Hi,

I wondered if anyone could help me get access to the following. I know it's new so maybe I can try and email the author but I thought I would ask kindly first :-)

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12517.html#abstract

Many thanks!!

Hi,

I have just come across an interesting paper in nature and I would really appreciate if someone could get hold of the pdf for me (my institutional access isn't allowing me to do so):

Activation of autophagy by inflammatory signals limits IL-1β production by targeting ubiquitinated inflammasomes for destruction

Chong-Shan Shi,
Kevin Shenderov,
Ning-Na Huang,
Juraj Kabat,
Mones Abu-Asab,
Katherine A Fitzgerald,
Alan Sher
& John H Kehrl

Nature Immunology 13, 255–263 (2012); doi:10.1038/ni.2215

Direct link: http://www.nature.com/ni/journal/v13/n3/full/ni.2215.html#access

Thanks!!

Hi Lolly,

Well firstly, sorry to hear of your situation.

The advice you have received so far sounds quite frankly terrible! The first point of call if you have a problem is to approach your supervisors (especially the lead supervisor) and to voice your concerns in a calm manner.

I know this is a lot easier said than done but resolving these problems sooner rather than later will save you a lot of distress further down the line. These problems will only escalate without intervention. Do you have an advisor you can speak to or failing that another lecturer / academic? Some of the best advice in my PhD actually came from people outside of the loop. In this way their opinions and advice are often unbiased.

It seems most of your issues lie in respect with funding. If you have a PhD position then the University WILL have some money somewhere to support you (even if you can't afford that expensive bit of kit you have been yearning for). Don't be suckered in by individuals, it's best to see the heads of your research institutes to ascertain the levels of funding that are available. I have had grants fall through in the past and whilst it's never nice if you keep pushing you will get through it.

Most importantly you have to enjoy what you're doing. I would seek some advice from your peers first and then weigh up all of your options to help you decide what to do next. Also, how long are you in to your PhD?

I hope some of this helps :-)

Hi,

I had no joy accessing this but an email to the author asking if they would kindly send you a pdf might be an option? It's pretty new after all.

Cheers :-)

Hi,

I found the first paper in your list at the following link. It tries to make you sign in to download the pdf but the entire document seems accessible here:

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone had any experience in the use of mounting media to attach coverslips to tissue sections once they have been stained? These sections have been processed into paraffin wax and so are de-waxed and re-hydrated prior to staining (it's an aqueous stain)

I have been using DPX but this renders the sample optically transparent. Whilst this is great for light transmittance it hinders the ability to be able to see the original structures prior to applying the DPX.

If anyone knows of any tried and tested alternative permanent mounting medium to DPX that might alleviate these problems, then your help would be much appreciated.

Sorry for the off-topic post...

Thanks!!

Hi tt_dan,

Personally I would first gather enough data to warrant a publication, be it a short communication or article. The review process takes some time (often several moths from the original manuscript to publication), so in the meantime you can work on the next part of your investigation.

If things work out you may get 2 -3 papers for example on the back of your idea or alternatively you can wait and try to publish something in a higher impact factor journal consisting of a culmination of the independent studies you have performed. Unfortunately this always carries the risk of someone beating you to it and publishing first.

If you think it's likely that others may be hot on your heals with similar ideas I would try and publish something first to get your foot in the door and then continue your studies after submitting.

Cheers.

Thanks Pixie,

I have PMd you my email address.

Thanks!!!!!

A fantastic reply by Smoobles!! I was going to write something very similar but I recommend you follow the great advice given here!

Hi,

I have just seen this really interesting work in Nature but unfortunately my institutional access is not allowing me to view the paper.

I therefore wondered if anyone might be able to access it?

Structural and molecular interrogation of intact biological systems; Kwanghun Chung,
Jenelle Wallace, Sung-Yon Kim, Sandhiya Kalyanasundaram et al. Nature 2013; DOI: 10.1038/nature12107.

Direct link:

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nature12107.html

Thanks!!

I agree with Noctu,

If your situation is very similar then it would be right to obtain both spots, 1st and corresponding author. This is quite rare for science based papers it seems, but not impossible.

Either slot requires the holder to have put the most substantial effort into the research and preparation of the paper. If this was you then yes go for it but try to avoid any conflict as this will only end up in delaying the publication of the paper. You don't want somebody else to beat you to it!

Thanks!

Hi,

I was wondering if anyone had access to the following paper:

KIERNAN, J. A. 1996. Staining paraffin sections without prior removal of the wax. Biotech Histochem, 71, 304-10.

Direct link:

http://informahealthcare.com/doi/abs/10.3109/10520299609117180?journalCode=bih

Thanks!

Hi,

Firstly congratulations on securing your PhD!! Now the tricky bit:

Ask about demonstrating. It basically involves helping undergraduates out in practical sessions. I did a science based PhD and did loads of (maybe even too much) demonstrating. It pays really well but the sessions run in the day which may clash with your PhD commitments.

If you are a humanities / history / social science-based research student then you might still be able to help in tutorials? Computer scientists sometimes aid in the running of the computer labs (maybe someone else on the forum who has done any of these can help here).

Either way these teaching / demonstrating slots are normally highly competitive so the sooner you ask the better. I was also a resident tutor (it's like a halls warden) which gave me free accommodation in my final year (although I know some who had it in every year). Maybe your institution offers a similar scheme?

Hope this helps,
Thanks,
Matt.

Thanks Ian (and others) that's great,

Just came to browse the forum and saw even more helpful stuff here, thanks. I will browse through this again tonight but thanks in advance for all your help with this!

Cheers :-)
Matt.

Hi,

The weighting of a corresponding author in a scientific publication has EXACTLY the same weighting as the first author. Generally:

The first author is the individual who has conducted the research, contributed to experimental designs and in-part (or less commonly fully) written the manuscript (the same goes for figures).

The corresponding author however is generally the group leader. They would have aided in the experimental design / supervision and general research direction as well as contributing in a big way to the preparation of the manuscript. The corresponding author also submits the paper in the first place and gets all correspondence sent directly to them (I have two first authors from my PhD and the publishers have never directly liaised with me).

If you are first author then it's YOUR paper. It belongs to you hence, "Macia et al"....... Don't be concerned with grabbing both spots, the 1st author is the most important slot in my opinion but either one is good!

Only those people who have had a DIRECT input into the specific manuscript have the right to be put on your paper. My advisor never featured therefore on my papers but it is likely that your supervisor/s will.

I hope this helps!!

Cheers,
Matt.