How to minimize formation and growth of tumours: Potential benefits of decapod crustaceans for cancer research” in International Journal of Cancer.

You can support the podcast, and your scholar, by buying the Kindle edition of Presentation Tips through this link.

Related posts

All lobsters are mortal

External links

Episode 178 - Wetter is Better

References

Ackermann M, Stearns SC, Jenal U. 2003. Senescence in a bacterium with asymmetric division. Science 300(5627): 1920. DOI: 10.1126/science.1083532

Stewart EJ, Madden R, Paul G, Taddei F. 2005. Aging and death in an organism that reproduces by morphologically symmetric division. PLoS Biol 3(2): e45. DOI: 10.1371/journal.pbio.0030045

Vogt G. 2008. How to minimize formation and growth of tumours: Potential benefits of decapod crustaceans for cancer research. International Journal of Cancer 123(12): 2727-2734. DOI: 10.1002/ijc.23947

07 August 2013

Crustacean pain is still a complicated issue, despite the headlines

The Nature News blog reports on a recent presentation by Robert Elwood given to the Behaviour 2013 conference about crustacean pain. The headline, as is often the case with headlines, paints a simple picture:

Experiments reveal that crabs and lobsters feel pain

So. We’re done here? Well, no. When you go to the text, you find a more nuanced comment from Elwood:

“Assessing pain is difficult, even within humans,” Elwood told the Newcastle meeting. But there is a “clear, long term motivational change [in these experiments] that is entirely consistent with the idea of pain”.

“Consistent with” is not “revealing.” There can be any large number of hypotheses that can be “consistent with” available evidence, especially when evidence is incomplete or in early stages. If you just had your everyday experience to go by, the sun rising in the East and setting in the West is “consistent with” the Sun going around the Earth (which it doesn’t). It’s also “consistent with” the Earth going around the Sun, and rotating on its axis all the while (which it does).

Elwood appears to have given a review talk of his existing papers on the subject. There are no new data or papers mentioned in the news article. This means that I don’t have to update my previous post on what we know, and don’t know, about crustacean pain. It’s a tricky, tricky subject, and I think it is far too early to call this one definitively yet. Yes, crustaceans may feel pain, but they might not.

This sort of press could have substantial implications for for policy:

Robert Hubrecht, deputy director of the Universities Federation for Animal Welfare (UFAW) and the organizer of the session at which Elwood gave his talk, says that the data for crustaceans appear equivalent to the kind of data that are used to give mice the benefit of the doubt, and thus award them protection from possible pain under the law.

I wonder if Hubrecht has seen any other data besides those generated by Elwood and colleagues. Has there been independent replications of many of these results?

It’s also worth thinking about the consequences if all crustaceans given the same protection as mice. Well, crustaceans are a far more diverse group of animals than mice. Daphnia and Artemia are crustaceans. Daphnia, for example, are barely visible to the naked eye and are used in huge numbers for water quality testing. Some crustacean researchers I’ve talked to dread the effects on those sorts of environmental monitoring efforts if suddenly, a blanket change on regulation to crustaceans were to drop in.

For that matter, why single out crustaceans as special concern? Why not insects, which have as good or better evidence for experiencing pain?

Full disclosure: I have co-authored research in the field of crustacean nociception, which was unable to replicate some early findings.

Additional: See also this post from Magnus Johnson, commenting on the paper that prompted my “What we know (and don’t)” post. I like this piece of writing:

I stand by my feeling that whether animals feel pain or not is irrelevant. To damage or stress a living organisms for no reason other than to enjoy their struggling and suffering is like taking a hammer to a Ferrari or slashing the Mona Lisa. It is an act of pure mindless vandalism.

More additional: Popular Science has picked up this story. This blog makes a cameo appearance in the article.

Additional, 8 August 2013: The Canadian edition of The Huffington Post picks up the story.

More additional, 8 August 2013: I looked at the abstract book for the Behaviour 2013 meeting that Elwood presented his talk at. It’s interesting only one that out of many symposium talks is getting coverage. In the abstract, Elwood puts forward a paper on prawns that was not replicated using three other decapod crustacean species.

Softpedia covers this story as being “as cited in Nature,” which kind of leaves out that this was a conference presentation, not a new paper in the journal.

ZME Science also reports on this Nature News piece.

Additional, 9 August 2013: Nature World News also covers this story. It’s a mash-up the Nature News article and a few other online essays and articles.

