CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

December 2004

CONFOCALMICROSCOPY@LISTS.UMN.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Alexander Schulz <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 8 Dec 2004 17:15:34 +0100
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (135 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

I have the greatest respect for the expertise represented by the
listserver. And I am absolutely in favour for a healthy skepticism. My
point was that the authors might be able to respond rapidly to some of the
questions coming up on this forum!
Alexander

At 17:04 08-12-2004, you wrote:
>Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>
>I am all for the authors joining the discussion but reject the idea
>that we shouldn't discuss a published work on this list.
>
>As for the idea that reviewers of the JCB have the same level of what
>I might call "justified technical skepticism" as the 1,500 odd
>members of this list, I think that it lacks merit.
>
>My three* cents worth,
>
>Jim P.
>
>* Inflation. US cents aren't worth what they were.
>
>
>>Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>>
>>Sorry to disturb the discussion, but shouldn't the authors be asked before
>>starting an extended discussion on the material and concluding that the
>>results might be artefacts? After all, the referees of JBC did accept the
>>manuscript for publication.
>>
>>It might just be a question of style, but the present discussion occurs
>>possibly without the knowledge of the authors that their paper is taken
>>apart on the www. The E-mail address of the corresponding author is given
>><>.  The discussion is certainly outmost relevant - no
>>doubt about that - but we can learn much more when the authors get the
>>opportunity to take part.
>>
>>Cheers
>>Alexander
>>
>>=======================================
>>Alexander Schulz
>>Bioimaging Group
>>Department of Plant Biology
>>The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, KVL
>>Thorvaldsensvej 40
>>DK-1871 Frederiksberg C,
>>Copenhagen Denmark
>>____________________________________________
>>Phone +45-3528-3350
>>Fax     +45-3528-3365
>>E-mail: [log in to unmask]
>>=======================================
>>
>>At 16:13 08-12-2004, you wrote:
>>>Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>>>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>>>
>>>Are the images shown in the paper raw or were they filtered in anyway
>>>before calculating the ratios? It is not mentioned in the methods. That
>>>could cause artefactual "spots"
>>>
>>>Leoncio A. Vergara MD
>>>Research Assistant Professor
>>>Department of Neuroscience and Cell Biology
>>>Director, Optical Imaging Laboratory (O.I.L.)
>>>University of Texas Medical Branch
>>>301 University Boulevard
>>>Galveston, Texas 77555-0641
>>>
>>>(409) 772-3970
>>>(409) 772-3982
>>>www.oil.utmb.edu
>>>
>>>
>>>-----Original Message-----
>>>From: Confocal Microscopy List [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On
>>>Behalf Of Stephen Cody
>>>Sent: Tuesday, December 07, 2004 7:20 PM
>>>To: [log in to unmask]
>>>Subject: Re: Better than possible confocal images?
>>>
>>>Search the CONFOCAL archive at
>>>http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
>>>
>>>Dear Christof,
>>>
>>>I'd have to share your scepticism. Considering FIG 1B in this paper is
>>>an intensity map, and the dendrite that is highlighted in FIG IC can
>>>hardly be seen in Fig 1B I'm not convinced that what they show is
>>>anything but noise or edge artefact.
>>>
>>>Cheers
>>>
>>>Stephen H. Cody
>>>
>>>Microscopy Manager
>>>Central Resource for Advanced Microscopy
>>>Ludwig Institute For Cancer Research
>>>PO Box 2008 Royal Melbourne Hospital
>>>Parkville  Victoria    3050
>>>Australia
>>>Tel: 61 3 9341 3155    Fax: 61 3 9341 3104
>>>email: [log in to unmask]
>>>www.ludwig.edu.au/labs/confocal.html
>>>www.ludwig.edu.au/confocal
>
>
>--
>               ****************************************
>Prof. James B. Pawley,                             Ph.  608-263-3147
>Room 223, Zoology Research Building,               FAX  608-265-5315
>1117 Johnson Ave., Madison, WI, 53706  [log in to unmask]
>"A scientist is not one who can answer questions but one who can
>question answers."  Theodore Schick Jr., Skeptical Enquirer, 21-2:39

=======================================
Alexander Schulz
Department of Plant Biology
The Royal Veterinary and Agricultural University, KVL
Thorvaldsensvej 40
DK-1871 Frederiksberg C,
Copenhagen Denmark
____________________________________________
Phone +45-3528-3350
Fax     +45-3528-3365
E-mail: [log in to unmask]
http://www.plbio.kvl.dk/~als/
=======================================

ATOM RSS1 RSS2