4. Do ItYourself.
• See & feel value of peer review process
• Improve writing skills
• Improve critical reading skills
• Construct your online profile
• credit as author, as reviewer, as editor.
5. Plan?
• 8 papers - 1 blog post per paper
• 100-500 words
• 2 authors per blog post
• from “other theme”
• mix up groups
# needed in role # of reviews to do
Normal person everyone else 2
Web person 2 1
Editor responsible
for 4 blog posts
2 0
8. Todos
• Decide your groups for authoring
• (must pair with different people than presentation!)
• cannot present and blog as part of same "theme"
• https://etherpad.mozilla.org/obVAlZUq5D
• Editors
• determine who is responsible for which papers
• alert authors when their stuff is due
• determine who receives which review task when
• Web people need to decide on platform (e.g. tumblr & color
scheme etc), name, potential guidelines, and set up…
10. Writing a good blog post
• Respect basic writing rules :)
• Similar to “New Scientist” article?
• Lots of online resources. e.g.:
http://scienceofblogging.com/how-to-write-a-good-research-blog-post/
11. Reviewing
• Mention strengths
• Most important:
• Potential for improvement!!
• Major themes
• Constructive suggestions if possible:
• structure / wording
• clarification / elimination
• Structuring a review:
• General statement
• Numbered list of specific points that need to be addressed.
12. Responding to a review
• Fix main text
• Specifically reply to each point raised by reviewers!
13.
14. Todos
• Decide your groups for authoring
• (must pair with different people than presentation!)
• cannot present and blog as part of same "theme"
• https://etherpad.mozilla.org/obVAlZUq5D
• Editors
• determine who is responsible for which papers
• alert authors when their stuff is due
• determine who receives which review task when
• Web people need to decide on platform (e.g. tumblr & color
scheme etc), name, potential guidelines, and set up…
18. So you want to do sequence a
genome…
• Sampling?
• algorithms prefer low diversity
• Sequencing approach?
• paired end?
• which sequencer?
• what is needed for scaffolding?
20. So you want to do sequence a
genome…
• Sampling?
• algorithms prefer low diversity
• Sequencing approach?
• paired end?
• which sequencer?
• what is needed for scaffolding?
• input data Q/A?
• sequencer statistics
• fastqc
• bio-relevant measurements? (e.g. % mapping to known data)
Unable to detect all errors!
21. • trimming/deduplicating/filtering
• removing excess/redundant data
• removing errors
• Which assembler?
• used by others? (publications/ online list/ forum/
assemblathon)
• something new?
!
• assembly result QA
• sequence statistics (e.g., QUAST)
• bio-relevant measures (e.g. ,CEGMA)
So you want to do sequence a
genome…
22. Perfect parameters
• Instead: need to test many combinations
• of trimming
• of filtering
• different assembly software
24. Gene prediction
Dozens of software algorithms: dozens of predictions
Yandell&Ence2013NRG
TTTTtACCTGTTTTtGAAAAGGTAATTTTCTTTAGATATATACAGTTTGTAATaTTAGGTATTTTATAAACAGTGTGTATATTTCTTACAATATAAAAGACACAATTGCAAACTAGCATGATTGTAAACAATTGCTAAACGGATCAATATAAATTAAAATTGTAATATTAAGTATCAAACCGATAATTTTT
Evidence
Why?
25. Gene prediction
Dozens of software algorithms: dozens of predictions
20% failure rate:
•missing pieces
•extra pieces
•incorrect merging
•incorrect splitting
Visual inspection... and
manual fixing required.
1 gene = 20 minutes to 3 days
Yandell&Ence2013NRG
TTTTtACCTGTTTTtGAAAAGGTAATTTTCTTTAGATATATACAGTTTGTAATaTTAGGTATTTTATAAACAGTGTGTATATTTCTTACAATATAAAAGACACAATTGCAAACTAGCATGATTGTAAACAATTGCTAAACGGATCAATATAAATTAAAATTGTAATATTAAGTATCAAACCGATAATTTTT
Evidence
Consensus:
26. Annotation in practice
• Annotation software (in google chrome):Afra Login
• http://afra.sbcs.qmul.ac.uk/#login
• Your task:
• work through 3 examples
• 5 additional gene annotations (through “Curate” button)