Posts Tagged ‘admin’

It has been almost three months since my last post here, and things have fallen quiet on our sister blog Anatomy to You, too. I thought it was time for an update, which is mostly a summary of stuff we’ve been doing on my team, but also featuring some interesting images if you stick around. The relative silence here has partly been due to me giving myself some nice holiday time w/family in L.A., then having surgery to fix my right shoulder, then recovering from that and some complications (still underway, but the fact that I am doing this post is itself evidence of recovery).

Stomach-Churning Rating: 4/10; semi-gruesome x-rays of me and hippo bits at the end, but just bones really.

X-ray of my right shoulder from frontal view, unlabelled

X-ray of my right shoulder from frontal view, unlabelled

Labelled x-ray

Labelled x-ray

So my priorities shifted to those things and to what work priorities most badly needed my limited energy and time. I’ve also felt that, especially since my health has had its two-year rough patch, this blog has been quieter and less interactive than it used to be, but that is the nature of things and maybe part of a broader trend in blogs, too. My creative juices in terms of social media just haven’t been at their ~2011-2014 levels but much is out of my control, and I am hopeful that time will reverse that trend. Enough about all this. I want to talk about science for the rest of this post.

My team, and collaborators as well, have published six recent studies that are very relevant to this blog’s theme- how about we run through them quickly? OK then.

  1. Panagiotopoulou, O., Pataky, T.C., Day, M., Hensman, M.C., Hensman, S., Hutchinson, J.R., Clemente, C.J. 2016. Foot pressure distributions during walking in African elephants (Loxodonta africana). Royal Society Open Science 3: 160203.

Our Australian collaborators got five African elephants together in Limpopo, South Africa and walked them over pressure-measuring mats, mimicking our 2012 study of Asian elephants. While sample sizes were too limited to say much statistically, in qualitatively descriptive terms we didn’t find striking differences between the two species’ foot pressure patterns. I particularly like how the centre of pressure of each foot (i.e. abstracting all regional pressures down to one mean point over time) followed essentially the same pattern in our African and Asian elephants, with a variable heelstrike concentration that then moved forward throughout the step, and finally moved toward the outer (3rd-5th; especially 3rd) toes as the foot pushed off the ground, as below.

African elephant foot COP traces vs. time in red; Asian elephant in orange. Left and right forefeet above; hindfeet below.

African elephant foot COP traces vs. time in red; Asian elephant in orange-yellow. Left and right forefeet above; hindfeet below.

Gradually, this work is moving the field toward better ability to use similar techniques to compare elephant foot mechanics among species, individuals, or over time– especially with the potential of using this method (popular in human clinical gait labs) to monitor foot (and broader musculoskeletal) health in elephants. I am hopeful that a difference can be made, and the basic science we’ve done to date will be a foundation for that.

  1. Panagiotopoulou, O., Rankin, J.W., Gatesy, S.M., Hutchinson, J.R. 2016. A preliminary case study of the effect of shoe-wearing on the biomechanics of a horse’s foot. PeerJ 4: e2164.

Finally, about six years after we collected some very challenging experimental data in our lab, we’ve published our first study on them. It’s a methodological study of one horse, not something one can hang any hats on statistically, but we threw the “kitchen sink” of biomechanics at that horse (harmlessly!) by combining standard in vivo forceplate analysis with “XROMM” (scientific rotoscopy with biplanar fluoroscopy or “x-ray video”) to conduct dynamic analysis of forefoot joint motions and forces (with and without horseshoes on the horse), and then to use these data as input values for finite element analysis (FEA) of estimated skeletal stresses and strains. This method sets the stage for some even more ambitious comparative studies that we’re finishing up now. And it is not in short supply of cool biomechanical, anatomical images so here ya go:


Above: The toe bones (phalanges) of our horse’s forefoot in dorsal (cranial/front) view, from our FEA results, with hot colours showing higher relative stresses- in this case, hinting (but not demonstrating statistically) that wearing horseshoes might increase stresses in some regions on the feet. But more convincingly, showing that we have a scientific workflow set up to do these kinds of biomechanical calculations from experiments to computer models and simulations, which was not trivial.

And a cool XROMM video of our horse’s foot motions:

  1. Bates, K.T., Mannion, P.D., Falkingham, P.L., Brusatte, S.L., Hutchinson, J.R., Otero, A., Sellers, W.I., Sullivan, C., Stevens, K.A., Allen, V. 2016. Temporal and phylogenetic evolution of the sauropod dinosaur body plan. Royal Society Open Science 3: 150636.

