CONFOCALMICROSCOPY Archives

July 2008

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:
Larry Tague <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Confocal Microscopy List <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Tue, 1 Jul 2008 23:52:24 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (163 lines)
Search the CONFOCAL archive at
http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal

Guy,

You bet there would be archival problems, but no worse 
(for the most part) than what we currently have with 
electronic thesis and dissertations.  Many universities 
are now storing 400+ very large documents/yr with images, 
etc., and some of these institutions also publish 
supporting data, i.e., CalTech.  However, with that said, 
your statement, "And since most Universities have rules 
requiring authors to keep data for X years anyway, I can't 
see the point" means that the data is already stored... 
make it part of the data stream for publications research. 
Yes, it will take organization, etc., but why loose or 
close data, unless for national security, that at least in 
public institutions, and in some private institutions, the 
public has already paid for with their hard earned taxes.

If the original data is already stored, and today that 
means in many or most cases stored in digital format 
(digital images are the only kind I collect these days), 
and the authors do not want to allow others access, you 
begin to wonder why. I would suggest with public data, 
storage and public access should be a requirement before 
receiving public funds for research.  Already with some 
NIH grant programs (not bench research) there is an 
external evaluation requirement that must be included in 
the budget request... no if ands or buts. For bench 
research, maybe accessible data storage should now be a 
budget item in the proposal process..

Yes, this diatribe strays somewhat from the original image 
manipulation question, but if there is no data to check or 
continue using, how could you possibly know if an improper 
image analysis had been applied.  Even if rules for image 
analysis exist, there is no good way to be sure mistakes 
were not made... especially when there are questions post 
publication and no raw data to check. Cheers!

Larry
  
On Wed, 2 Jul 2008 12:14:13 +1000
  Guy Cox <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
> 
> Well, I don't know what web space all you good folk have 
>available to you but there's no way I have access to 
>anywhere enough to post the several gigabytes of images 
>which lie behind a typical confocal / multiphoton / 
>second harmonic paper.  My University web site allows me 
>something like 10Mb which wouldn't hold a single Z-stack 
>or spectral series.  And it will go as soon as I leave 
>the University - so much for being archival.  My private 
>(paid for) site has a lot more but still nowhere near 
>enough, and it's only there as long as I pay the bills.  
> 
> It's all very well to say you can but a terabyte drive 
>for however many dollars, but that's just the start. 
> There's the power to run it (and replace it every few 
>years), there's the backup facility without which it's 
>not remotely archival, and most of all there's the 
>bandwidth needed to access it.  On the scale people are 
>talking about that's a huge operation.  A moderately 
>popular paid site I administer, for example, has 4 
>GB/month allowed - and comes close to it every month. 
> That's not involving any confocal images!  When I put 
>the Pawley/Cox Zeiss Diffraction Kit simulation on my 
>personal site, and announced it to this list, it reached 
>the site quota within 48 hours, and shut the whole thing 
>down. 
> 
> About the only way you could have a sensible archive 
>would be to get authors to mail a few DVDs to some sort 
>of repository.  Then anyone would wanted to check the 
>data could pay a search fee and get copies of the disks. 
> The search fee would not be cheap, though.  And since 
>most Universities have rules requiring authors to keep 
>data for X years anyway, I can't see the point.  In any 
>case, anyone who is being selective with the data they 
>publish is likely to be selective in what they archive, 
>too.
> 
>                                                           
>       Guy
> 
> 
> Optical Imaging Techniques in Cell Biology
> by Guy Cox    CRC Press / Taylor & Francis
>    http://www.guycox.com/optical.htm
> ______________________________________________
> Associate Professor Guy Cox, MA, DPhil(Oxon)
> Electron Microscope Unit, Madsen Building F09,
> University of Sydney, NSW 2006
> ______________________________________________
> Phone +61 2 9351 3176     Fax +61 2 9351 7682
> Mobile 0413 281 861
> ______________________________________________
>     http://www.guycox.net
> -----Original Message-----
>From: Confocal Microscopy List 
>[mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of 
>Christophe Leterrier
> Sent: Wednesday, 2 July 2008 3:16 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: An alarming amount of (statistical) image 
>manipulation
> 
> Search the CONFOCAL archive at
> http://listserv.acsu.buffalo.edu/cgi-bin/wa?S1=confocal
> 
>> That's fine.  But that's not how most journals work 
>>right now, as far 
>> as I know, and we are talking about how it works now. 
>> If, five or ten 
>> years from now, paper journals are no longer the 
>>standard, then the 
>> limitations won't exist.  As long as they do, however, 
>>they do.
>>
>> billo
>>
> 
> This is true, however it is not uncommon to see 40-60 
>pages supplementary data in Science or Nature papers 
>nowadays. Furthermore, as Larry pointed out, nothing 
>keeps you today from hosting your 140 pages pdf by 
>yourself (your university, your lab...) and link to it in 
>your article, as a web link only takes half a line in a 
>paper !
> 
> No virus found in this incoming message.
> Checked by AVG. 
> Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1527 - 
>Release Date: 30/06/2008 6:07 PM
> 
> 
> No virus found in this outgoing message.
> Checked by AVG. 
> Version: 7.5.526 / Virus Database: 270.4.3/1529 - 
>Release Date: 1/07/2008 7:23 PM
> 

Larry Tague
Co-Investigator BBHSL*
Co-Director of MECCA**
Research Associate                       Dept. of 
Physiology
Phone Bus.: 901-448-7152                 U.T. Memphis
Phone FAX:  901-448-7126                 894 Union Ave.
e-mail:[log in to unmask]          Memphis, TN
        [log in to unmask]                  38163
        [log in to unmask]

*BBHSL (Building Bridges to Health Science Literacy). An 
NIH Science Education Partnership Award (SEPA)2005-2010
URL: http://bbhsl.mecca.org
**MECCA (Memphis Educational Computer Connectivity 
Alliance)
URL: http://www.mecca.org/

ATOM RSS1 RSS2