Thursday, February 13, 2014

Still Post Processing This . . .



I'm still processing this exchange.  I did read the ominous and darkly funny original post yesterday which appeared on the Bits of DNA blog. Without commenting on the full exchange and follow-up, I have to say that Lior's concern about the "Evidence for Abundant and Purifying Selection in Humans for Recently Acquired Regulatory Functions" paper seem to be worth merit:


Have to read the follow ups and corrections. Poor Reindeer. Poor Dogs. Poor Moo-moos. Poor Wolves. Poor us.


Update (2/16/2014):

1. It is highly worth reading the Why I read the network nonsense papers comments. In particular, a number of very well constructed comments are made by commenters who post under their real names:

Erik Van Nimwegen
Bioinformatics and System Biology
http://www.biozentrum.unibas.ch/~nimwegen/cgi-bin/page.cgi

Marc Robinson-Rechavi
Ecology and Evolution
http://www.unil.ch/dee/page22707_en.html

Gene Myers
Bioinformatics
http://www.homolog.us/blogs/

Nikolay Nicolov
Mathematical Institute
http://www.maths.ox.ac.uk/contact/details/nikolov

2. I note that as of tonight, Manoulis Kellis has responded to Lior Pachter. (pdf link) The response is also posted as comment 44 in the comment thread of the post on Why I read the network nonsense papers.

3. I look forward to those who are expert in the field of computational biology contributing their further thoughts.


Update (2/17/2014):
Adding:
Nicolas Bray
0.7535*Math + 0.6376*Biology + 0.5405*Statistics + 0.5320*CS + 0.4792
http://math.berkeley.edu/~nbray/

No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments have temporarily been turned off. Because I currently have a heavy workload, I do not feel that I can do an acceptable job as moderator. Thanks for your understanding.

Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.