Related posts

What we know and don’t know about crustacean pain
Crustacean nociception: The worry
Ignorance may not be bliss, but perhaps it is painless
Do octopuses feel pain as deeply as mammals?
Squished squid, or: noci-ceph-tion

External links

Experiments reveal that crabs and lobsters feel pain
Do crabs feel pain?
Crabs And Lobsters Probably Do Feel Pain, According To New Experiments

06 August 2013

Tuesday Crustie: No!


In 1922, Sweden was considering prohibition. Artist Albert Engström created this poster rejecting it. A historian (Swahn, 2004) would later write:

Probably no Swedish artist produced more work featuring crayfish than Albert Engström. Most famous is his emphatic “No!” Poster for the Swedish prohibition referendum in 1922: “Crayfish require these drinks!” Prohibitionist posters, with their starving children and battered wives of drunkards, stood little chance against Engström’s simple but pungent slogan. And so it came about that the crayfish, for the first and perhaps last time ever, had a hand - well, claw - in the making of Swedish history.

Reference

Swahn J-Ö. 2004. The cultural history of crayfish. Bulletin Francais de la Peche et de la Pisciculture 372-373: 243-251.

05 August 2013

News you can’t use: deflating a penis size study

Over on Facebook, I became aware of a press release that is making the rounds concerning penis size. It annoys me because it is prurient linkbait disguised as science.

Based on sales of sized condoms, the condom distributor has produced a ranked list of penis sizes for the American states and certain American cities. Oh no, Texas is thirty-fifth, putting the lie to “Everything is bigger in Texas.” (Cue snickering. No, I can’t resist the cheap joke.)

The problems are that there is no actual data anywhere that I can find, and that the rankings are meaningless.

The implication of this press release is that men in some places are better endowed on average than others, and that this is a real difference. But basic statistics says samples vary. I went to Random.org and asked it to generate 1,000 numbers following a normal distribution (bell curve) with a mean of 5.5 and a standard deviation of one. Then, I sampled 100 numbers from that list, ten times, and averaged them. These are the means.

5.648
5.639
5.585
5.583
5.563
5.484
5.466
5.424
5.424
5.374

And there you have a ranking (with one duplicate). But the ranks are meaningless because there is no difference in the population the samples were taken from. The average of the population is 5.5, always.

That the list is probably just noise is shown by the fact that the list of top states and the list of top cites don’t have much in common. The top state, New Hampshire, doesn’t have a single city in the top 10 list (though this may have to do with how they defined “city”). New Orleans is the top ranked city, but the state is listed seventh.

In short, you can’t draw any firm conclusions from this publicity stunt hiding itself as science.

Related posts

Friday Weird Science: Will this spoil the surprise?

Photo by Skakerman on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

02 August 2013

How to cheer up a neurobiologist: listen to spikes on the speaker

Last couple of days haven't been good. August means that I have to tell myself, “Classes start this month.” And that means my annual merit folder will be due. I started looking at what I have generated this last year, and... there’s been less stuff out than I’d like. Then, I had a long talk yesterday with a colleague about some data that left me worried that data I thought would be usable... wasn’t. All in all, I felt a twinge of the ol’ imposter syndrome settling in.

But then I managed to get this recording of spikes, the best in a long while.


Made me feel a teensy bit better. A good signal to noise ratio, and hearing spikes pop on speakers, always cheers me up.

01 August 2013

Why write an editorial calling for more of the same, but better?

I’m disappointed with a new editorial in Journal of Neurophysiology on peer-review. It talks about innovations like post-publication review, transparency in reviewers’ identities, removing the asymmetry between reviewers and authors... and dismisses all of them.

There are lots of other innovative things that could be done with peer review that are not addressed in the editorial. Why not a dynamic conversation between reviewers and authors, as Frontiers journals do? Why not publish reviews along with the paper? Why not provide easier mechanisms to track post-publication discussion?

The editorial’s solution to peer review woes? “Hey, you reviewers, try harder to play nice.”

That’s worth an editorial? A bland defense of the status quo?

Additional, 10 August 2013: Dr. Isis has read this editorial, too. A snippet:

I find it interesting that Raff and Brown begin by drawing such a dichotomy. The alternative to pre-publication peer review is the lawless, wild west-style world of open access, post-publication peer review. Post-publication peer review happens necessarily at the elimination of pre-publication review and the opposite of peer review is 4chan. I find this to be disingenuous.

Reference

Raff H, Brown D. 2013. Civil, sensible and constructive peer review in APS journals. Journal of Neurophysiology: in press. DOI:

Comments for second half of July 2013

Here’s the bi-weekly collection of blog posts worth talking about!

