I had a paper go through peer review at PNAS last fall, and although
the paper got rejected, it was certainly very well peer reviewed.
This paper compares current extinction rates of vertebrates in modern
times to that in the Cretaceous mass extinction (using fuzzy
computational approaches). One reviewer caught a typo in the table on
mammals and it fed down the column. The other reviewer alerted me to
a couple of Pimm's articles which I had missed citing, pretty
important since he had done similar stuff with point estimates a good
decade or more before. I went back, corrected the error, required me
to recalculate the column of numbers, and now its back in peer review
with a different journal. Of course, the hardest part is that so few
people have any background in fuzzy math that they make a lot of
invalid interpretations of the numbers. This means I have to be extra
careful to relate things well. Its pretty hard in that respect. But,
hopefully, it will get published this time around. Its obviously an
important study, but you have to dot your i's and cross your t's. I
was pretty embarrassed to have such an error, but even though others
had read it for me prior to submission, none would have recognized it.
In fact, the reviewer who knew fuzzy math caught it. Pretty
disappointing too, but you know what? Its water under the bridge now.
:)
I would not hesitate to send a paper into PNAS if I felt it was that
important.
Now, would would you like me to relay my experiences with PLoS One?
Ok, I'm in a good mood today, not going there. :)
M
On Wed, Jun 18, 2014 at 2:30 PM, David Duffy <[email protected]> wrote:
Problems with peer review at PNAS and trendiness at Science and Nature
http://www.nature.com/news/scientific-publishing-the-inside-track-1.15424?WT.ec_id=NATURE-20140619
--
David Duffy
戴大� (Dà i Dà wěi)
Pacific Cooperative Studies Unit
Botany
University of Hawaii
3190 Maile Way
Honolulu Hawaii 96822 USA
1-808-956-8218
--
Malcolm L. McCallum, PHD, REP
Department of Environmental Studies
University of Illinois at Springfield
Managing Editor,
Herpetological Conservation and Biology
“Nothing is more priceless and worthy of preservation than the rich
array of animal life with which our country has been blessed. It is a
many-faceted treasure, of value to scholars, scientists, and nature
lovers alike, and it forms a vital part of the heritage we all share
as Americans.�
-President Richard Nixon upon signing the Endangered Species Act of
1973 into law.
"Peer pressure is designed to contain anyone with a sense of drive" -
Allan Nation
1880's: "There's lots of good fish in the sea" W.S. Gilbert
1990's: Many fish stocks depleted due to overfishing, habitat loss,
and pollution.
2000: Marine reserves, ecosystem restoration, and pollution reduction
MAY help restore populations.
2022: Soylent Green is People!
The Seven Blunders of the World (Mohandas Gandhi)
Wealth w/o work
Pleasure w/o conscience
Knowledge w/o character
Commerce w/o morality
Science w/o humanity
Worship w/o sacrifice
Politics w/o principle
Confidentiality Notice: This e-mail message, including any
attachments, is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
contain confidential and privileged information. Any unauthorized
review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited. If you are not
the intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and
destroy all copies of the original message.
