On Your Mind Neuroscience Podcast

We are super stoked to announce that the OYM team will be at the Canadian Neuroscience meeting in Toronto this year, hosting an exciting new satellite symposium on science communication!  Come talk about the importance of communication in neuroscience with special guest speakers!

Other than shamelessly self-promoting, the hosts have got a whole lot on their minds this week.  They’re both on writing duty this week and have been thinking about the way that their science is portrayed and how it fits into the big picture.  Kat’s been reading up a lot (like, a lot a lot) on the misuse of statistics in the wake of the American Statistical Association’s statement on p values.  Plus, she’s back on a podcast kick and is a new fan of the Bold Signals Podcast.  Meanwhile, Liam’s been spending some free time on Twitter and catches us up on the hashtag #BiologySpaceFacts before we move onto this week’s paper.

The media attention drew our attention to this study that was published as a letter in Nature. In it, researchers use a mouse model of Alzheimer’s disease (AD) to study the cells in the dentate gyrus, and their connections to surrounding cortices, that are activated during the formation of contextual fear memories.  They use optogenetic techniques to modulate the activity of these ‘engram’ cells, and show that they can strengthen their connections and recover memory function in the AD mice.  It’s a whole lot of information to be crammed into a letter, but it certainly takes a promising step towards understanding how AD relates to memory formation and retrieval.

More links!

Institute for Research on Public Policy Podcast

Spurious Correlations

We’ve got an explosive episode this week: we’re talking about the schizophrenia genetics paper whose press release has got a lot of internet attention recently.

But first, it’s grant deadline crunch time for Liam and Kat and they’re sharing their very different approaches to the writing process.  In between budgets and proposals, Kat’s allowed herself to be distracted by the NEJM editorial piece that introduces the idea of “data authors” and “research parasites”.  It’s a timely warning about the dangers of irresponsible data sharing, given the recent controversy over improperly credited sources in a paper on the Zika virus.

Meanwhile, Liam’s come across a surprising (and alarming) article from STAT news that exposes the lack of transparency with human drug research in the US.  Apparently, even though there are stiff fines from the NIH for those who fail to promptly upload their results, the astounding majority of data doesn’t make it to the federal archive.  Then, after another health podcast recommendation from Liam, it’s onto this week’s paper.

We’re talking about a paper, published in Nature, that uses a clever mix of statistical modelling and cryptogenetics to investigate the functional impact of one of the most highly implicated genetic loci on schizophrenia risk.  We’re both incredibly impressed by the mountains of data pointing to the expression of a specific isoform of the C4 gene as the key functional mediator of decades of genetic linkage studies that have associated the MHC locus with schizophrenia.

It’s that time of year again, when you’ve got the urge to get close to that special someone, light some candles, and put on the latest OYM episode for a night of sweet, sweet neuroscience.  And this year, we’re delighted to welcome our official valentine, Daniel Almeida, to the guest host chair.  He’s a Master’s student who’s excited about developing a new microscopy technique in his lab, and is putting his background in sex research to good use with this week’s paper about oxytocin and sexual behavior in Prairie Voles. 

But first, we’ve got some local neuroscience news to discuss.  The Montreal Neurological Institute in Montreal has announced a new plan to promote open science by asking it’s researchers to make all data and programs available and no longer supporting the creation of new patents.

We’re also talking about reproducibility again, with the launch of a the new F1000 research channel, thePreclinical Reproducibility and Robustness Channel, and a comment piece in Science that highlights the many hurdles involved in the ‘self-correcting’ aspect of science.

It’s the first episode of 2016 and we’re catching up with our co-hosts and all that’s been on their minds.  Kat’s pre-winter break plan to get everything finished has backfired bigtime, but she’s learned a valuable lesson in deadline realism.  While she’s frantically trying to catch up, she’s read a story about a disastrous press release that’s lead her to an online organization that systematically reviews and grades medical news stories.  

Meanwhile, Liam’s had a bit of a head start back to work and is imminently awaiting the arrival of some very important results.  While he waits, he’s reading up on some (intentionally?) misleading charts that have made the rounds this past year.  We’re also talking about whether it’s cool to ghost write your own reference letters, and the Luminosity lawsuit before it’s onto this week’s paper!

This week, we’re talking about an article in Neuron that looks at the Shank3 gene as a link between autism spectrum disorders and schizophrenia.  The authors have generated two novel mouse lines with truncated Shank3 proteins analogous to mutations in human patients with either ASD or schizophrenia.  Then, using a massive battery of electrophysiological, biochemical and behavioral experiments at two developmental time points, this paper presents one of the first experimental investigations that we’ve ever seen, into similarities and differences between these two disorders.

We’re starting to get back into the swing of things this week, with Kat finally returning from her travelling adventures with stories to share!  She’s discovered an unexpected excitement about bioinformatics while she was away, and so she’s been thinking about the importance of computer literacy in the life sciences.  In fact, she brings us an article from The Conversation that takes the rather controversial stance that the widespread use of personal computers has been actively harmful to science.  Even though we’ve got a lot to say about the details, it all boils down to a call for more computer education in science - and for the understanding that software isn’t flawless.