Small Pond Science looks at the paucity of grant applicants who are trying to reach under-represented minorities. Also, how is NSF reviewing pre-proposals?

Prof-Like Substance asks if tenure committees live in the real world of declining federal funding.

The Singular Scientist looks at predatory publishers.

At Arthropod Ecology, I make a cameo in a presentation about academic publishing, with my example of publishing a paper here on my blog.

Matthew MacManes looks at his experiences in looking for a tenure-track job.

Dynamic Ecology wants to know if you ever spend your own money on research.

The National Science Foundation releases some data on awards and proposals.

31 July 2013

More real scientists reviewing Texas science textbooks, please



TFN Insider reports that half a dozen creationists are among the reviewers of potential Texas science textbooks. There is a distinct lack of working scientists. Jerry Coyne put it well:

Could they not find professors of biology at, say, the University of Texas at Austin, Rice, Texas A&M, or any of the schools in Texas that have good biology programs? Of course they could, and I am absolutely certain those people would be willing to be on this committee. It almost seems as if Texas wants to get evolution out of the schools, doesn’t it?  Is this the best that the populous state of Texas can do?

I will say that I would not want only academic biologists reviewing K-12 textbooks. It is good to have a mix of representatives from all the scientific disciplines, people with experienced teaching K-12, and so on. But this looks like stacking the deck to accomplish one thing: get the presentation of evolution in Texas K-12 textbooks weakened as much as possible.

According to TFN Insider, six of the reviewers are selected by the State Board of Education, which I have blogged about many times before. The State Board of Education has long had a very strong and effective group of fundamentalist conservative Christians who oppose teaching of evolution.

If you live in Texas, consider signing this petition.

External links

Alarm Bells Are Ringing: Creationists Get Influential Positions in Texas Science Textbook Review
Creationism once again threatens Texas schools

30 July 2013

Tuesday Crustie: Who was that masked crab?

I love me some digging, burrowing crustaceans, and here’s one I have never seen or heard about before...


This is masked burrowing crab (Gomeza bicornis).

Photo by wildsingapore on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

25 July 2013

Somebody else’s problem

Everyone agrees that peer-reviewed assessment of scientific articles is important. But sometimes it seems that everyone wants it to be somebody else’s problem.

Readers – many scientists, journalists, tenure committees – want it to be the journals’ problem.

Editors want it to be the reviewers’ problem.

Funding agencies want it to be the panels’ problem.

Administrators want it to be the external reviewers’ problem.

Reviewers complain about being inundated with review requests and want it to be other reviewers’ problem.

Almetrics people want it to be the cloud’s problem.

And not just somebody else’s problem, but it has to be the right somebody else. Witness the harumphing and frowning and kvetching about “appropriate channels” when papers get criticized on the blogosphere.

External links

Somebody else’s problem

24 July 2013

Stay put or boldy go?

When Texas Governor Rick Perry was at our campus last week, he told an anecdote about meeting a dozen top K-12 students in the area, and he asked how many of them were planning on going to university in Texas. Two out of twelve were. He thought this was not good.

Similarly, a current university student spoke at the ceremony about the prospects for a medical school in the region, and how this would allow students to stay here.

But is this necessarily a good thing?

I grew up in small towns. There was no way I was going to be able to go to university in my home town, so I had to live on my own as soon as I got out of high school. I learned a lot that way.

As I continued my career, I moved first across country, to Québec. Being an anglophone in Montréal was another tremendous learning experience.

Finally, I got to live overseas, in Australia. Again, that experience was incredibly rich and rewarding in ways too numerous to describe here.

Now, I often tell people, “I think everyone should live outside their own country for a least a year. Not just visit in a hotel, but rent an apartment, and go through the cycle of the seasons.” Travel really does broaden the mind. I personally think that this has made me a better instructor.

In this area, I’ve seen a lot of people stop their studies because they won’t move. On the one hand, I get this. because moving sucks. Each and every time. On the other hand... I worry about people missing out on the experiences. A lot of students, I think, would benefit from being independent, and having to deal with a different culture.

Plus, I am not convinced that every career opportunity should be available in everyone’s backyard.

When there is opportunity for advanced degrees locally, I worry about the potential for regional universities becoming silos: recruiting their own students for graduate degrees. No students leaving, and just as importantly, few students moving in, bringing their own ideas and experiences to enrich the department.