I had the good fortune of joining a big international team of sauropod experts to look at how the shapes and sizes of body segments in sauropods evolved and how those influenced the position of the body’s centre of mass, similar to what we did earlier with theropod dinosaurs. My role was minor but I enjoyed the study (despite a rough ride with some early reviews) and the final product is one cool paper in my opinion. Here’s an example:


The (embiggenable-by-clicking) plot shows that early dinosaurs shifted their centre of mass (COM) backwards (maybe related to becoming bipedal?) and then sauropods shifted the COM forwards again (i.e. toward their forelimbs and heads) throughout much of their evolution. This was related to quadrupedalism and giant size as well as to evolving a longer neck; which makes sense (and I’m glad the data broadly supported it). But it is also a reminder that not all sauropods moved in the same ways- the change of COM would have required changes in how they moved. There was also plenty of methodological nuance here to cover all the uncertainties but for that, see the 17 page paper and 86 pages of supplementary material…

  1. Randau, M., Goswami, A., Hutchinson, J.R., Cuff, A.R., Pierce, S.E. 2016. Cryptic complexity in felid vertebral evolution: shape differentiation and allometry of the axial skeleton. Zoological Journal of the Linnean Society 178:183-202.

Back in 2011, Stephanie Pierce, Jenny Clack and I tried some simple linear morphometrics (shape analysis) to see how pinniped (seal, walrus, etc) mammals changed their vertebral morphology with size and regionally across their backbones. Now in this new study, with “Team Cat” assembled, PhD student Marcela Randau collected her own big dataset for felid (cat) backbones and applied some even fancier techniques to see how cat spines change their shape and size. We found that overall the vertebrae tended to get relatively more robust in larger cats, helping to resist gravity and other forces, and that cats with different ecologies across the arboreal-to-terrestrial spectrum also changed their (lumbar) vertebral shape differently. Now Marcela’s work is diving even deeper into these issues; stay tuned…


Example measurements taken on felid vertebrae, from the neck (A-F) to the lumbar region (G-J), using a cheetah skeleton.

  1. Charles, J.P., Cappellari, O., Spence, A.J., Hutchinson, J.R., Wells, D.J. 2016. Musculoskeletal geometry, muscle architecture and functional specialisations of the mouse hindlimb. PLOS One 11(4): e0147669.

RVC PhD student James Charles measured the heck out of some normal mice, dissecting their hindlimb muscle anatomy, and using microCT scans produced some gorgeous images of that anatomy too. In the process, he also quantified how each muscle is differently specialized for the ability to produce large forces, rapid contractions or fine control. Those data were essential for the next study, where we got more computational!


  1. Charles, J.P., Cappellari, O., Spence, A.J., Wells, D.J., Hutchinson, J.R. 2016. Muscle moment arms and sensitivity analysis of a mouse hindlimb musculoskeletal model. Journal of Anatomy 229:514–535.

James wrangled together a lovely musculoskeletal model of our representative mouse subject’s hindlimb in the SIMM software that my team uses for these kinds of biomechanical analyses. As we normally do as a first step, we used the model to estimate things that are hard to measure directly, such as the leverages (moment arms) of each individual muscle and how those change with limb posture (which can produce variable gearing of muscles around joints). James has his PhD viva (defense) next week so good luck James!


The horse and mouse papers are exemplars of what my team now does routinely. For about 15 years now, I’ve been building my team toward doing these kinds of fusion of data from anatomy, experimental biomechanics, musculoskeletal and other models, and simulation (i.e. estimating unmeasurable parameters by telling a model to execute a behaviour with a given set of criteria to try to perform well). Big thanks go to collaborator Jeff Rankin for helping us move that along lately. Our ostrich study from earlier this year shows the best example we’ve done yet with this, but there’s plenty more to come.

I am incredibly excited that, now that my team has the tools and expertise built up to do what I’ve long wanted to do, we can finally deliver the goods on the aspirations I had back when I was a postdoc, and which we have put enormous effort into pushing forward since then. In addition to new analyses of horses and mice and other animals, we’ll be trying to push the envelope more with how well we can apply similar methods to extinct animals, which brings new challenges– and evolutionary questions that get me very, very fired up.

Here we are, then; time has brought some changes to my life and work and it will continue to as we pass this juncture. I suspect I’ll look back on 2016 and see it as transformative, but it hasn’t been an easy year either, to say the least. “Draining” is the word that leaps to mind right now—but also “Focused” applies, because I had to try to be that, and sometimes succeeded. I’ve certainly benefited a lot at work from having some talented staff, students and other collaborators cranking out cool papers with me.

