Read on Twitter
I was thinking back over publications I've been part of and about a recent authorship discussion that went past.
I don't think much of our work could have been done without the collaborations that lead to "long" author lists. The idea that "fewer is always better" is ridiculous.
I don't think much of our work could have been done without the collaborations that lead to "long" author lists. The idea that "fewer is always better" is ridiculous.
To be blunt, even excellent science benefits from more brains, more expertise and bringing more investigative approaches to the mix.
This does take time, and can take massive effort to coordinate, but it makes stronger, better papers.
This does take time, and can take massive effort to coordinate, but it makes stronger, better papers.
If you want to be cynical about it, involving more people has at least the benefit that more eyes will have looked over everything, which in principle should make the review process more straightforward.
Some of my collaborators have been much tougher than reviewers!
Some of my collaborators have been much tougher than reviewers!
So here's a few of my favourite collaborative works, all of which have long* author lists, all contributors adding something to the overall composition...
*totally subjectively
*totally subjectively
Starting with a recent one, 20 authors, over ~8 years, to put this together. @JennyEyley designed the linker and MOF syntheses, @GLSmith_ took it further to do the SO2 and neutron work, but ALL the authors had roles to play. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41563-019-0495-0
That just pips this one, with 19 authors, which again took many years to reach completion and has some really beautiful MOF structures from asymmetric linkers: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2019/sc/c8sc03622e
This paper, with a relatively tiny 9 authors, was one that started with some "let's see what happens" experiments between me and @Chelsea_buns and ended with Tamoghna Mitra and a robot making MOF films on electrodes! (it's a bit of a favourite of mine) https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2018/sc/c8sc00803e
Then there's this, a respectable 12 author effort, with contributors working in 3 different countries, in which NMR methods that really need experts were used to study motion in MOFs. It also contains particularly lovely figures by Florian Moreau: https://www.pnas.org/content/114/12/3056
(You can also see Florian's first outing of these beautiful structures here, in this 10 author effort:
http://disq.us/t/2j9ex6w )
http://disq.us/t/2j9ex6w )
Jumping back in time a bit, another 10 author work, this time on perylenediimide photophysics and electrochemistry.
Even though 9/10 people were in Notts at the time, incl. @AnnaGSlater & @ChampnessGroup, we still needed an external expert to finish it. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/dt/c3dt50874a
Even though 9/10 people were in Notts at the time, incl. @AnnaGSlater & @ChampnessGroup, we still needed an external expert to finish it. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2014/dt/c3dt50874a
Around the same time, another 10 of us (incl. @moniek_tromp) published a tricky set of experiments on time-resolved EXAFS that had taken ages to finalise. This time, 8 institutions across 4 countries were represented:
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jp4020355
(This one's on @tocrofl, don't ask)
https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/jp4020355
(This one's on @tocrofl, don't ask)
Then there's this, a mere 9 authors, but a manuscript nicknamed "Thud" by Mike Ward for the sound it made landing in our inboxes as we passed it round. My last paper with my PhD group, ~5 years after I left. Science takes *time*. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2012/dt/c2dt31001e
I know, it's self-indulgent looking back and posting all these, but it's been rather enjoyable for me to see just how many excellent collaborators I've had the privilege of working with over the years. It's a lot. And that's rather the point.
Oh, here's another nice little one... 11 authors including @pr_raithby & @_M_Warren_ with some photocrystallography - always good for pretty figures and frequently needing synchrotrons too, in this case both Daresbury & the ALS: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2012/dt/c1dt11379h
That was of course preceded by this 9 author work, with possibly my most-used figure in talks I give, and certainly the worst title pun of all these papers (thanks @pr_raithby for that!): https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/anie.200901706#.Xz1PRqikLRU.twitter
Important but related aside: beamline scientists and central facilities people are absolutely essential for much of what I've done and are awesome scientists who should be recognised as such.
Around then I was still involved in time-resolved work on metal complexes with DNA. Both "TR" and "DNA" seem good for growing collaborations, as this one had 13 of us in the team, across 2 countries: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2011/pp/c1pp05050h
In fact, metal complexes and TR spectroscopies in general need a lot of people working together to get it right. I was a pot-boiling chemist in my PhD, working with laser people on things like this (10 authors): https://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/ja072672w
I think the highest author count in that period (PhD-time) was 12, with a study on a family of solvatohromic complexes. Beautiful to work with, every colour imaginable depending on the solvents and ions present: https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2006/dt/b509042c
And while it's only 7 authors, I can't forget Jim @GroupThomas for introducing me to metallomacrocycles as I learned how to do spectroelectrochemistry with Mike Ward. https://pubs.rsc.org/en/content/articlelanding/2006/dt/b516080b
The spectroscopies I learned back then with a range of collaborators took the fear out of it for me, a synthetic person at the time. I owe those people a lot!
I'm not sure I forgive the journal in the last example though - they wanted an extortionate amount for colour figures so my beautiful rainbow spectroelectrochemical figures were unceremoniously converted to black & white!
Finally, in my first research experience in chemistry, I was fortunate enough to do an @EUErasmusPlus placement in Italy, as part of a UK-Italy collaboration. It may only be 7 authors but it got me started on all the great collaborations above and more. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0957416603005834
So, I guess I've said everything I wanted to say.
Author list arguments are crap, and make everyone's lives poorer. Be generous and be inclusive, people.
Collaboration is a great thing, and in many cases it makes our work far better.
Thanks everyone I've worked with so far
Author list arguments are crap, and make everyone's lives poorer. Be generous and be inclusive, people.
Collaboration is a great thing, and in many cases it makes our work far better.
Thanks everyone I've worked with so far