Ultimately, does the idea of getting people to stay in a state or region mean that the ideal university department is composed of people who were students in that same department? I think that would be an impoverished intellectual environment. I often tell undergraduates, “Think hard about going to another university for grad school. Because after you’ve hung out in a department for a bachelor’s you’ve probably learned a lot of what we have to teach you.” Other departments will have other strengths and things for students to learn.

While I don’t like how many people drop out of the pipeline because they don’t want to move, I appreciate the richness that comes from throwing together people who were willing to move.

Camp photo by johnhope14 on Flickr; trailer photo by dwstucke on Flickr; both used under a Creative Commons license.

23 July 2013

Tuesday Crustie: Volcrayno!

Yes, in the wake of the viral success of Sharknado, I cannot help but pitch the next Syfy movie...


Volcanic base by Kröyer on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

22 July 2013

Teach the nontroversy: Tyrannosaurus teaching


If you’re a paleontologist, it seems there’s a quick way toget attention: say something about Tyrannosaurus rex. A new paper about predatory behaviour in the terrible lizard king got its fair share of attention, because it was reported as being relevant to this controversy, laid out by Calvin and Hobbes:


That’s right, it’s time to play:


The problem is, among working dinosaur paleontologists, this is a nontroversy. It just isn’t even a question. John Hutchinson wrote an excellent post laying out both the background when it was a controversy (past tense) and why it’s just bothersome to him now:

But when a journalist asks me how I feel about a new paper that revisits the “controversy”, I feel embarassed for palaeontology. Can’t we get past this? It makes us look so petty, mired in trivial questions for decades.

I understand this, I really do. Sometimes, you get tired. You get tired of rehashing the same old misrepresentations. But I am mindful of the point made by this xkcd:


Hutchinson, I think, know this, when he talks about getting questions from a kid (my emphasis):

That’s why I started off this long post talking about feeling deflated, or disappointed, when asked this question. I do feel that way. I have to admit, I sometimes even feel that way when a sweet young kid asks me that question. Deep inside, I wish they wondered about something else.

Similarly, Brian Switek wrote:

(A)s I expected, the question of whether T. rex was a hunter or scavenger came up today while I was on WNPR's Colin McEnroe Show.

Having met Brian, I’m sure that he handled the question like a pro: not with disdain or fatigue, but with a smile and good humour.

We always have to be wary of the “curse of expertise.” When you’re deep in a field, you get so used to knowing about something, you forget that other people don’t know it. There are all sorts of questions that people ask themselves. They get to those questions not because of any sort of failure of education, but just because they are curious, and have idle thoughts.

For instance, I have learned from listening to Dr. Karl’s weekly phone-in show on Triple J radio that a huge number of people, completely independently of each other, wonder what would happen in you drilled a hole though the centre of the Earth and fell through it. Would you go to the other side, or get stuck in the middle? (The former.) This question is so common, that Karl instantly says, “The answer is 42 minutes.”

I reckon it’d be very easy for someone to look at a a Tyrannosaurus rex reconstruction, be completely unaware of the history laid out by Hutchinson, and still wonder, “Hey, could T. rex have killed anything with those short front arms?”

Even if we rail against the systematic failure of journalism or society to do a better job of getting information to people in general, it’s part of the job of being any sort of educator to stay open and enthused when dealing with questions from individual people. Those are the people we want to reach, and you can’t reach them if they see your eyes roll.

Related posts

Tides and doldrums in science communication

External links

Physical evidence of predatory behavior in Tyrannosaurus rex
Tyrannosaurus rex: predator or media hype?
Time to slay the T. rex “debate”
Ten thousand

18 July 2013

New Texas university: post-celebration reflections

On Tuesday, Texas Governor Rick Perry travelled to my campus to participate in a ceremonial signing of the legislation that will create a new university in South Texas. It was scheduled to start at 9:30 a.m. I arrived at 9:00 a.m., and the place was almost packed then. I couldn’t have gotten close even if I’d gotten there earlier, because most of the theatre was reserved, and I didn’t rate. The picture at right shows the throng of cameras as Governor Perry signed the bill.

A few things that stood out for me.

First, we have a time line. The new Texas university will be in place in Fall 2015; one year later than was originally suggested back in December at the announcement. The medical school is schedule to open one year later, in Fall 2016. There’s a transition team in place that will be meeting with interested parties later this year. All student currently enrolled in one of the existing universities will automatically be enrolled in the new university.

Second, I was watching to see how often certain key words appeared. I was not surprised that “medical school” was mentioned about fourteen times. Research was mentioned about three times, about the same as economic development and the permanent universities fund.

