... but the rest of the lab is moving ahead.
We're doing some revisions on our failed-again CIHR proposal about DNA uptake, and will pass it on to two internal reviewers on Monday. They're both microbiologists and we hope their comments will help us fine-tune it for the Microbiology and Infectious Diseases review committee.
The RA is about to do some preliminary cross-linking experiments that we hope to add to the proposal.
The post-doc and I are making good progress on the first of his two papers (both of which we plan to submit before the March 1 CIHR deadline). He's going to present a fairly complete version of it at today's lab meeting.
I need to spend part of today working on a draft of the Response to Reviewers (when I'm not devising beautiful teaching slides to illustrate how elegantly meiosis solves the problems of correctly segregating homologous chromosomes).
Field of Science
-
-
-
Political pollsters are pretending they know what's happening. They don't.5 weeks ago in Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience
-
-
Course Corrections6 months ago in Angry by Choice
2 comments:
Markup Key:
- <b>bold</b> = bold
- <i>italic</i> = italic
- <a href="http://www.fieldofscience.com/">FoS</a> = FoS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Dear Rosie
ReplyDeleteI am really enjoying your blogs and your general attitude to "open science".
However something jars in your blog - why do you refer to your staff by their titles: "the post doc", "the RA" etc. Why not by name? I am guessing this is to "protect the innocent" but it does sound rather impersonal. Do they not want to be named?
Cheers
Nick
Hi Nick,
ReplyDeleteI decided when I started the blog not to use the names of the other people in the lab. I still feel more comfortable talking about them and their work this way, especially since lab personnel turn over every few years.
None of them have ever complained about this or asked to have their name uses, so I've assumed that they're happy with this arrangement.