The Scientist

» peer review and cell & molecular biology

Most Recent

image: Preprints Galore

Preprints Galore

By | November 12, 2013

The research community sees the launch of a new life science–centric preprint server.

0 Comments

image: Decoding Breast Cancer Drug Resistance

Decoding Breast Cancer Drug Resistance

By | November 3, 2013

Common mutations in metastasized breast tumors suggest how the cancer can develop resistance to frontline drugs.

2 Comments

image: Book Excerpt from <em>Brave Genius</em>

Book Excerpt from Brave Genius

By | November 1, 2013

In Chapter 20, “On the Same Path,” author Sean Carroll describes the initial meeting between Nobel Laureates Jacques Monod and Albert Camus.

0 Comments

image: Chance and Necessity

Chance and Necessity

By | November 1, 2013

War and justice brought together two of the greatest minds of the 20th century, a scientist and a writer.

1 Comment

image: Contributors

Contributors

By | November 1, 2013

Meet some of the people featured in the November 2013 issue of The Scientist.

0 Comments

image: Penetrating the Brain

Penetrating the Brain

By | November 1, 2013

Researchers use molecular keys, chisels, and crowbars to open the last great biochemical barricade in the body—the blood-brain barrier.

3 Comments

image: Evolving Pain Resistance

Evolving Pain Resistance

By | October 24, 2013

Grasshopper mice harbor mutations in a pain-transmitting sodium channel that allow them to prey on highly toxic bark scorpions.

2 Comments

image: Post-Publication Peer Review Mainstreamed

Post-Publication Peer Review Mainstreamed

By | October 22, 2013

The launch of PubMed Commons highlights the pros and cons of re-reviewing published papers. 

6 Comments

image: FDA Considers Three-Parent IVF

FDA Considers Three-Parent IVF

By | October 17, 2013

The US regulatory agency will meet next week to discuss whether to allow human trials of a technique that combines the genetic information of three adults.

0 Comments

image: Useless Peer Review?

Useless Peer Review?

By | October 15, 2013

A study shows that the methods by which scientists evaluate each other’s work are error-prone and poor at measuring merit.

3 Comments

Popular Now

  1. Unstructured Proteins Help Tardigrades Survive Desiccation
  2. What Budget Cuts Might Mean for US Science
    News Analysis What Budget Cuts Might Mean for US Science

    A look at the historical effects of downsized research funding suggests that the Trump administration’s proposed budget could hit early-career scientists the hardest.  

  3. Inflammation Drives Gut Bacteria Evolution
  4. Women Lose Vision After Stem Cell Treatment
Business Birmingham