Catriona MacCallum

Learn More
S ince 2003, when PLoS Biology was launched, there has been a spectacular growth in " open-access " journals. The Directory of Open Access Journals (http:⁄⁄www. doaj.org/), hosted by Lund University Libraries, lists 2,816 open-access journals as this article goes to press (and probably more by the time you read this). Authors also have various " open-access(More)
Today, the Public Library of Science publishes a collection of essays, perspectives, and reviews about how genomics, with all its associated tools and techniques, can provide insights into our understanding of emerging infectious disease (http://ploscollections. org/emerginginfectiousdisease/) [1–13]. This collection, focused on human disease, is(More)
What responsibility do scientists have to report the experimental work and analyses they do on animals fully and transparently, and what responsibilities do funders, journal editors, and reviewers have to ensure that what is reported is done so appropri-ately? While the answer to both of these questions might seem obvious, the accumulating evidence suggests(More)
Funding organisations, scientists, and the general public need robust and reliable ways to evaluate the output of scientific research. In this issue of PLOS Biology, Adam Eyre-Walker and Nina Stoletzki analyse the subjective assessment and citations of more than 6,000 published papers [1]. They show that expert assessors are biased by the impact factor (IF)(More)
W elcome to PLoS Biology. We would like to introduce you to your journal, one that is run by and for the scientific community in the broadest sense: researchers, teachers, students, physicians, and the public. One could argue whether scientists need more journals, but we believe there is a global need for greater access to scientific and medical information(More)