I still have time to do other things, too. Once in a while, a cool critter manifests in The Freezers. Check out a hippo foot from a CT scan! It’s not my best scan ever (noisy data) but it shows the anatomy fairly well, and some odd pathologies such as tiny floating lumps of mineralized soft tissue here and there. Lots to puzzle over.

Read Full Post »

Short post here– I have 4 jobs now opened on my team, 1 short-term one (~4 months or less) and 3 long-term ones (5 years; negotiable down to 2-3 minimum) as follows:

Stomach-Churning Rating: -10/10 Let’s do some SCIENCE!

  1. Research Technician in Vertebrate Anatomical Imaging; until ~1 December 2016 (some flexibility), on our Leverhulme Trust sesamoid bone grant. Lots of flexibility here and on a super fun, established project! Deadline to apply: 11 August (interviews will be 22 August)
  2. Part-time (50%) Research Administrator, on our ERC dinosaur evolution/locomotion grant until 2021. I’m hunting for someone that’s super organized and enthusiastic and not afraid of paperwork (it is EU funding, after all), but there is sure to be some involvement in science communication, too. Deadline to apply: 11 August  (interviews will be 31 August)
  3. Research Technician in Biomechanics; until 2021 as above. This post will not “just” be technical support but hands-on doing science. Some vital experience in biomechanics will be needed as the research will begin very quickly after starting. If the right person applies, we could agree for them to do a part-time PhD or MRes related to the grant research (but that’s not guaranteed in advance). Deadline to apply: 26 August (interviews will be 7/8 September)
  4. Postdoctoral Researcher in Biomechanics; until 2021 as above. This second postdoc on the project will join Dr. Vivian Allen and the rest of my team to push this project forward! I am keenest on finding someone who is good at biomechanical computer simulation, i.e., has already published on work in that general area. But the right person with XROMM (digital biplanar fluoroscopy), other digital imaging and biomechanics experience might fit. Deadline to apply: 23 August (interviews will be 7/8 September)

Update: all jobs have closed for applications.

Note that on the bottom of each page linked above, there are Person Specification and Job Description documents that explain more what the jobs are about and what skills we’re looking for in applicants. I strongly encourage any applicants to read these before applying. If those documents don’t describe you reasonably well, it is probably best not to apply, but you can always contact me if you’re not sure.

The project for jobs 2-4 is about testing the “locomotor superiority hypothesis”, an old idea that dinosaurs gained dominance in the Triassic-Jurassic transition because something about their locomotion was better in some way than other archosaurs’. That idea has been dismissed, embraced, ignored and otherwise considered by various studies over the past 40+ years but never really well tested. So in we go, with a lot of biomechanical and anatomical tools and ideas to try to (indirectly) test it! As usual for projects that I do, there is a healthy mix of empirical (e.g. experiments) and theoretical (e.g. models/simulations) research to be done.

Please spread the word if you know of someone right for any of these roles. I am casting a broad net. The next year (and beyond) is going to be a very exciting time on my team, with this big ~£1.9M ERC Horizon 2020 grant starting and lots of modelling, simulation, experiments, imaging and more. Non-EU/EEA/UK people are very welcome to apply– “Brexit” is not expected to affect this project. If you’re not familiar with my team, check out my “mission statement” for what we stand for professionally and as a team. Join us!


Read Full Post »

I was inspired this week, after a stimulating conference, to put into writing what my team stands for. What do we have in common with other scientists, or what makes us different, or what should we all be doing together beyond the actual science itself? I’ve written advice for my team before, but not something like this, and with new staff/students coming soon, I want something ready for them to see what we’re about, and what we need to become more of, too. Not a rant, but a calm codification of our core beliefs. I presented this to my team later in the week for edits and ideas, and felt that it’s now ready for sharing. There’s no reason to keep it private; I personally like what’s here at the moment, and response from my team was positive, too. I am sure opinions will vary, and it’s my team to lead so I might not agree with some, but the fact that I’m posting this means that I expect it’s quite likely that this “mission statement” will improve if commenters pipe up.

No images this time, except for Jerry above. I want the emphasis to be on the thoughts.

Stomach-Churning Rating: wot? No, not that kind of post.

