[Comment] Redefine statistical significance

The lack of reproducibility of scientific studies has caused growing concern over the credibility of claims of new discoveries based on “statistically significant” findings. There has been much progress toward documenting and addressing several causes of this lack of reproducibility (e.g., multiple testing, P-hacking, publication bias, and under-powered studies). However, we believe that a leading cause of non-reproducibility has not yet been adequately addressed: Statistical standards of evidence for claiming discoveries in many fields of science are simply too low. Associating “statistically significant” findings with P < 0.05 results in a high rate of false positives even in the absence of other experimental, procedural and reporting problems. For fields where the threshold for defining statistical significance is P<0.05, we propose a change to P<0.005. This simple step would immediately improve the reproducibility of scientific research in many fields. Results that would currently be called “significant” but do not meet the new threshold should instead be called “suggestive.” While statisticians have known the relative weakness of using P≈0.05 as a threshold for discovery and the proposal to lower it to 0.005 is not new (1, 2), a critical mass of researchers now endorse this change. We restrict our recommendation to claims of discovery of new effects. We do not address the appropriate threshold for confirmatory or contradictory replications of existing claims. We also do not advocate changes to discovery thresholds in fields that have already adopted more stringent standards (e.g., genomics and high-energy physics research; see Potential Objections below). We also restrict our recommendation to studies that conduct null hypothesis significance tests. We have diverse views about how best to improve reproducibility, and many of us believe that other ways of summarizing the data, such as Bayes factors or other posterior summaries based on clearly articulated model assumptions, are preferable to P-values. However, changing the P-value threshold is simple and might quickly achieve broad acceptance

An investigation into reusable cutlery solutions

The University of British Columbia’s Student Union Building (SUB) and cafeteria in particular, is a large hub for student activity and traffic. Thousands of students pass through the SUB each day, generally in a rush. There are many food establishments within the SUB and managing the subsequent waste in a sustainable way is a challenge. With the new, more sustainable SUB building being built, there is a push to make every detail more sustainable. One of the most pressing issues in the current SUB is the amount of waste from disposable cutlery produced from all the food establishments. An excellent alternative is portable, reusable cutlery. This report addresses on three specific cutlery products and assesses them based on triple bottom line assessment. This assessment focuses on the environmental, social, and economic impacts of the products. The specific products feature bamboo cutlery from “To-Go Ware Products”, stainless steel cutlery available from “Lavish and Lime Vancouver”, and recycled polypropylene cutlery from “Preserve Products”. Research methods included locating sustainable products, then assessing their benefits and drawbacks based on contact with suppliers, and research in peer-reviewed journals. Each product has unique benefits and drawbacks. The assessment concluded that stainless steel cutlery was the most well rounded option. Despite the fact that the stainless steel product has the poorest environmental impact in terms of production, it has the longest working life span of the three products. Polypropylene cutlery is the cheapest of the three, but it doesn’t last as long as stainless steel. The bamboo cutlery has good functionality properties and has excellent environmental standards, but it is much too expensive. When accounting for the environmental, social, and economic factors, stainless steel reusable cutlery proves to be the most viable option. Disclaimer: “UBC SEEDS provides students with the opportunity to share the findings of their studies, as well as their opinions, conclusions and recommendations with the UBC community. The reader should bear in mind that this is a student project/report and is not an official document of UBC. Furthermore readers should bear in mind that these reports may not reflect the current status of activities at UBC. We urge you to contact the research persons mentioned in a report or the SEEDS Coordinator about the current status of the subject matter of a project/report.”Applied Science, Faculty ofUnreviewedUndergraduat

Reproducibility of fluorescent expression from engineered biological constructs in E. coli

We present results of the first large-scale interlaboratory study carried out in synthetic biology, as part of the 2014 and 2015 International Genetically Engineered Machine (iGEM) competitions. Participants at 88 institutions around the world measured fluorescence from three engineered constitutive constructs in E. coli. Few participants were able to measure absolute fluorescence, so data was analyzed in terms of ratios. Precision was strongly related to fluorescent strength, ranging from 1.54-fold standard deviation for the ratio between strong promoters to 5.75-fold for the ratio between the strongest and weakest promoter, and while host strain did not affect expression ratios, choice of instrument did. This result shows that high quantitative precision and reproducibility of results is possible, while at the same time indicating areas needing improved laboratory practices.Peer reviewe