A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review [version 2; referees: 2 approved]

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments

Effects of dietary carotenoids on mouse lung genomic profiles and their modulatory effects on short-term cigarette smoke exposures

Male C57BL/6 mice were fed diets supplemented with either β-carotene (BC) or lycopene (LY) that were formulated for human consumption. Four weeks of dietary supplementations results in plasma and lung carotenoid (CAR) concentrations that approximated the levels detected in humans. Bioactivity of the CARs was determined by assaying their effects on the activity of the lung transcriptome (~8,500 mRNAs). Both CARs activated the cytochrome P450 1A1 gene but only BC induced the retinol dehydrogenase gene. The contrasting effects of the two CARs on the lung transcriptome were further uncovered in mice exposed to cigarette smoke (CS) for 3 days; only LY activated ~50 genes detected in the lungs of CS-exposed mice. These genes encoded inflammatory-immune proteins. Our data suggest that mice offer a viable in vivo model for studying bioactivities of dietary CARs and their modulatory effects on lung genomic expression in both health and after exposure to CS toxicants

Photography-based taxonomy is inadequate, unnecessary, and potentially harmful for biological sciences

The question whether taxonomic descriptions naming new animal species without type specimen(s) deposited in collections should be accepted for publication by scientific journals and allowed by the Code has already been discussed in Zootaxa (Dubois & Nemésio 2007; Donegan 2008, 2009; Nemésio 2009a–b; Dubois 2009; Gentile & Snell 2009; Minelli 2009; Cianferoni & Bartolozzi 2016; Amorim et al. 2016). This question was again raised in a letter supported by 35 signatories published in the journal Nature (Pape et al. 2016) on 15 September 2016. On 25 September 2016, the following rebuttal (strictly limited to 300 words as per the editorial rules of Nature) was submitted to Nature, which on 18 October 2016 refused to publish it. As we think this problem is a very important one for zoological taxonomy, this text is published here exactly as submitted to Nature, followed by the list of the 493 taxonomists and collection-based researchers who signed it in the short time span from 20 September to 6 October 2016

A multi-disciplinary perspective on emergent and future innovations in peer review

Peer review of research articles is a core part of our scholarly communication system. In spite of its importance, the status and purpose of peer review is often contested. What is its role in our modern digital research and communications infrastructure? Does it perform to the high standards with which it is generally regarded? Studies of peer review have shown that it is prone to bias and abuse in numerous dimensions, frequently unreliable, and can fail to detect even fraudulent research. With the advent of web technologies, we are now witnessing a phase of innovation and experimentation in our approaches to peer review. These developments prompted us to examine emerging models of peer review from a range of disciplines and venues, and to ask how they might address some of the issues with our current systems of peer review. We examine the functionality of a range of social Web platforms, and compare these with the traits underlying a viable peer review system: quality control, quantified performance metrics as engagement incentives, and certification and reputation. Ideally, any new systems will demonstrate that they out-perform and reduce the biases of existing models as much as possible. We conclude that there is considerable scope for new peer review initiatives to be developed, each with their own potential issues and advantages. We also propose a novel hybrid platform model that could, at least partially, resolve many of the socio-technical issues associated with peer review, and potentially disrupt the entire scholarly communication system. Success for any such development relies on reaching a critical threshold of research community engagement with both the process and the platform, and therefore cannot be achieved without a significant change of incentives in research environments

Phylogenetic partitioning of the third-largest vertebrate genus in the world, Cyrtodactylus Gray, 1827 (Reptilia; Squamata; Gekkonidae) and its relevance to taxonomy and conservation

The gekkonid genus Cyrtodactylus is the third most speciose vertebrate genus in the world, containing well over 300 species that collectively range from South Asia to Melanesia across some of the most diverse landscapes and imperiled habitats on the planet. A genus-wide phylogeny of the group has never been presented because researchers working on different groups were using different genetic markers to construct phylogenies that could not be integrated. We present here Maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference mitochondrial and mito-nuclear phylogenies incorporating of 310 species that include dozens of species that had never been included in a genus-wide analysis. Based on the mitochondrial phylogeny, we partition Cyrtodactylus into 31 well-supported monophyletic species groups which, if used as recommended herein, will increase the information content of future integrative taxonomic analyses that continue to add new species to this genus at an ever-increasing annual rate. Data presented here reiterate the outcome of several previous studies indicating that Cyrtodactylus comprises an unprecedented number of narrow-range endemics restricted to single mountain tops, small islands, or karst formations that still remain unprotected. This phylogeny can provide a platform for various comparative ecological studies that can be integrated with conservation management programs across the broad diversity of landscapes and habitats occupied by this genus. Additionally, these data indicate that the true number of Cyrtodactylus remains substantially underrepresented