Here we outline my team’s fundamental principles and ethos for our scientific activities, beyond the rules of the RVC and other institutions (e.g. funders) that we adhere to, and basic common sense or morality, or elaborating on and emphasizing those in relation to our work. This is a document that will evolve as we learn from our experiences. We welcome input and discussion. It applies to all of Team Hutch’s staff and students (and Prof. John Hutchinson [JRH], too). The intent is positive: to remind us of our overarching scientific standards, to foster lively debate and to educate ourselves by challenging us to think about what we stand for. The motivation is to communicate the team’s ethos, benefiting from past lessons. The application is flexible, to accommodate the fact that everyone is different, although some of our ethos must be rigid.

While we are unified by research interests, we respect and value other aspects of science including teaching and administrative work. We consider science communication and public engagement to be part of research, too. Our focus is on the evolution of locomotor biomechanics in organisms and, to maintain a strength in this focus, we try to remain within it. However, “side projects” are enthusiastically supported as long as the main research foci of projects (including past work) remain the top priorities and on target.

We aim to conduct high quality research (and other scientific efforts), where possible setting and following gold standards, and acting in a professional leadership role. We are willing to slow our research progress in order to improve the quality of the work, although we also recognize that science is an imperfect human venture. “Minimal publishable units” are not a goal of our research but we fully recognize that early career scientists need to publish in order to move on in many careers.

We are scholars- we care deeply about communicating with each other, our colleagues, and the past and future of science via the literature. We try to keep up with progress in our fields. This is normal practice but we try to do even better than normal. We aim to publish all research we do; otherwise it is wasted effort.

We also treasure openness in science, from publishing our work in open access formats where feasible, to externally sharing open data and methods with the broader community and public, as quickly and comprehensively as possible.

Regular communication within the team and with collaborators is immensely valuable and so we respond promptly to it (sensibly—working or communicating out of normal working hours is not expected!). We participate in regular lab meetings as part of the team culture and communication. In socializing within and outside the team, we respect others, attempting to avoid offense caused by demeaning or other behaviour. Our team members should not be condescended to in discussions or otherwise made to feel stupid- speaking out should be cultivated, not repressed with aggression or egotism.

Quality of writing (and other communication such as oral presentations) in science is something that we aim to maximize, improving our own writing skills and products by pushing ourselves to learn to be better and by constructive critiques of others’ writing.

Ethical practice in all of our work is immensely valued. This includes diversity of people and skills, which broaden our perspectives and help us to transcend disciplinary boundaries that might otherwise blind us to broader insights. We are a team- we support each other in our work and careers, trying to eschew internal competition or territoriality. Mutual benefits from teamwork need to be raised above selfish individualism; focusing on one person’s need for career boosts may reduce others’ prospects.

One of the most treasured ethical principles that we cleave to is integrity. Among the worst scientific crimes that can be committed are fraud, intellectual property theft and plagiarism—no goal justifies those actions. We seek to be our own toughest critics, within reason, to minimize errors or worse outcomes in our science. We promptly correct our published research if we find errors needing amendment.

Ethical sourcing of and handling of data or specimens is important to us. Whether it is favouring publically accessible as opposed to privately held fossil (or other) specimens or cadaveric material that was obtained via traceable sources that maintain legal or optimal standards of animal welfare, we target the “high road” in obtaining material for study. If we conduct in vivo animal research we attempt to transcend the standards of the “three R’s” and set a high example, maximizing animal welfare and benefits from that research—as we are at a veterinary university, we involve vets and other health and welfare specialists in transferring knowledge from our work to improving the lives of animals.

We try to be inclusive in coauthorship of publications (following RVC rules) but especially do not tolerate “honorary coauthors” who contribute little or nothing to research. We value idea production, data collection and provision, analysis, writing and revision as ingredients that earn coauthorship.

[these next two paragraphs still feel too formal/negative to me, but they highlight something important that I’ve learned about; to a degree there must be hierarchy, and I’m the only one that will be in Team Hutch for as long as it lasts, so I have to be the enforcer of its long-term rules. It’s the aspect of this job that I probably enjoy least, but it looms there whether I like it or not.]

As per RVC intellectual property (IP) rules (as well as rules of funders etc.), all IP generated while working at the RVC remains its IP, managed by JRH. Such IP can and should be used by those generating it, and others that would benefit (including those who have since left the lab) but to ensure proper conduct, JRH must approve usage.

