Since I have last posted, there are some new video articles on JoVE involving zebrafish research. A team at MIT published a video protocol showing how to do injections in the zebrafish brain ventricle. This can aid in the study of ventricle formation and morphology. When studying the effect of teratogens, it could also be interesting to look at brain morphology using this technique. Here are some images shown on JoVE from this protocol.

View the video protocol on JoVE here.

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.

JoVE stands for “Journal of Visualized Experiments”, and basically that is exactly what it delivers. JoVE is a new concept that tries to marry scientific reporting with video. Think of a typical journal article describing a protocol or experiment, and now imagine you can actually see the researcher perform the experiments on video. This is the format JoVE uses to report scientific research, and since it is also indexed in PubMed, the content really does go beyond your short little YouTube video. The concept also remains true to the layout of a typical research article, including an abstract, an introduction, and a conclusion. However, video articles on JoVE spend a lot of time on the actual experimental protocol, which is a huge benefit in relatively novel fields, such as in the use of zebrafish, or when learning to use new technology.

JoVE publishes articles in a number of different categories, focusing on the life sciences:

• Medicine
• Neuroscience
• Developmental Biology
• Cellular Biology
• Plant Biology
• Microbiology
• Immunology
• Basic Protocols

Zebrafish fit in all but one of those categories, so there are tons of opportunities to learn about the different types of zebrafish research being done. Best of all, because it is a video based journal, and zebrafish research is relatively new, the opportunity to learn new protocols is also pretty good. When it comes to the Materials and Methods section of a traditional journal, I can rarely say I find it particularly entertaining and most of the time not even really that interesting. However, seeing the experiment being performed on video makes it not only educational, informative, but also particularly entertaining.

JoVE subscription vs free content

The production costs associated with each of the research articles published in JoVE is understandably much higher than in traditional paper publishing. This cost has to be offset somehow, and researchers wanting to publish in JoVE are met with relatively high publishing costs. Aside from this, a lot of the content is only available to viewers who have a membership (which is actually very reasonably priced). The paid content is easily recognized, because you’re met with a video that is locked:

There is quite a bit of content that is open access though, where you can see the complete video journal article for free. Why are some videos not locked? Simple, the authors paid more money to make them open access! Personally, I really appreciate this and I’ve already found a number of very interesting open access zebrafish research articles on JoVE:

• Methods for the study of the Zebrafish Maxillary Barbel
• Live Imaging of the Zebrafish Embryonic Brain by Confocal Microscopy

I really believe this new concept in scientific research reporting is an amazing way of staying on top of the latest (zebrafish) research. What do you think? I’d love to hear your comments!

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.

This is by no means a new video, but even after a couple of years on youtube, it is a great quick peak into zebrafish embryonic development. Even though zebrafish develop fast, which fueled their popularity with developmental biologists, the timelapse video shows a complete overview of development in less than a minute.

[ad]

Check out the video showing development after alcohol exposure as well!