Getting more and more into preprints (see for example these posts Guest post from Jake Scott: Building trust: a sine qua non for successful acceptance of preprints in the biological sciences and More bio preprint discussion sites …). So am starting to browse preprint servers a bit more and I have found some recently posted preprints of interest:
- [1305.7256] tRNA signatures reveal polyphyletic origins of streamlined SAR11 genomes among the alphaproteobacteria
- Coalescence, genetic diversity and adaptation in sexual populations from Neher et al.
- Reducing assembly complexity of microbial genomes with single-molecule sequencing from Koren et al.
- Antibiotic resistance landscapes: a quantification of theory-data incompatibility for fitness landscapes from Crona et al.
From PeerJ preprints
- Supertrees based on the subtree prune-and-regraft distance from Whidden et al.
- Microenvironmental variables need to effect intrinsic phenotypic parameters of cancer stem cells to affect tumourigenicity from Jake Scott et al.
- GenGIS 2: Geospatial analysis of traditional and genetic biodiversity, with new gradient algorithms and an extensible plugin framework from Rob Beiko et al.
|Figure 2. Submissions to the quantitative biology section lag behind physics, mathematics, and computer science. Data from . doi:10.1371/journal.pbio.1001563.g002. The reference to 19 is to Warner S (2012) Data for arXiv submissions by subject and year. Available: http://dx.doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.96966. Accessed 14 April 2013.|
Preprints are simply bypassing this model for what we believe is the progress of science: they speed up the dissemination of scientific discoveries and put on readers’ shoulders the responsibility to judge originality and pertinence.