Third, I was very concerned when one of the speakers talked about using “new technology” to make the university “affordable” to students. That, to me, was code for things like online courses, the more massive the better (MOOCs, in other words). Janet Stemwedel commented:

Danger is that the affordable thing you're left with won't be education.

Put those two things together, and I worry about resources being dumped into the medical school hand over fist while all the other colleges are told to do things on the cheap.



External links

'Every dream could become a reality': Perry, UT officials celebrate merger, medical school
Political unification touted as officials tour Valley with historic governor visit

17 July 2013

Misconceptions about evolution video has its own misconceptions

When you teach science, and biology, and evolution, you run into a lot of misconceptions. I can use all the help I can get. I should be grateful for “Myths and misconceptions about evolution” on the TED-Ed website.


It’s well-made and good-looking. Unfortunately, in setting a few of those perceptions right, it inadvertently fall into showing other misconceptions.

This is the serious one:


It’s the march of progress. The problem with this image is that it shows evolution as progressive and linear, while the scientific understanding of evolution is that it is undirected and branching. That so much of evolution occurs by branching is so important.

This video is hardly alone in using this. You see this left to right marching image all the time. Normally, I’d let it go, except that this video is supposed to address common misconceptions, not recycle them!

It’s weird, because the video explictly talks about “evolutionary purpose” as a metaphor. But the march of progress image is repeated twice, with it being one of the closing statements. Now, it is immediately followed by this image, which tries to show diversity of life:


But there’s no indication of the connection between organisms.

Compare what that march of progress image implies to this one (click to enlarge):


Branches and branches leading to diversity, with no preferred “direction,” and humans so hard to find as one of many species that they have to be marked with “You are here.”

This is the more trivial misconception. It introduces French biologist, Jean-Baptiste Lamarck:


Followed immediately by... giraffes!


Lamarck’s giraffes are a bad cliché. First, the idea of inheriting acquired characteristics was not abandoned with the publication of Darwin’s On the Origin of the Species. Darwin himself thought this happened and was a real mechanism of evolution. This is often forgotten, perhaps because he called it “use and disuse”, and thought that it only played a minor role in shaping species.

Second, it gives the impression that Lamarck put serious thought into his giraffe example, and that it appears in a lot of his work. Stephen Jay Gould, a formidable historian of science, checked Lamarck’s original texts (Gould 1996):

Lamarck did mention giraffes’ necks as a putative illustration of evolutionary enlargement by the inherited effects of lifetime effort. But his entire discussion runs for one paragraph in a chapter filled with much longer examples that he obviously regarded as far more important. Lamarck had this—and absolutely nothing more—to say about giraffes’ necks, a few lines of speculation never intended as the centerpiece of a theory:

It is interesting to observe the result of habit in the peculiar shape and size of the giraffe: this animal, the tallest of the mammals, is known to live in the interior of Africa in places where the soil is nearly always arid and barren, so that it is obliged to browse on the leaves of trees and to make constant efforts to reach them. From this habit, long maintained in all the individuals of the race, it has resulted that the animal’s forelegs have become longer than its hind legs and that its neck is lengthened to such a degree that the giraffe, without standing up on its hind legs, can raise its head to a height of six meters. (From Lamarck’s classic 1809 work, Philosophie zoologique, vol. 1, p. 122, my translation.)

That’s it. A person writes one paragraph about giraffes once, and that’s the only thing that he’s remembered for. It’s sad, because Lamarck made many substantial contributions to biology, like coining the word “invertebrate” and drawing the first phylogenetic tree.

Additional: See this article (PDF), “The Tree, the Spiral and the Web of Life: A Visual Exploration of Biological Evolution for Public Murals” by Joana Ricou and John Archie Pollock on how to represent the relationship of living organisms. Hat tip to Carl Zimmer.

References

Gould SJ. 1996. The Tallest Tale. Natural History 105: 18-23+. PDF

External links

Myths and misconceptions about evolution - Alex Gendler
Myths and misconceptions about evolution: A TED-Ed lesson about the subtleties
The march of progress has deep roots
Tree of life

16 July 2013

Comments for first half of July 2013

I have a brief cameo on Skepchick on a Twitter project that compile  “love” and “hate” about science.

At High Heels in the Lab, a physicist talks to her sister about her research and gets a surprising reaction.

Namnezia describes how a magazine writer can’t see past his national origin to get to his science.

Small Pond Science looks at how much researchers should specialize. The punch line:

Doing this work on an obscure topic buys you a place at the table. That might be true, with a caveat: Working on minutia buys you a place at the kiddie table.

