Zebrafish are increasing in popularity in countless research areas. Having made its debut in developmental biology, Danio rerio is swimming through research areas spanning from behavioral neuroscience to cardiac or oncological studies. There are few disciplines I can think of where zebrafish have not yet been used, but with the recent surge in zebrafish research there is also a need for good literature on the topic. Here is a brief list of useful resources for zebrafish research:

The Zebrafish Book

Already in its 5th edition, the Zebrafish Book by Westerfield (2007) is certainly not a new kid on the block, but it is by far the most basic and necessary resource for anyone venturing into zebrafish research. You can either purchase a print version of the book, but you can also access all of the content in the 4th edition of the book online (for free!).
The Zebrafish Book covers general methods for zebrafish care, breeding, embryonic and larval culture, cellular and molecular methods, and protocols.

ZFIN Protocol Wiki

ZFIN has built a Wiki with protocols for zebrafish research. Whether you are using Danio rerio for gene cloning, protein analysis, or microscopic observations… ZFIN has a protocol for it.
As it is a wiki, users can load protocols to the site as well. When using protocols, it is worth keeping in mind that although it being a useful resource it is not peer reviewed. Some of the protocols are based on peer reviewed papers.

ZFIN model organism database

ZFIN is a phenomenal database for all things zebrafish. ZFIN has a database with zebrafish lines and also a page with job listings for people in the field.

Zebrafish Neurobehavioral Protocols

Zebrafish are relatively new in behavioral neuroscience. As a consequence, standardized protocols are still in being developed by the different groups in this field. There is a remarkable need for good protocols, and this book covers a number of protocols that have successfully been used in previous studies.

This list is by no means comprehensive, if you know of some other great resources for beginners in zebrafish research, or for those who have used this model organism for decades, feel free to share it in the comments!

Depression affects more than 120 million people world wide (according to the World Health Organization), and the cost of treatment is estimated at 30 billion dollars each year. At this year’s SfN meeting in San Diego, Dr. Herwig Baier presented some very interesting findings:

Dr. Baier and his team found that disrupting the stress response in zebrafish can generate behavioral phenotypes that resemble behaviors characteristic to depression. His work suggests that depression could be linked to a individual’s ability to cope with stress.

The zebrafish displaying depression-like behaviors carried a mutation in the glucocorticoid receptor gene, which is involved in stress management. However, the depression-like behaviors were ameliorated when the fish were given Prozac.

New therapies might be able to play into the activity of the glucocorticoid receptor, and promoting its activity instead of blocking it.

When keeping research notes, I use a traditional lab notebook. But, more than once I have been tempted to take the time and work out my notes on a computer to keep better track of everything. The benefits of a traditional paper notebook are simple:

• Easy to carry around to any research environment (especially in fish rooms)
• Can quickly j0t down notes and sketches
• No need for a power plug nearby
• Notes do not accidentally get deleted or lost

However, a digital notebook has one overwhelming advantage in my opinion:

• Ease of locating important notes

The ability to tag notes with keywords, organize them by date or topic can cut down on hours of flipping through a lab-book to locate that tidbit of information you need to continue with your data analysis. Personally, I’m planning to combine the best of both worlds and enter important information in a virtual Google Docs lab notebook. The reason I’ll go with Google Docs is that I can access it from any computer (our lab has more than one, and access on any particular one depends on who is using what).

One of the reasons I am considering Google Docs is for it’s ease of access, and ease of use. But there are also plenty of Google tutorials available for Docs and other Google applications. In addition, I trust my data is safe with Google, but I still wouldn’t use the notebook for any crucial information. It would mostly be for those things you need to process data at the end of the day, and might not easily find in a traditional notebook. Some other science bloggers have mentioned the use of virtual notebooks, but which method you use really seems to depend on your research needs. For some, taking notes within a particular software program, such as Mathematica works best. I, unlike Philip at BioCurious, would worry about being able to access my notes down the road if appropriate readers are no longer available. That worry might stem from my frustration of not being able to open older version SPSS output files in newer versions of the program, but that really doesn’t mean the problem exists with other applications.

The Scientist published an interesting article titled “Life After Fraud” today. This article is a true cautionary tale that shows us how Google might be more powerful in steering our careers than the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI).

In the article Dr. Daniel Page’s story is a wake-up call to anyone who doesn’t like editing or reading their own work, ad nauseam. Over the course of the process of adding and removing details from a grant application, Dr. Page accidentally forgot to remove data, or attribute it to the company he was collaborating with, after he was asked to remove the co-author’s name responsible for the particular data.

It can get even worse though when information about misconduct leaks onto the internet. Such was the case with Dr. Gerald Levick: Google has a longer memory than the ORI, and after confusing allegations of misrepresenting his qualifications on a grant proposal lead to a case of misconduct against him, Dr. Levick was suddenly unemployable. Although he managed to secure considerable amounts of funding, and he came with a small army of graduate students, institutions would not hire him. All thanks to Google. When entering Dr. Levick’s name in Google, the first page of results showed a record of the misconduct case that had already expired and should have been a non-issue since 1997.

Read more examples in the original article and in the mean time we might want to ask ourselves: Are we really too tired to give that grant application/research paper/dissertation another read before submitting it? After all, one small error might lead to an investigation but the real trouble is that everything has a habit of creeping onto the internet, and it seems Google never forgets.