JRH is the leader of the team and as manager has final say in decisions, but encourages negotiation and reasonable disagreement to seek mutually acceptable solutions. JRH makes mistakes too and welcomes them being pointed out. JRH seeks to help his team succeed in whatever career goals they have and for long after they depart Team Hutch, but expects solid effort at work in return, and dedication to the principles outlined here.

We are human. We want fun, enjoyable lives including at work, and this pursuit of fun colours all that we do, because science is fun and so are scientists. We want that fun to radiate upon the world and echo through time.


That’s as it stands right now. What do you think? I am certain that I have left things out, but it’s a start.

Read Full Post »

Anatomy of an amoeba: why not? I like it.

Anatomy of an amoeba: why not? I like it.

Well I made it this far, and I might not have expected to last four years of blogging but I did last, and I’m very glad. Here is my customary retrospective with some “new” images. I’m glad to see that you’re still here, too: over 3200 blog subscribers (roughly doubled since 2014?) and some regular commenters remain– thank you! Like an undead horror, this blog keeps lurching forward, and it appreciates loyalty.


 Stomach-Churning Rating: 5/10- there’s a bit of blood and stuff. Nothing that unusual. If you’re like Rick (above; by /u/epicolllie), that won’t phase you by now.

The past year on the #JohnsFreezer blog felt quiet to me, and that’s largely because I was distracted by numerous things; if you know me (or follow my whining on Twitter), you probably can guess. But there were enough highlights to keep me feeling satisfied. Judging from your reactions, you liked my inside scoop on the T. rex Autopsy documentary that I consulted on, and a distant second place post was, hmm, that’s kinda surprising: my elephant foot dissection post. I’m rather pleased so many of you clicked on that one, actually. That’s a meat-and-potatoes post for this blog, much like my latest one on getting to know M. caudofemoralis (longus). But hey, check out the “Goat to be Seen” post if those are your kind of entries– it seems a lot of people missed that one, and it had a mix of quirkiness, unflinching raw anatomy, and art that still makes me smile.

I was browsing my photos and ran across this NHMUK exhibit of a small ungulate hooved limb vs. a nice honking big padded elephant foot. It elegantly gets across the biomechanical differences between these limb structures.

I was browsing my photos and ran across this NHMUK exhibit of a small ungulate hooved limb vs. a nice honking big padded elephant foot (both abstracted down to their fundamentals). It elegantly gets across the biomechanical differences between these limb structures. Bravo!

My rants about how sometimes it’s helpful for scientists to put the brakes on media coverage of their own research, and on “HONCOs” (honorary co-authors), also brought in the punters, as did the re-post about the not-so-bad aspects of self-promotion in science. Not so many people appeared to read the post about where ideas come from in science but it got a lot of tweets, which is a strange incongruity, yet my thoughts on how to manage a research team didn’t do any better (but if you read in between the lines, there’s a poignancy to that post). Anyway: good ole rants; ahh, it still feels good to have those off my chest, even after all these months. And writing them helps me sort out my own thoughts, if nothing else.

Hindlimb of a sea turtle that we dissected in 2015 after it came in for a clinical postmortem.

Hindlimb of a sea turtle that we dissected in 2015 after it came in for a clinical postmortem.

One of my greatest science heroes, “Neill” Alexander, got his due here, and there continue to be comments trickling in on that post from people who are reminiscing about his influence on their careers. That is definitely one of the posts on this blog that I feel best about, even after four years. It meant a lot to me, much as Neill has meant a lot to others. I also did an homage to museums, which in parallel (oddly, but enjoyably for me) became an(other) homage to avian kneecaps. I like them too, and museums of course, but they’re awesome in a very different way from Neill.

Team Cat is still cranking on our biomechanical and anatomical studies of felids- expect a lot of new stuff from us in 2016! Meanwhile, enjoy this spectacular taxidermy.

Team Cat is still cranking on our biomechanical and anatomical studies of felids- expect a lot of new stuff from us in 2016! Meanwhile, enjoy this spectacular taxidermy– and check out Dr. Andrew Cuff’s blog with the latest science and stories.

I learned a lot about my genome in this fourth year of blogging, and I delved into that with you, as part of my commitment to share what I learn about myself by poking around in my biology. Oh, and I just learned that the image depicting my genomic ancestry was this blog’s most-clicked image this year– that’s cool, and unexpected!

The past year was a big year for dinosaurs on this blog, with a post on the “Giant Dinosaurs of London” and another related to my cameo in the giant titanosaur documentary with Attenborough, but with a focus on dissecting dinosaurs, and a blatant bandwagon tribute to/musing on Jurassic World.

