SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
We know that bacteriophages are viruses that infect and replicate within bacteria. We know that they are the most abundant organisms on Earth. But we don’t know much about their genetic architecture.
A team of professional scholars and budding scientists–chiefly college freshmen–have joined forces under the aegis of SEA-PHAGES (Science Education Alliance-Phage Hunters Advancing Genomics and Evolutionary Science), which is run jointly by the University of Pittsburgh and the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, to study the little-known genetics of bacteriophages. In a new paper recently published in the journal eLife, the authors show that phages do not form discrete populations as previously suggested but are rampantly exchanging genes with each other to generate a broad spectrum of genetic diversity, albeit with some types being a lot more prevalent than others.
Of the nearly 3,000 authors, 2,664 were students from among 81 colleges and universities that participate in the SEA-PHAGES undergraduate science program, created by Pitt’s Graham Hatfull and colleagues and funded by the Howard Hughes Medical Institute. This paper is believed to have the second-highest number in history of authors on a scientific paper, trailing only that which describes the discovery of the Higgs boson. That paper has more than 6,000 authors.
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2015/05/150511114422.htm
[Abstract]: http://elifesciences.org/content/4/e06416
(Score: 1) by Ox0000 on Tuesday May 12 2015, @03:09PM
I understand that science is a collaborative field but when you have almost 3000 authors of a paper, how much value is there still in 'also' having you name in that list? I guess the list of authors is longer than the actual paper.
Publish or perish indeed... "I'll get my name on absolutely anything and everything!"
(Score: 2) by ikanreed on Tuesday May 12 2015, @03:13PM
Or, you know, they're trying to contribute to an important project and the name on the paper is only a small career consideration next to supporting a major backbone study in their field that will be used for generations.
(Score: 1) by Ox0000 on Tuesday May 12 2015, @03:19PM
I get that and I think learning more about bacteriophages would be good for humanity; but let me ask the question in another way: how much did each 'author' contribute to the paper and what is the threshold for one's name to be included as an author? Could I have my name included as well? I saw a documentary on bacteriophages once...
(Score: 3, Informative) by ikanreed on Tuesday May 12 2015, @03:33PM
The paper was a collation of various distinct bacteriophage genome sequencings with information from each author about the particulars of each studied phage. Presumably every author was responsible for characterizing their own previous research so that there is context to the sequences they've got stored.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @06:08PM
Most of the authors seem to be students that participated in a high school or college class that isolated bacteriophage from various areas, then sent the bacteriophage to be sequenced.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @05:18PM
LOL!
Somebody (you!) has clearly never worked in academia, or even just worked with academics.
You wouldn't have written what you just wrote if you knew how academia and academics really work.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @06:50PM
The vast majority are undergraduates. Publish or perish does not apply. They were simply doing a small fraction of the overall work through other course assignments, then submitting the work to be included as a paper greater than the sum of its parts.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Tuesday May 12 2015, @10:11PM
Which is a reason they shouldn't have been given co-authorship but rather mention in the acknowledgements section. Giving them all authorship in this case is the academic equivalent of giving them all participation trophies.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Wednesday May 13 2015, @06:10AM
Being published in a journal as a primary author is more often than not just a participation trophy too. Rarely does any paper get much readership unless there is a fad within the subject scope. Sure it is a real downer to spend hundreds of hours on a paper knowing full well that maybe a dozen people will read it after publishing, but that is the way journals go.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Tuesday May 12 2015, @11:27PM
I understand that science is a collaborative field but when you have almost 3000 authors of a paper, how much value is there still in 'also' having you name in that list?
It's a standard tradition. If you contribute to a paper or the research it presents, you get your name on the paper. And I suspect this paper represents a number of man years of research on the part of the authors. The publish and perish aspect rather is that they might publish a number of papers with this author list rather than one or two more definitive papers.