While browsing Small Pond Science, check the post about research statements if you want a job at a teaching university.

Empirical Planet takes on a favourite neuromyth of mine: That we have lizard brains tucked inside of us that are responsible for things like fear and aggression.

And lastly, I want to thank Lauren Meyer for her lovely recommendation and Scicurious for another plug for this blog.

Tuesday Crustie: “Five clawed” crayfish

Check this claw!


A fisherman collected this crayfish in Schoharie Creek, near Delanson, New York and took this quick picture before using this as bait. Here’s his reaction, recorded with his phone:


Being a neuro guy, I wondered if the extra segments have muscle and neurons, or whether they were just “blank” exoskeleton. The word I received was that the extra claw was not moving.

The picture and video made its way to a colleague, Frank Dirrigl, and eventually to me. I have never seen a deformity like on this crayfish before. Anyone ever seen anything like this before? Leave word in the comments!

Additional, 18 July 2013: This deformity is unusual, but not rare. Some reports go back over a hundred years (Faxon, 1905). You can get these sorts of outgrowths fairly easily following injury. In particular, Nakatani and colleagues (1998) show pictures that are very reminiscent of the one above, and show that you also get not just regeneration of the exoskeleton, but nerves and muscle, too.

Thanks to Joe Staton, Marina Araújo, and Gerhard Scholtz for these references:

References

Araújo M, dos Santos TC. 2012. New record of malformation in the true crab Ucides cordatus (Linnaeus, 1763) (Crustacea, Decapoda, Ucididae), at Brazilian coast. Revista Nordestina de Zoologia, Recife 6(1): 15-19.

Faxon W. 1905. On some crustacean deformities. Bulletin of the Museum of Comparative Zoology 8(13): 257-274.

Mantellatto FLM, O'Brien JJ, Alvare F. 2000. The first record of external abnormalities on abdomens of Callinectes ornatus (Portunidae) from Ubatuba Bay, Brazil. Nauplius 8(1): 9-97.

Nakatani, I., Oshida, Y., Kitahara, T. 1998. Induction of extra claws on the chelipeds of a crayfish, Procambarus clarkii. The Biological Bulletin 195: 52-59.

Przibram, H. 1921. Die Bruchdreifachbildung im Tierreich. Wilhelm Roux Archiv für Entwicklungsmechanik der Organismen 48: 205-444.

Shelton, P.M.J., Truby, P.R., Shelton, R.G.J. 1981. Naturally occurring abnormalities (Bruchdreifachbildungen) in the chelae of three species of Crustacea (Decapoda) and a possible explanation. Journal of Embryology and Experimental Morphology 63: 285-304.

Pinheiro MAA , de Toledo TR. 2010. Malformation in the crab Ucides cordatus (Linnaeus, 1763)(Crustacea, Brachyura, Ocypodidae), in São Vicente (SP), Brazil. Revista CEPSUL - Biodiversidade e Conservação Marinha 1(1): 61-65.

Crossposted at the Marmorkrebs blog.

15 July 2013

Schooled by Sharknado

Even I tweeted about this:


Yes, this cheesy movie blew up on Twitter last week. So much so that it was a key component of the ads for tomorrow night’s encore presentation, but outside of Twitter... low ratings. (Lots of talk but no audience just makes it a “cult classic.”) In examining what going viral on Twitter but not making a dent elsewhere means for politics, Ezra Klein wrote:

(T)he first rule of being a political junkie is to always remember that you are a very weird person, and most people are not like you.

This is advice that we science enthusiasts should remember. The first rule of being a science junkie is to always remember that you are a very weird person, and most people are not like you. (Heck, this applies not just to political junkies and science enthusiasts, but fans of anything. You’re a huge rodeo / anime / vinyl record fan? Most people are not like you.)

Here on the science blogosphere, we have particular obsessions that we just can’t stop talking about (pseudonyms, open access, federal funding, tenure and promotion rewards). But most people are not like us. This just isn’t part of their sphere and there are not a huge number of ways to get them to tune in to our show.

External link

Sharknado shows how out of touch Washington really is

12 July 2013

Blog carnival for July 2013

How could I have forgotten to mention that the Carnival of Evolution #61 is now up at Teaching Biology? Especially when it is chock full of crustacean goodness?

Get your crustie lovin’ right here! And hosts are needed for the upcoming carnivals! Email bjorn@bjornostman.com if you’d like lots of evolution-minded people reading your blog.