               It seems that Liam has been busy these days as well, probably too busy in fact; he’s the new co-president of the Science Policy Exchange here in Montreal!  Thankfully he’s still got some podcast time, and he’s bringing us a list of other podcasts that he’s been digging lately, including a Reply All episode on LSD microdosing and the newly formed Useful Science that features our longtime OYM friend Ian Mahar!  Of course, given his new extracurricular calling, Liam’s got politics on his mind and he’s got some encouraging news to share about publicly released Minister’s mandate letters, and the role of evidence based science in the policies of the new Canadian government.

This week on the On Your Mind Neuoscience Podcast:

Liam is joined by McMaster graduate students Shawna Thompson (@mostlymicroglia) and Aadil Bharwani (@brainymicrobes), to debrief on SFN15, talk about the reproducibility project, recent successes and troubles at 23andMe, and genetic dating services.

In this week’s paper we bring together the worlds of microglia and gut microbiota. We know the bacteria in the gut are important for healthy immune response but Erny et al. show that this is also true for microglia, the immune cells of the brain.

This week on the On Your Mind Neuroscience Podcast: 

We're joined by special guest Dr. Brad Dieter who tells us about his journey from running people on treadmills to running proteins on a gel.  Then we discuss the challenges of preparing for conferences, the importance of colour coordination, and taking classes way to late into grads school. 

On Our Minds:

Liam has been dreaming of telling a story in The Bench Warmers, a new podcast featuring tales from grad school, and we all swap stories of the most expensive things we’ve ever broken in the lab.  

Then he finds another excuse to talk about CRISPR, this time it’s about who should win the Nobel Prize for the discovery, why it might be a different person than the patent holder, and why this whole process completely misrepresents science.

Brad has been spending a lot of time thinking about the ethics of human cloning, and can’t figure out why it would be such a bad thing. And frankly we can’t either.

Kat has been digging deep into the field of predatory journals, who made over $75 million last year

Paper:

This week’s paper is about how the stress response factor NRF2 regulates the degradation of phosphorylated Tau in models of Alzheimer’s disease (Readcube link)

This week on the On Your Mind Neuroscience Podcast:

Kathryn has been so busy getting ready for conferences she hasn’t prepared for her committee meeting, and Liam’s been so busy not thinking about it he hasn’t gotten ready for conferences! Maybe he should spend less time interviewing politicians like Ted Hsu and Laurin Liu about science policy, and more time focusing on school.

Still not focusing on school Liam’s been reading about the Ethics for a New Scientific Millennium on The Winnower, a really cool open scholarly publishing platform. Meanwhile Kathryn has been focused on increasing her score on Nature’s How Interdisciplinary Are You quiz, and becoming more T-shaped, whatever that means.

In this week’s paper (OA), suggested by listener Rebeca, we examine the suitability of fibroblasts for modeling the motor neuron diseases ALS and PLS.

This week on the On Your Mind Neuroscience Podcast:

Kat has had a dramatic change in problems, and now has so much data she can’t stop working on it (literally), while Liam has realized that maybe it was a mistake to sign up for so many extracurricular activities.

In what little spare time Kat has she's been searching for levity in the IgNobel Prizes - Personal favourites include the universal pee time and diagnosing appendicitis with speed bumps.

Liam is interested in conflicts of interest this week, but insists he has nothing to disclose.

Oh, and Kat accidently predicted the future last week now that Tom Insel has stepped down as director of the NIMH to take a job at the Google spinoff Life Sciences.

This week’s paper is a plot study - or maybe a pilot of a pilot study - that takes an interesting approach to the search for Alzheimer's biomarkers by studying people with Down’s syndrome. A lot of the techniques are interesting, but we wish there was a little more data available before publication.

In the title test we could see past the colon, but it turns out the length may reduce their citations.

“The down syndrome biomarker initiative (DSBI) pilot: proof of concept for deep phenotyping of Alzheimer’s disease biomarkers in down syndrome”  (OA)

Thanks for listening! For links to our previous episodes head to www.onyourmind.ca

We're Back!!

This week on the On Your Mind Neuroscience Podcast:

We celebrate our triumphant return, and realize that somewhere during our break we became senior PhD students in our labs. A lot has happened since we spoke last, so Kat catches us up on Tom Insel's push to involve private tech companies in neuroscience, and why neuroscience needs hackers, and Liam give his thoughts on former OYM guest Jean-François Gariépy's Public departure from academic science and if encouraging students to study science is a fools errand.

Finally in our paper this week we discuss how NDMA receptors can cause spine shrinkage and LND without opening ion channels. 

Our website is a little bit behind our release schedule right now, but you can still find all our old episodes at www.onyourmind.ca