1. transcript
  2. Lazy Sunday Morning after a Wild Week of Theory Busting Science

Lazy Sunday Morning after a Wild Week of Theory Busting Science

By apalazzo on January 25, 2009.

So this week I tried to gain evidence that supports my supper dupper theory, based on my unexpectedly amazing mass spec results I told you about a few weeks ago. Fortunately I had a staight forward way of testing the implications of these initial findings. And my experiments conclusively demonstrated that this new theory was not right. I forgot about Murphy's laws.

So after having busted my own new theory, the question to ask would be am I upset? No way. Although some of the proteins in my unexpectedly amazing mass spec results had nothing to do with the process I am studying (the nuclear export of SSCR-containing transcripts), there are still some unidentified proteins in that magical fraction. All I need to do is to scale up my preparation and identify these new factors, that's all. In some ways the nullification of this new theory is a relief because it would have been hard to reconcile it with some of my previously published results. Now it looks likely that a totaly unidentified protein may be responsible for SSCR-dependent export. I will soon find out.

Tags
lab life

More like this

Link between the Nuclear Export of mRNA and Decay
As many of you may know, I have been examining how mRNAs are transported and localized within the cell and how the regulation of mRNA metabolism contributes to gene expression. From data accumulated recently within the "RNA Field", we know that transcription in eukaryotic cells is very sloppy -…
A Subclass of mRNAs Use a Different Nuclear Export Machine
It's been a while since I've written about mRNA and mRNA export. There has been lots of CPEB papers (cytoplasmic polyadenylation element binding protein), but nothing fundamentally new at the molecular level. As for mRNA export, the Reed lab will have a big paper out soon, and when that comes out I…
Will data-euphoria kill scientific theory?
Now that I have a good chunk of time where I'm not scheduled to run off to some distant land for vacation or to give some talk, I have decided to work extra hard. Right now I'm incubating my samples. This post is the result of me killing that time. I want to bring up an article that appeared n…
Alex! Practically Famous!
I thought the name sounded familiar when I checked the newest papers published in PLoS Biology today - yup, that's him, my SciBling and friend Alex Palazzo: The Signal Sequence Coding Region Promotes Nuclear Export of mRNA by Alexander F. Palazzo, Michael Springer, Yoko Shibata, Chung-Sheng Lee,…

I think this happens to all researchers at least once, if not more often. I once spent a good-sized chunk of the taxpayers' money on a flight research project (in Buffalo in February) trying to prove a hypothesis, based on an anomaly in a previous project, that turned out to be absolutely wrong. Fortunately, once we really looked at the data we came up with a better explanation that answered a couple of other questions, too.

I hate it when real life and the data destroy a perfectly good theory.

Yes, it has happened to me many times, but in this case my preliminary data told me to follow up on this new theory that complex X was responsible for SSCR-mediated mRNA export. Fortunately I had a straight forward way to test the theory before wasting too much time and money on it. In retrospect I think that my data was telling me something much more nuanced, that my (still elusive) magical protein may interact with a component of complex X, but acts quite independently of complex X. This actually resolve a paradox that might have arisen if my suped duper theory was correct.

As soon as I get my new mass spec results I'll let you know if I'm on the right track.