External links

Carnival of Evolution #61: Crustie Lovin’ Edition

Carnival of Evolution

11 July 2013

The frog came back, the very next day

Given how often we can’t find our car in a parking lot, it’s no wonder that the wayfinding abilities of animals impress and amaze us. We’ve all heard the stories of pets that find their way back to their homes, how salmon find their way back to the particular they were hatched in years after roaming around in the open oceans, and how pigeons can find their roost, even when taken to places that they have never been before.

A new paper adds another animal to the list of pathfinders, and it’s this little guy here:


This is a poison dart frog (Allobates femoralis). We normally don’t think of amphibians as animals that travel great distance, but this species has complicated territorial behaviour. The frogs defend a territory that is is about 14 meters across, which is pretty large compared to their body size. This led PaÅ¡ukonisand and colleagues to test whether this frog could find its way around in its natural habitat.

The experimenters “translocated” a bunch of male frogs from their territories to new locations. To these frogs, this is probably what the scientists seemed like:


Translocation is basically the scientific equivalent of stuffing you in a car trunk, driving around for a few hours, then letting you out in the middle of the nowhere and telling you that you’re walking home.

The frogs were moved anywhere from 50 to 800 meters. The frogs performed very well for distances up to 200 meters: 87% of them made the long walk back to their original territory. At 400 meters, only about a third of the frogs got home, and none made it back from 800 meters.

The authors looked at a few other variables, like the directions the frogs were moved, the presence of streams or rivers between the catch and release sites, but distance was the only factor that predicted whether the frogs found their way home. The authors also think that the failure of the frogs to get back from the long distances is not likely to be due to things like exhaustion or predation. The frigs can go quite long distances, and because they are poison dart frogs, predation seems low.

How do these frogs do this? There are many ways that animals can navigate, from simply learning the local area very well (fails if you move to a new place) to true navigation (where you can find your way back from anywhere). Trying to sort out the mechanism the frogs are using to get back to their favourite spot is surely one of the next logical experiments to do, although the authors seem to favour the “know the locale really well” hypothesis.

Maybe the frogs have ruby flippers. “There’s no place like (croak) home.”

Reference

Pašukonis A, Ringler M., Brandl HB, Mangione R, Ringler E, Hödl W, Tregenza T. 2013. The homing frog: high homing performance in a territorial dendrobatid frog (Dendrobatidae). Ethology: in press. DOI:

Photo by Sean McCann (ibycter.com) on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

10 July 2013

The Zen of Presentations, Part 62: Making questions easy

I have been lucky to see polished, slick PowerPoint presentations. Some might even be called graceful. But I rarely see a similarly smooth handling of questions using PowerPoint presentations.
In contrast to the well-rehearsed smooth advance of slides, most question sessions are replaced by actions with the look of someone woken in the middle of the night and fumbling in the dark.

This is strange, because a good presentation is expected to provoke questions, especially in academic or scientific circles. It’s why so many speakers blow the ending by asking, “Any questions?” first.

Very often, a question begins with the audience member asking, “Could you go back to the slide where you showed... ?”

The speaker then has to exit the presentation and go back to the PowerPoint editing screen, fiddle around with the preview pane on the left, trying to find the requested slide. Then, the speaker leaves up the editing screen, or tries to restart the presentation, and not all of them start at the beginning. I’m a keyboard shortcut fanatics, and I always forget that F5 in PowerPoint starts a show at the first slide, not the current slide.

Here’s how to avoid this little dance.

There is a little known shortcut for PowerPoint. When you’re presenting, you can type a number on the keyboard, hit “Enter,” and PowerPoint will jump to that slide. This way, you don’t have to show us the ugly editing screen.

This depends on you knowing the number of each specific slide. Have a thumbnail cheat sheet with a list of each slide, so you know if that graph the person is asking about was slide 12 or 15.

But an even easier way to take advantage of the shortcut that takes you to specific slides: number your slides. This makes is easy for the audience member to ask, “Could we look at slide 7 again?”

I resisted numbering slides for a long time, thinking they were just clutter. But if your talks often have people wanting to look at data again, think of how handy it would be for someone to be able to specify exactly where in your talk their question was coming from.

Just go to the “Insert” tab and look for “Slide number.”



If your slide template doesn’t have slide numbers, you can add them. Go to  “View,” pick “Slide Master,” then go to the “Insert” tab and look for slide number:


You can also modify the formatting for all the slide numbers from this screen, too.

Related posts

The Zen of Presentations, Part 15: Take a bow

09 July 2013

Tuesday Crustie: They should call this shrimp “the law”


... because of its long arms.

