Archive for November, 2011

Scientific Code of Conduct…

What would a scientific code of conduct look like?

From SciDev:

“Representatives of many of the world’s top science research organisations have endorsed a call for a universal code of conduct on the rights, freedom and responsibilities of scientific workers, demanding that such a code be recognised by, and built into, the legislation of individual countries.”

Science needs to be afforded the freedom to act without restraint, but at the same time, scientists are urged to fully understand their responsibilities. Disparities in science exist. From the bias of peer-review, gender balance, to the allocation of research funds, and to the gap that exists between developed and developing nations. How much and how far would a universal code of conduct go towards levelling the playing field?


The social network of solitary lizards…

Burra, South Australia. Dirt roads link sparsely populated towns and communities once home to copper miners that lived in tiny dugouts along the banks of the creek. Burra is a place capsulated by hot, dry summers and cool moist winters. Across the arid place a grey-brown reptile with short limbs and a large cumbersome head shuffles along the dirt in search of the place it calls home. No other living thing is in sight. For all intents and purposes, this lizard is the last being in existence in this arid place.

The Pygmy Blue-tongue Lizard is the smallest of the genus Tiliqua and, unlike the other members of the genus, it has a pink tongue. Its home is a vertical burrow constructed by spiders. The bluetongue lizard is territorial and solitary. An animal so solitary it was once thought of to be completely extinct

The solitary lizards rarely leave home, and when they do rarely for any great amount of time, taking solace within their holes for many months at a time and rarely encountering a neighbour outside of mating season.

When a lizard does venture out, it is rarely far from its burrow. The lizard’s use of wolf and trapdoor spider holes as a home is only a recent discovery. It really makes no modifications to its lodging, using it for day time shelter, retreat sites for hiding, ambush sites for hunting passing prey, basking sites for thermoregulation, and birthing sites. From cradle to the grave.

At the height of the mining boom, the population of miners living in the Burra region was in the area of 5000, approximately the number of lizards that currently roam the grasslands near Burra today. The Pygmy blue-tongue lizard is endangered and under threat from climate change, the changing of the natural soil under its feet due to ploughing of native grassy understorey, and – most importantly – from parasites.

The bluetongue lizards are host to an ixodid tick, Bothriocroton hydrosauri, and an oxyurid nematode, Pharyngodon wandillahensis. Two parasites that don’t really go out of their way to be parasitic.

How a host acts can be very beneficial for a parasite or pathogen. Parasites evolve to get the most out of their host… by hook or by crook. Some parasites go to great lengths to change the behaviour of their hosts. The Tom & Jerry dynamic witnessed in Toxoplasma gondii, and zombie ants to name but a few.

A challenge of disease ecology in a wildlife setting is to identify and map how different parasites and pathogens spread and establish a foothold within a population. From influenza to measles to HIV to foot and mouth to real or hypothetical diseases, the modelling is all very similar. The patterns of contact among hosts within a population are likely to play a central role in how parasites spread.

A good social network is key to any disease transmission. This lizard is a solitary beast – making it an interesting subject to study social networks, and in particular social networking that results in the spread of disease. The question is how can a parasite remain successful with an anti-social host.

The spread of parasites is one that often relies on the modification of host behaviour, but in the case of the tick and the nematode, the parasite takes advantage of the lizard’s less than social nature.

The tick requires three hosts, and each developmental stage of the tick is on a different host. Larvae, nymphs and adult females each attach to a host, feed and then detach. The detached larvae and nymphs then moult to the next developmental stage. Whereas the female lay eggs that hatch into larvae.

Tick activity and development occur in the spring and summer months when the weather is warm and the lizards are at their most adventurous (lizard activity is at its peak). The tick adopts a ‘sit and wait’ strategy to find its next host. Once detached from its host, it will move less than half a metre to find the next host. It simply waits for the lizard to find it. This must happen within 40 days before the tick becomes unviable.

The oxyurid nematode has a more clever strategy. Lizards use their tongues to sense environmental cues, and the pygmy bluetongue lizards uses its tongue to inspect scats other lizards use to mark their territory. This is when transmission occurs. The eggs of the nematode are thought to have no more than 10 days to find its next host before it dies.

Some lizards are naturally more adventurous, acting as dispersers, and wandering from neighbouring settlements. Being mobile enough to disperse the disease. These dispersing lizards behave more cautiously, and are more likely to inspect any scats as they move through occupied habitat. Lizards moving across the population are the major agents for the spread of nematodes.

Links join individuals that interact with each other – but in the case of the bluetongue lizard, these links are rare, and few and far between. These parasites, unlike most, have had to rely on the rare occasions of interpersonal contact patterns between lizards.

Peer reviewing peer review…

The debate into the merits and/or problems with peer review as a system in itself as well as one for catching scientific fraud has probably been going on for as long as the peer review process itself. Every time a retraction turns up peer review’s detractors throw their arms up in the air claiming that this is why peer review doesn’t work. I haven’t seen much in the way of a viable alternative to peer review being suggested than the simplistic “just blog your research”, which in itself has many more problems just waiting to happen than the peer review process has presently. Many complaints of the peer review process don’t really seem to be about peer review itself — rather, about the scientific class system we find ourselves in. The world of impact factors and journals of esteem skew peer review. This is without a doubt. Some are trying to turn the tide with a recent phenomenon of publishing “negative” results. Or rather, results that have no positive bias and have no wow-factor. Examples of open access journals are becoming more common in that respect.

But going back to peer review, very few ask the question of what peer review is actually for?

It is important to have this discussion as a reminder. I think as scientists, sometimes we forget what publication means. Publication is never the last word. Publication through peer review ensures that what is presented is of suitable scientific “merit” to be presented to the wider scientific community. That your findings can be reproduced by other scientists in the field. Peer review establishes a minimal scientific unit, if you will, for the larger community.

This whole debate, as important as it is, really reminds me of a this paper:

What If Social Scientists Had Reviewed Great Scientific Works of the Past

What had I twaught…

%d bloggers like this: