Neuroscience Forum

The Journal of Neuroscience abandons 'Supplementary Materials'.

Quote: 'Beginning November 1, 2010, The Journal of Neuroscience will no longer allow authors to include supplemental material when they submit new manuscripts and will no longer host supplemental material on its web site for those articles. When articles are published, authors will be allowed to include a footnote with a URL that points to supplemental material on a site they support and maintain, together with a brief description of what the supplemental material includes, but that supplemental material will not be reviewed or hosted by The Journal.'

For good reasons:

Quote: 'Although The Journal, like most journals, currently peer reviews supplemental material, the depth of that review is questionable. Most well qualified reviewers are overburdened with requests to review manuscripts, and many feel that it is too much to ask them to also evaluate supplemental material that can be as extensive as the article itself. It is obvious to editors that most reviewers put far less effort (often no effort) into examining supplemental material. Nevertheless, we certify the supplemental material as having passed peer review.
Another troubling problem associated with supplemental material is that it encourages excessive demands from reviewers. Increasingly, reviewers insist that authors add further analyses or experiments "in the supplemental material." These additions are invariably subordinate or tangential, but they represent real work for authors and they delay publication. Such requests can be an unjustified burden on authors. In principle, editors can overrule these requests, but this represents additional work for the editors, who may fail to adequately referee this aspect of the review.

Reviewer demands in turn have encouraged authors to respond in a supplemental material arms race. Many authors feel that reviewers have become so demanding they cannot afford to pass up the opportunity to insert any supplemental material that might help immunize them against reviewers' concerns.

Supplemental material also undermines the concept of a self-contained research report by providing a place for critical material to get lost. Methods that are essential for replicating the experiments, analyses that are central to validating the results, and awkward observations are increasingly being relegated to supplemental material. Such material is not supplemental and belongs in the body of the article, but authors can be tempted (or, with some journals, encouraged) to place essential article components in the supplemental material. Precise policies and thorough examination by reviewers and editors might ensure that material is correctly packaged, but this again diverts energy from the review of the primary article, and lapses are inevitable.'

For more information see the official press release:
http://www.jneurosci.org/cgi/content/full/30/32/10599

In this very moment the brain of H.M. is sliced in the context of a great project. The overall aim of this research project is to conduct a complete and systematic histopathological study of the brain of patient H.M. in order to reveal the precise nature of his lesion.
It is possible to watch the procedure live via internet stream.

http://thebrainobservatory.ucsd.edu/hm_live.php

A colleague of mine recently sent around an article he read. I personally find it quite an interesting read about how stupidity might actually be an important concept in science. Here is the link. Its free access so take a read if you have some free time

Henry G. Molaison, 82, of Windsor Locks, CT died on Tuesday.  He is known in the medical and scientific literatures as "the amnesic patient, H.M."  He was born in Manchester, CT and graduated from East Hartford High School.  In 1953, he underwent an experimental brain operation at the Hartford Hospital to relieve his seizure disorder. Immediately after the operation, Mr. Molaison showed a profound amnesia, which became the topic of intense scientific study for more than five decades.  From age 27 on, he was unable to establish new memories for events in his everyday life and to acquire general information about the world in which he lived.  His memory impairment was "pure" and not accompanied by intellectual or personality disorders.  For this reason, and because the operation has not been repeated, he is the most widely studied and famous case in the neuroscience literature of the 20th and 21st centuries.  Mr. Molaison's contributions to knowledge about memory have been groundbreaking, and researchers worldwide are in his debt.

The Berlin Brain Days 2008 is jointly organized by the seven Phd-programs in Berlin to foster exchange and interaction between neuroscience faculty and students across Berlin. On this symposium PhD students will present their research in lectures and poster presentations. Prof. Dr. Helmut Kettenmann – Chair

This year's invited keynot speakers are:

Ranulfo Romo (opening lecture) Professor of Neuroscience Institute of Cellular Physiology National Autonomous University of Mexico (UNAM)

Moses Chao Professor of Cell Biology, Physiology and Neuroscience and Psychiatry Departments of Cell Biology (Skirball) and Physiology and Neuroscience and Psychiatry New York University

Ray Dolan Professor of Neuropsychiatry and Director of the Wellcome Trust Centre for Neuroimaging University College London

Jutta Engel Cellular and molecular physiology – Hair cell physiology University of Tübingen

Magdalena Goetz Professor of Physiological Genomics Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München

David McAlpine Professor of Auditory Neuroscience and Director of the Ear Institute University College London

Registration is open on the BBD 2008 website.