Here is a new paper that just came out on PLoS-Biology. What do you think?
Search
Profile
My scientific specialty is chronobiology (circadian rhythms and photoperiodism), with additional interests in comparative physiology, animal behavior and evolution. I am not an MD so I cannot diagnose and treat your sleep problems. As well as writing this blog, I am also the Online Discussion Expert for PLoS. This is a personal blog and opinions within it in no way reflect the policies of PLoS. You can contact me at: Coturnix@gmail.com
Buy the 2008 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2007 Science Blogging Anthology:
Buy the 2006 Science Blogging Anthology:
Recent Posts
- ScienceOnline'09 - interview with Christian Casper
- ScienceOnline2010 - introducing the participants
- Clock Quotes
- Tweetlinks, 11-08-09
- The podcast of the radio show is now online
- ScienceOnline2010 - Program highlights
- Clock Quotes
- Tweetlinks, 11-07-09
- Ignite talks at ScienceOnline2010
- Clock Quotes
Recent Comments
- Darren Naish on ScienceOnline'09 - interview with Christian Casper
- Christian Casper on ScienceOnline'09 - interview with Christian Casper
- Catharine on Tweetlinks, 11-08-09
- LuLu on BIO101 - Lecture 7 - Physiology: Coordinated Response
- Coturnix on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- JohnV on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- Coturnix on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- JohnV on Cool new Scienceblogs.com widgets
- Occam Razor on Will there be terrorist attacks if Obama is the President?
- DeLene on Science Cafe Raleigh: Boom 'n' Doom: Volcanoes, North Carolina and North Carolina Volcanoes
Archives
- November 2009
- October 2009
- September 2009
- August 2009
- July 2009
- June 2009
- May 2009
- April 2009
- March 2009
- February 2009
- January 2009
- December 2008
- November 2008
- October 2008
- September 2008
- August 2008
- July 2008
- June 2008
- May 2008
- April 2008
- March 2008
- February 2008
- January 2008
- December 2007
- November 2007
- October 2007
- September 2007
- August 2007
- July 2007
- June 2007
- May 2007
- April 2007
- March 2007
- February 2007
- January 2007
- December 2006
- November 2006
- October 2006
- September 2006
- August 2006
- July 2006
- June 2006
Blogroll
Find me on...
Make Me Happy
Add Scienceblogs to your Technorati Favorites!
Make Me Solvent
I Support
Bloggie Stuff
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 Unported License.
« Just Science? | Main | Final notes on the Science Blogging Conference and Anthology »
Evolution, Interactions, and Biological Networks
Category: Evolution • Science News
Posted on: January 17, 2007 5:00 PM, by Coturnix
Share this: Facebook Twitter Stumbleupon Reddit Email + More
TrackBacks
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://scienceblogs.com/mt/pings/30805
Comments
I think "plane reading material!" because I have zero time now, but I LOVE networks, so I will read this at some point.
Posted by: Eva | January 17, 2007 5:45 PM
Very interesting article - I hope you don't mind, but I chose to express my thoughts on it on my own blog. :o)
Thanks for sharing it!
Posted by: Daniel | January 17, 2007 6:31 PM
Usually I try to be the voice of reason when commenting on Science Blogs. But I'm in a bad mood over being subpoenaed early tomorrow morning as an eyewitness in a criminal trial tomorrow morning. So, here's a very snarky first impression of the paper cited.
================
Catchy title by someone I never heard of.
Hey, we got big bucks from DARPA by using the good name of Princeton.
Networks, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword. But some biologists think it's nonsense. Non-networkologists = neologisms. Why should they care? Why should we care?
Name-drop, bow to Darwin, this way, that way, can we dream up a third way?
Wish we were mathematicians. Wish we were physicists. I can't get no respect.
Networks, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword.
Handwave towards someone else who might have actual data, which may or may not relate to our buzzword.
Paradigm, paradigm, paradigm, paradigm, may well reflect.
Wish-list, wish-list, wish-list, wish-list.
Networks, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword, buzzword.
Question, question, question, question, question, we ran out of money before we got an answer. Can we have another grant?
================
That looks nastier than I really am. Maybe I'm just giving a template for all the articles I had to referee from an interdisciplinary conference. Maybe I'm giving a review template for a dynamic robust network of ecosystem-level cross-disciplinary synthesis. Choose a buzzword from column A. Choose a buzzword from column B. Crossover, inversion, point mutation, handwave, optimization, network.
Maybe my feelings are still hurt by my having had two papers rejected from the same conference in a pretty part of Italy, where I was making essentially the same main points which were, as I recall:
He says paradigm is static, she says paradigm is static, it says paradigm is static, I think it is dynamic. Consequently: evolution, optimization, multidimensional, nonlinear, genetic algorithm, phenotype, genotype, ensemble, granularity, structure, function, pathway, complex interactions, scale-free, fractal, power-law, growth, change, selection, central organizing principle, complex system, heterogeneous, vary widely, patterns emerge, properties emerge, questions emerge, answers still hide.
Yeah, my feelings were hurt when the referees said "This isn't really a scientific paper. It's more of a personal narrative."
Did I say "network"? Oh.
Sauce for the goose, sauce for the gander, heterogeneous network of sauce.
That's my first impression. If the paper actually makde sense, I'm sorry. No I'm not. Yes I am. Is Colin Fergusson on TV yet?
Okay. Goodnight.
p.s. Hey, guys, if I'm ever at Princeton or Georgia or Duke, you know this was all in good fun. Right. Guys?
Posted by: Jonathan Vos Post | January 18, 2007 3:24 AM