Guest BFSleuth Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I'm sad to see what gov't agencies are having to go through to get articles. Keep in mind that the majority of scientific research in the US is funded and supported in whole or in part by government grants. I would think that the journal publishers should have to provide copies for gov't/public use as a partial repayment for that investment. The gist of the article I read in regard to the rising cost of journal subscriptions is that there is a movement afoot by institutions to ask that their research scientists publish in online only journals, the newer breed of journals that forego the cost of printing and distribution. However, there is push back from scientists because the established big name journals that garner the greatest prestige for themselves and their institutions all have print editions, and have the most respected peer review processes. Especially in academia there is the classic "publish or perish" need to author peer reviewed papers in established journals in order to be considered for tenure or to advance, and this culture has not yet changed enough to consider publications in "lesser" journals to be on par with established journals. The conclusion of the article is that we will likely see a trend toward online only publication within the next decade, as more online only journals start publishing groundbreaking work. Lower cost, wider distribution, and easier access to content were sited as the driving factors. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 My understanding is Wally paid for full genome analysis on three samples, they came back sooner than expected. That probably resulted in a major rewrite. Maybe there's a distinction I am unaware of, but I thought it took a worldwide team of researchers some YEARS to sequence the entire human genome? Is what Ketchum et al did something different, or has technology advanced so much that it is doable in a much shorter period of time? GK It is my understanding that the team did the entire genome. Maybe you know the answer to my above question. Thanks for the info. GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 (edited) I think the technology has advanced considerably since the initial complete genome sequencing. The recent complete genome sequencing of the Denisovan DNA used a unique new method for extracting ancient DNA and I think that effort took about 2-3 years, and in the articles I read on the subject they alluded to the speed with which complete genome sequencing has advanced so that now it is only months or even weeks for relatively fresh DNA. I'll certainly defer to anyone that has more detailed knowledge in the field. Edited September 21, 2012 by BFSleuth Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 I think the technology has advanced considerably since the initial complete genome sequencing. The recent complete genome sequencing of the Denisovan DNA used a unique new method for extracting ancient DNA and I think that effort took about 2-3 years, and in the articles I read on the subject they alluded to the speed with which complete genome sequencing has advanced so that now it is only months or even weeks for relatively fresh DNA. I'll certainly defer to anyone that has more detailed knowledge in the field. Thanks. If anyone knows more, please chime in. It's amazing how long the first time can take for many technological breakthroughs and how short the same process can take once the kinks have been shaken out! Entirely sequenced Bigfoot DNA = slam dunk as far as proof goes. IMHO. Hoaxing would seem to still be in the mix, but I wonder if it's even possible to hoax the complete sequencing of a genome so that the experts wouldn't detect it. I speak from a position of woeful technical knowledge, but that seems very unlikely to me! Makes you wonder why they haven't published yet though....It should be a done deal. GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Lance's post above, with the memo noting that the government institution wouldn't be paying for advanced copies of research, also noted that media embargos can be in place for 6 to 18 months. This would be so the journal could milk additional money from institutions (above and beyond the high bundled subscription costs) so scientists could have the most up to date research papers. The way I read the tea leaves the paper is pretty much done and is likely entering or has entered this stage of the process. Hopefully they don't do the "milk run" too long. I also noted that on Dr. Ketchum's FB page a person questioned whether the DNA results would mean that the peer reviewing scientists will be able to say, "Yes, there is a bigfoot" or whether it would simply mean there is DNA of a new creature between man and ape. She noted that she cannot comment on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 GK Complete genome sequencing including deep sequencing for transcript analysis takes only 4 days in our facility. I've posted the cost in this forum previously, can't remember the amount, and am too lazy to search for it. I think its about $5K per sample. Genes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 21, 2012 Share Posted September 21, 2012 Thanks for the info, GK. Do you think the sequencing you noted is sufficient for complete identification of a new species, or is there another level of sequencing that might be required? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest gerrykleier Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 GK Complete genome sequencing including deep sequencing for transcript analysis takes only 4 days in our facility. I've posted the cost in this forum previously, can't remember the amount, and am too lazy to search for it. I think its about $5K per sample. Genes Is that to take a sample and compare/contrast it with the genome of a previously sequenced species to see what the differences might be or is that to take a sample and completely sequence the genome even if that species has never been sequenced before? How is what you guys do different from the much ballyhooed sequencing of the Human and Fruit Fly Genomes a few years back? Is it basically the same thing but takes on 4 days and costs 5K??!! If so, WOW! GK Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Melba Ketchum I have severed ties with Sally Ramey. Please address anything directly to me. Thank you. 43 minutes ago, Facebook Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Let the speculation begin... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MikeG Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Begin speculating, hey? ...........coz the last 263 pages, 7885 posts, have all been fact-based? Mike, who can't find an ironic smiley. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 The speculation continues, and I must admit to only checking in quarterly, these days. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BFSleuth Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Well, there have been a few facts sprinkled here and there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Incorrigible1 Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 Certainly. Yet, I've not missed much, in the couple/three months I've been absent from the thread...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest OntarioSquatch Posted September 22, 2012 Share Posted September 22, 2012 (edited) Come to think of it. I can't tell if there has been anything new in the past three months. Except for maybe the monthly rumours from Robert Lindsay. Edited September 22, 2012 by OntarioSquatch Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts