Big Data = No Brain? Pt. 2: Digging deeper

Having being ignored by phylogeneticists for over a decade, maples [GE:Wikipedia/The Maple Society] – the second-most diverse extratropical angiosperm tree genus of the Northern Hemisphere – have come into focus again. And going Big Data. In part 2 of this longread, we'll dig out the little precious information, usually ignored in phylogenomic, "big pattern" analyses.

Just a single, easily overlooked tip

One thing about phylogenomic studies in the Era of Big Data is that we easily tend to overlook what is new and interesting. Why it may be worth to give each subtree in a phylogenomic tree a closer look

Searching for a research object? Why not maples!

In course of my career as a professional scientist, I had to leave a lot of threads open. Mainly, because I need to make sure to fund my own position, which consumed 80–90% of the money the mighty research councils granted me. One easy pick for those that have money to do molecular research are the western Eurasian super-species of Acer sect. Acer.

Palynology from A to Z: A as in Aponogeton

One thing, full-blood scientists usually forget, is to advertise their work. Usually because they lack the time. I have plenty and started a series of daily threads on Twitter advertising palynological research. But my reach there is miniscule and the half-life of tweets is extremely short. Hence, this post series.

Why you never should do a single-species plastid analysis of oaks

The fragmentation of science makes it more and more difficult to keep up scientific standards. Editors struggle harder and harder to find peers who have the knowledge and time to properly review the papers of others. Hence, in even relatively transparent peer-reviewed journals, the same errors are endlessly repeated. For instance: phylogenetic/-biogeographic studies on Chinese oaks using plastid data.