Maybe it would be a good thing for the site if people were encouraged to write critical reviews of something in their fields, the way SSC does? It has been mentioned that criticizing is easier than creating.
I do have something specific in mind (about how plant physiology is often divorced from population research), but I am in a minority here, so it might be more interesting for most people to read about other stuff.
I am in a minority here, so it might be more interesting for most people to read about other stuff
You mean you are studying a field most LWers are unfamiliar with? Well that means we can learn more from your post, right? ;)
If people don’t find it interesting they won’t read it. Little harm done. Polls indicate that LWers want to see more content, and I think you’re displaying the exact sort of self-effacing attitude that is holding us back :)
I’m not guaranteeing that people will vote up your post or anything, but the entire point of the voting system is to help people find good content and ignore bad content. So upvoted posts are more valuable than downvoted posts are harmful.
Thank you, I will do it ASAP, I’m just a bit rushed by PhD schedule and some other work that can be done only in summer. Do you have similar observations? It would be great to compile them into a post, because my own experience is based more on literature and less on personal communication, for personal reasons.
I really don’t have any similar observations, since I mostly focused on biochem and computational bio in school.
I’m actually not entirely sure what details you’re thinking of—I’m imagining something like the influence of selective pressure from other members of the same species, which could cover things like how redwoods are so tall because other redwoods block out light below the canopy. On the other hand, insight into the dynamics of population biologists and those studying plant physiology would also be interesting.
According to the 2014 survey we have about 30 biologists on here, and there are considerably more people here who take an interest in such things. Go ahead and post—the community might say they want less of it, but I’d bet at 4:1 odds that the community will be receptive.
No, I meant rather what between-different-fields-of-biology observations you might have. It doesn’t matter what you study, specifically. It’s more like ‘but why did those biochists study the impact of gall on probiotics for a whole fortnight of cultivation, if every physiologist knows that the probiotic pill cannot possibly be stuck in the GI tract for so long? thing.’ Have you encountered this before?
I can come up with a few examples that seemed obvious that they wouldn’t work in retrospect, mostly having to do with gene insertion using A. tumefaciens, but none that I honestly predicted before I learned that they didn’t work. Generally, the biological research at my institution seemed to be pretty practical, if boring. On the other hand, I was an undergrad, so there may have been obvious mistakes I missed—that’s part of what I’d be interested in learning.
Oh, I really can’t tell you much about that:) In my field, it’s much more basic. Somehow, even though everyone knows that young ferns exist because adult ferns reproduce, there are very few studies that incorporate adult ferns into young ferns’ most crucial life choices (like, what to produce—sperm or eggs.) I have no idea why it is so beyond simple laboratory convenience. It is not even a mistake, it’s a complete orthogonality of study approaches.
Maybe it would be a good thing for the site if people were encouraged to write critical reviews of something in their fields, the way SSC does? It has been mentioned that criticizing is easier than creating.
Sounds like a good idea. Do it!
I do have something specific in mind (about how plant physiology is often divorced from population research), but I am in a minority here, so it might be more interesting for most people to read about other stuff.
You mean you are studying a field most LWers are unfamiliar with? Well that means we can learn more from your post, right? ;)
If people don’t find it interesting they won’t read it. Little harm done. Polls indicate that LWers want to see more content, and I think you’re displaying the exact sort of self-effacing attitude that is holding us back :)
I’m not guaranteeing that people will vote up your post or anything, but the entire point of the voting system is to help people find good content and ignore bad content. So upvoted posts are more valuable than downvoted posts are harmful.
I, for one, would be interested in such a post.
Thank you, I will do it ASAP, I’m just a bit rushed by PhD schedule and some other work that can be done only in summer. Do you have similar observations? It would be great to compile them into a post, because my own experience is based more on literature and less on personal communication, for personal reasons.
I really don’t have any similar observations, since I mostly focused on biochem and computational bio in school.
I’m actually not entirely sure what details you’re thinking of—I’m imagining something like the influence of selective pressure from other members of the same species, which could cover things like how redwoods are so tall because other redwoods block out light below the canopy. On the other hand, insight into the dynamics of population biologists and those studying plant physiology would also be interesting.
According to the 2014 survey we have about 30 biologists on here, and there are considerably more people here who take an interest in such things. Go ahead and post—the community might say they want less of it, but I’d bet at 4:1 odds that the community will be receptive.
...you know, this is actually odd. I would expect ten biologists to take over a free discussion board. Where are those people?
No, I meant rather what between-different-fields-of-biology observations you might have. It doesn’t matter what you study, specifically. It’s more like ‘but why did those biochists study the impact of gall on probiotics for a whole fortnight of cultivation, if every physiologist knows that the probiotic pill cannot possibly be stuck in the GI tract for so long? thing.’ Have you encountered this before?
I can come up with a few examples that seemed obvious that they wouldn’t work in retrospect, mostly having to do with gene insertion using A. tumefaciens, but none that I honestly predicted before I learned that they didn’t work. Generally, the biological research at my institution seemed to be pretty practical, if boring. On the other hand, I was an undergrad, so there may have been obvious mistakes I missed—that’s part of what I’d be interested in learning.
Oh, I really can’t tell you much about that:) In my field, it’s much more basic. Somehow, even though everyone knows that young ferns exist because adult ferns reproduce, there are very few studies that incorporate adult ferns into young ferns’ most crucial life choices (like, what to produce—sperm or eggs.) I have no idea why it is so beyond simple laboratory convenience. It is not even a mistake, it’s a complete orthogonality of study approaches.