Pretty sure this is in the genus Macrobrachium, but wouldn’t guess the species.

Photo by UnitedSoybeanBoard on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

08 July 2013

The Zen of Presentations, Part 61: Blocking and interleaving

Academics tend to treat everything like a manuscript. In a manuscript, if you have multiple experiments, you do all the methods for all the experiments in a block, then all the results in a block. That is:

  • Methods: Experiment 1, 2, 3
  • Results: Experiment 1, 2, 3

This is a bad idea in a verbal presentation, because you’re making your audience have to work to remember everything. The reason why you tell someone the methods at all is because they help you interpret the results. In the example above, someone has to remember all the methods for all three experiments, using their working memory, before getting to a single result.

Much better to do it by interleaving the methods and results, and blocking the experiments together.

  • Experiment 1: Methods, Results
  • Experiment 2: Methods, Results
  • Experiment 3: Methods, Results

This way, you don’t ask people to remember as much. Plus, the results of the one experiment often tell you why needed the next experiment, which often informs you why picked the particular methods you did.

Interleaving photo by Danny Nicholson on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

03 July 2013

Everything is connected: How a snail in a lake helps a crab in the sea

Many people who have epiphanies often boil their realization down to, “Everything is connected.” Some may have achieved this through meditation, dreamquests, spirit walks, or illicit substances.

They could just study some biology instead.

Perhaps, like van Oosterhout and colleagues, you could study this on the western Atlantic island of Tobago off the coast of Venezuela:



Where van Oosterhout and company found this snail:


This snail, Melanoides tuberculata, is one of a couple of freshwater snail species introduced into the island of Tobago; this one was introduced in the 1970s. Another, which van Oosterhout and colleagues documented for the first time in Tobago, is Tarebia granifera.

The cool part of this story is that although these are freshwater snails, their presence may turn out to be beneficial for saltwater hermit crabs.


Hermit crabs live in snail shells. Tobago has a few species that live offshore, particularly Clibanarius tricolor (pictured) and Clibanarius vitattus. Looking around Tobago, and you will find these sea-dwelling hermits in freshwater snail shells. 

These two new snail species are abundant enough that their shells are common in Tobago rivers. During heavy rains, the increased water flow carries these shells down to the sea, where hermit crabs can pick them up. The further away the crabs are from the mouth of the river, the less likely you are to find one with a freshwater shell.

Not only are the shells just available for the hermit crabs, the hermits actually preferred the freshwater shells over a couple of the shells normally found in the oceans with the hermits. Shells can be a limited resource: there may just not be enough shells to go around for all the hermit crabs. All of these new shells from the introduced snails could actually help these hermit crabs.

Newly introduced species like these freshwater snails are often called “invasive,” which has a negative connotation. But if the invaders are winners, at least some of the bystanders might also be winners.

Reference

van Oosterhout C, Mohammed R, Xavier R, Stephenson J, Archard G, Hockley F, Perkins S, Cable J. 2013. Invasive freshwater snails provide resource for native marine hermit crabs. Aquatic Invasions 8(2): 185-191. DOI:

Tobago photo by cheesy42 on Flickr; snail photo by Mean and Pinchy on Flickr; hermit photo by Cephalopodcast.com on Flickr; both under under Creative Commons licenses.

02 July 2013

Tuesday Crustie: Captured but not cowed!


I love how this young woman pulls off a winning smile while being pinched by an angry female crayfish.

Photo by USFWS/Southeast on Flickr; used under a Creative Commons license.

01 July 2013

The Captain has landed!


Captain Canuck is back!

The comics character has been rebooted into an online animated series, and I honestly think this may be the incarnation of the character I’ve enjoyed the most so far. The voice acting is excellent and the animation is lively. Check out Episode 1 from the Captain Canuck website!


(Edit, 20 August 2022: The Captain Canuck website is now retired, and the video is no longer there. The new publisher is for Captain Canuck is Lev Gleason Publications.)


I’m proud to have supported this project on IndieGoGo!



External links

Captain Canuck website
Captain Canuck Facebook page

Related posts

Oh Captain, my Captain

Comments for second half of June 2013

Prof-Like Substance weighs in on why pseudonyms ruffle academics’ feathers.

Empiral Planet looks at career options outside of academia.

If you are an academics, A Bit of Behavioral Ecology wants to know about your social media experiences.

Namnezia considers ways to make grantwriting better.

Terry McGlynn over at Small Pond Science has had it with describing senior scientists as “silverbacks.” Could we jettison a few other terms while we’re at it?