It is not unusual to read the tirade of a senior scientist complaining that science was better back then, when papers were fewer, and ideas better (a perfect example of this genre is here). Usually, the conclusion is that we should publish less, lest producing lower-quality science.
These considerations are based on a quite precise hypothesis—that a scientist can either produce many papers, or produce fewer good ones. Detecting such a trade-off in actual data is quite difficult, though, as scientists vary dramatically in productivity, as well as field of study.
Matt and I tried a different route, and compared scientists with themselves: does a scientist produce better papers in the years when she’s most productive? For testing our method, we took the members of the National Academy of Sciences, and reconstructed their publication history. (The rationale being that their best papers must be of high quality).
We found that these scientists tend to produce their most recognized work in years when they’re most productive. However, they also tend to produce their least impactful articles during the same productive years. This is consistent with the “random impact” hypothesis: by publishing many papers, scientists sample their distribution of good ideas more thoroughly, leading to higher maxima and lower minima.
You can read the paper here:
One of the main obsessions in the laboratory is to build robust ecological theories for communities composed of many species.
This is especially important in competitive systems—much of our understanding in this area descends from the analysis of the dynamics of two competitors.
In a new review published this week in Nature, Jonathan Levine, Jordi Bascompte, Peter Adler, and yours truly provide a roadmap for extending these considerations to systems with more than two species.
Interestingly, certain mechanisms, such as higher-order interactions and intransitive competition, can only be studied in high-dimensional systems.
You can read the paper here:
In this Review, we suggest that coexistence mechanisms that emerge only in systems with more than two competitors exert a largely unexplored control over the maintenance of diversity in species-rich communities. We also highlight that when studying more than two competitors, ecologists necessarily confront an ecological network. However, it remains largely unknown how the structure of the network influences coexistence. The sparseness of evidence results from the intractability of empirically evaluating competition between many species and the technical difficulties that are inherent in tightly coupling theory to data. Despite these challenges, there are compelling reasons to deepen our understanding of these more complex mechanisms of coexistence. Armed with advances in data-driven modelling and network analyses that have been developed for multitrophic systems, ecologists are well-positioned to determine, for at least some species-rich communities, how much of the coexistence results from mechanisms that emerge only in diverse systems. Few other questions in ecology have such great potential to radically shift how we think about the maintenance and fragility of biodiversity.
Hard to believe, but I’ve been working in science for fifteen years! Many things have happened since I started my PhD in Antonio Bodini’s lab in Parma, but I still have fun doing my job, and I am extremely grateful for the fantastic students, postdocs and colleagues who have been working with me through the years. The anniversary calls for a song!
studying large matrices and their eigenvalues teaching to code and to despise p-values watching your students give excellent talks these are a few of my favorite things
reviewing good papers that are bright and novel writing nice code to implement a new model having a coffee with my lab and friends these are a few of my favorite things
finding a method to do something crazy I will keep searching until I turn lazy sending proposals before they are due these are a few of my favorite things
when the grant bites when reviews sting when I’m feeling mad I simply remember my favorite things and then I can start over
Last week, I was at the National Gallery in DC, and I’ve stumbled upon the painting that is featured as the first slide of most of my talks. I think it’s a perfect metaphor of science: the reality is out there, we have a small window to observe it, and we want to compose a simplified picture to understand what is going on. May I’ll still be happy to peer through the window in 2032!
In lieu of a laboratory meeting, we typically chat over coffee at the Smart Museum of Art every morning. Recently, they introduced a “vote with your tips” mechanism in which you can choose between two alternative tip jars. On Jacopo’s birthday, these were the options:
With Gyuri leaving for Sweden, the laboratory is short of a postdoc. I am therefore looking for a new postdoc who could start in late 2016 or early 2017. Here below I past the ad I am circulating.
Postdoctoral position — Allesina Laboratory, University of Chicago
The Allesina laboratory at the University of Chicago is looking for a postdoc, starting in late 2016 or early 2017. The interests of the laboratory include ecological networks (food webs, mutualistic, competitive networks), community ecology, and theoretical ecology in general. The focus of the lab is on the development of new mathematical, statistical and computational methods for the analysis of ecological systems. More information on the research interests can be found here. A list of recent publications from the laboratory is here.
The candidate should have a strong mathematical background, be well-versed in statistics, and fluent in at least one of the programming languages used in the laboratory (C, python, R). Knowledge of Linux, Git, LaTeX, and SQL is a plus. Candidates with a background in mathematics or physics are also encouraged to apply.
To apply, please send an email including a CV, a brief description of research interests and experience, and the name of two letter writers to Stefano Allesina (firstname.lastname@example.org).
Note: Gyuri Barabas and Matthew Smith will be at ESA Annual Meeting. If you are attending and are interested in this position, make sure to contact them to hear about life in the laboratory.