This is a caudal vertebra from the middle of the tail of an ostrich, LACM Bj342: {.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-8259 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“8259” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2013/04/10/crazy-pneumatic-ostrich-caudal/ostrich-caudal-composite-2/” orig-file=“https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/ostrich-caudal-composite1.jpeg” orig-size=“4338,3469” comments-opened=“1”

There’s an awful lot of talk about “predatory open access publishers” recently. So much talk that I can’t help wondering whether the phrase is being pushed by barrier-based publishers in another attempt to smear open access.

As many of you will know, it’s now official that Elsevier has bought Mendeley, previously a force for openness in the world of reference management. There’s some good commentary at The Scholarly Kitchen. Lots of open advocates — Ross Mounce, for example — are shutting down their accounts and moving to free alternatives such as Zotero. Unequivocal good guys at Mendeley, such as William Gunn, are painting this as optimistically as they can.

I first met Wann at SVP in 1997, in Chicago. I was an undergrad, still three months away from my B.S., presenting a poster arguing that OMNH 53062 (which would eventually become the holotype of Sauroposeidon ) was a new sauropod.

{.aligncenter .size-full .wp-image-8217 loading=“lazy” attachment-id=“8217” permalink=“http://svpow.com/2013/04/08/night-at-the-museum-lacms-camp-dino/lacm-dino-camp-3-mamenchisaurus-and-triceratops-1/” orig-file=“https://svpow.wordpress.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/lacm-dino-camp-3-mamenchisaurus-and-triceratops-1.jpg” orig-size=“2100,1575” comments-opened=“1”

There are probably many ways of getting a “90% complete” paper finished and ready for submission, but here’s the way that works for me. (It’s working for me right now : I’m in the middle of the process, and broke off to write this just for a a break.) You will need: A printed copy of your manuscript A red pen A CD of Dar Williams songs that you know inside out A bottle of red wine A bar of white chocolate (optional)

Because I am preparing this paper from PLOS ONE, with its stupid numbered-references system, I am finally getting to grips with a reference-management system. Specifically, Zotero, which is both free and open source, which means it can’t be taken over by Elsevier. As a complete Zotero n00b, I’ve run into a few issues that more experienced users will no doubt find laughable. Here are two of them.

Gah! No time, no time. I am overdue on some things, so this is a short pointer post, not the thorough breakdown this paper deserves. The short, short version: Schachner et al. (2013) is out in PeerJ, describing airflow in the lungs of Nile crocs, and showing how surprisingly birdlike croc lungs actually are.

Just like the last time I tried to post a comment on Richard Van Noorden’s piece on open-access economics, the comment I posted has been rejected with a fatuous “This account has been banned from commenting due to posting of comments classified as inappropriate or other violations of our Terms of Service” message. SERIOUSLY, NATURE PUBLISHING GROUP.

Folks, I am preparing a manuscript for PLOS ONE, which uses numbered references rather than author+date citations like sane journals. And I am hating it. I am taking perfectly good statements like: And reformatting them as: Which doesn’t look right at all. My question: how, when using numbered references, can I properly refer to page-range and figure number? Because there has to be a way — doesn’t there?

Long, long ago — back in 2010! — Gordon Dzemski of the University of Flensburg, Germany, sent me a copy of a miniposter that he had prepared, and invited me to share it on SV-POW!. Somehow, it fell through the cracks, and I never did so. Time to fix that!