My poster was admitted to the regional ACS conference this coming October! Results are pending on a single experiment (it was done once, but the data was difficult to interpret so we're subbing some expensive taq for the not-as-expensive taq we used initially), but they looked promising from the first run. Either way, my undergraduate research requirement will be satisfied, and if the results are positive then they should be publishable.
Which brings me to a point I often question about the scientific process: Why don't negative results get publishing, at least, more often? I'm assuming that it's more of a principle of parsimony in publishing than a fascination with positive results, but sometimes I wonder... is there a database where one could at least throw up negative results? Maybe it wouldn't count as publishing, but something like this would be great because... well, it could potentially stop other research groups from traveling down the same avenue, thereby limiting the amount of resources wasted on the same question. This, at least on its face, sounds like a good thing.
Physics trumps biology
1 day ago