Quantitative and Systems biology of plants and fungi at University of California, Davis
Davis, CA
Joined March 2018
- Tweets11.9K
- Following411
- Followers3.7K
- Likes1.5K
Pinned Tweet
Ever wondered "When a host and pathogen interact, which organism is in control? And what is the architecture of the interaction?".
No, sorry to have bugged you. Do you find plasticity fun if confusing?
Yes, cool do we have the dataset/analysis for you.
biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/…
I don't think that people pining for a US budget akin to 1900 really know what that means. For one, it would mean essentially no military.
Daniel J Kliebenstein retweeted
🎉 Congrats to Dr. Makenzie Mabry, named University of Florida Postdoc of the Year! Co-advised by Alex McAlvay (NYBG) & Doug & Pam Soltis (Florida Museum/UF), she stood out among 700+ postdocs. Amazing achievement! 👏 more info here ---> brnw.ch/21wO2R3 #NYBGscience
After reading papers across vastly different fields of biology, I really don’t think there is a singularly best style. Oddly, the idea that there is a singularly best style is a significant inhibition on integrative papers.
The UC Davis plant community is recruiting for a new head of the Charles M. Rick Tomato Genetic Resource center. This position is a cornerstone of the tomato and Solanaceae community and provides some really cool research and teaching opportunities. recruit.ucdavis.edu/JPF06784
Random question, why is it unexpected that a defense compound affects bacterial, fungal and insect attackers? I feel like that is becoming the default as people dive into these compounds more.
Daniel J Kliebenstein retweeted
UC Davis is hiring Assistant Professor of Plant Genetics and Director of the Tomato Genetics Resource Center.
recruit.ucdavis.edu/JPF06784
The right wing message seems to be that we should be great neighbors and treat each other great, unless they have $$$ and then they can jack you no matter what. If LoneMuskie can treat me like trash the legal system should make it easy to reciprocate.
The do more with less management argument only works if there are years of less with more that balance things out. Simply more, more, more is a way to grind down a work force.
Given some people’s up bringing, this is the only real form of compliment and anything else is simply a con at some level.
Did you know that it is possible to cleanly delineate academic science into that part which is purely academic and that part which is purely labour? The things that UC lawyers knew and the rest of us are only just now finding out is mind boggling. #themoreyouknow
I feel like teaching Mendel, in the logic structure sense, is more important than ever. Gives students a chance to learn how to use assumptions, inference and the like to create knowledge. All within constrained bounds. Don’t feel like they get that much anymore.
My main reason to not allow AI in any review of any form in Academia is related to the primacy effect. Most will run the AI first and then build off that. However, we tend towards the first even if it is not supported by evidence. As such the AI idea will tend to be the review.
Interesting tidbit, GSTs are actually key biosynthetic genes in plants. Not just oxidative stress genes or protein modifiers.
Distributed budgeting without decent institutional controls is useless in Academia and Industry. Creates a situation where saving one person 400 hours of work by having 5000 people do 2 hours extra work each is the result.
An undergrad driven manuscript is out. We have a set of papers that started in our undergrad lab meeting when a student asked "What happens if we change X that we always do?". They asked what happens if we change the leaf surface being infected? biorxiv.org/cgi/content/shor…
Undergrads manuscript is in the journal published form onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/…. They compare leaf surface effects on Botrytis virulence across host species, within host species, all while using a diverse pathogen pop.
Summary - Everything matters, except well maybe not stomates.
I have often heard the argument that there is value in a paper that essentially repeats 10 other papers to present a completer package. Especially from the CNS’s. I struggle seeing the reason for this beyond an argument that scientists don’t want to read. What am I missing?
A plant specialized metabolite intro saying we don’t know the benefits of specialized metabolites ignores a ton of eco, evo and even molecular work proving their benefit. Probably better to illustrate the benefits for other metabolites and say we want to see which applies to ours
What if studying how a network evolves across plants is like Mendelian mapping. Every new marker finds unseen recombination making a longer map. In evolution, every new genome added to the phylogeny adds unseen genes expanding the network? What is a safe stopping point?