The very, very strange iguanodontian dinosaur Lurdusaurus (forelimb; note the big spiky thumb claw), which I was pleased to see at the natural history museum in Brussels, Belgium in 2015.

The very, very strange iguanodontian dinosaur Lurdusaurus (forelimb; note the big spiky thumb claw), which I was pleased to see at the natural history museum in Brussels, Belgium in 2015.

And finally, this blog had a baby, or a sister, or whatever, this year, and that has been a blast: Anatomy to You was born, thanks to Dr. Lauren Sumner-Rooney’s expert care and dedication to science communication. If you haven’t checked it out, now’s a good time, or offer to do a guest post for our “In Focus” section if you’ve got some anatomical science to share! Speaking of guest posts, Julia Molnar did a fabulous one about our paper on crocodile backbones this year, here on this blog.

I'm still cleaning up specimens from the freezers: here, some "emu butts" (tails) from a collaboration with Michael Pittman and Heinrich Mallison, and PhD student Luis Lama's past thesis work.

I’m still cleaning up specimens from the freezers: here, some “emu butts” (tails) from a collaboration with Michael Pittman and Heinrich Mallison, and PhD student Luis Lama’s past work. Something about these vertebrae fascinates me.

I didn’t deliver on some plans for this year, such as a komodo dragon anatomy post, but I did finally do the “better know a muscle” and “dissecting dinosaurs” posts I planned, and a few other things, so the year worked out well enough.

What’s coming in year 5 of this blog? I have no bloody idea; I have not gotten that far. I think we’ll all be surprised. Let’s make the most of it! (I will consider requests)

"We'll always have elaborate models of gorilla muscular anatomy in Paris."

“We’ll always have elaborate models of gorilla muscular anatomy in Paris.”



Read Full Post »

For about 3 years now I’ve used the #WIJF (i.e. acronym for What’s In John’s Freezer) hashtag to organize my social media efforts on this blog. Over that time I became aware that “wijf” in Dutch can be taken as a derogatory term for women. And indeed, these days I do see people tweeting derogatory things with the #wijf hashtag, along with other, tamer uses like mine. I’ve come to the decision, albeit gradually and with much internal debate, to stop using that hashtag so I can avoid association with the sexist Dutch word. This post is about why, and what’s next.

Stomach-Churning Rating: Debatable, but 0/10 by the standard of the usual gory things on this blog; no images.

I don’t speak Dutch, but 25 million or so people do. This is a blog about morphological science, and the Dutch have had (and continue to have) a disproportionately strong influence on that field. I’m not claiming to be perfect when it comes to feminist issues, but I listen and I try and I care. My undergraduate tutelage in science was almost exclusively driven by female scientists– I never thought about that before but it’s true; at least 5 different major faculty influences at the University of Wisconsin! I work at a university where ~85% of the students are female (common today in vet schools). My research team has featured 9 out of 16 female postgraduate staff and students since 2004, and a lot of my collaborators and friends are scientists or science afficionados who happen to be female. I have good reason to care, and social media has helped to raise my awareness of important matters within and outside of science that I do care a lot about.

So, while I tend to hate to abandon words (or hashtags), preferring to fight for alternative meanings (e.g. the word “design” in evolutionary biology), and I am a stubborn git, the #WIJF hashtag and acronym are different, I’ve decided, and it’s time to use something else. Admittedly, #WIJF hasn’t been that important to this blog as hashtag or acronym– mainly just I use it, and any “brand name recognition” or other things surely arise more from the full name of the blog. So abandoning #WIJF is an inconvenience but not devastating to my blog. I see this move as (1) taking control of a situation where the benefits of staying with the hashtag/acronym are minimal and the harms, while of debatable magnitude, outweigh those minimal benefits in my view, and (2) demonstrating that I don’t tolerate or want to be associated with sexism or other discrimination. And I hope that this move might inspire others to reflect similarly on their own behaviour. Morphology, like any science, is for everyone, and this blog is meant to be a friendly place.

But a thing that has held me back, even though it is admittedly trivial in the grand scheme of things, is what hashtag/acronym to use henceforth? I turn that over to you, Freezerinos. I have no good ideas and so I am crowdsourcing. I need something short (not #Whatsinjohnsfreezer, probably– too long), something associated with the title of the blog, but also something dissimilar to the naughty word “wijf” and thus inoffensive… ideally inoffensive in the ~7000 languages of the world (!?!?). That might not leave many options! What should be in John’s blog’s hashtag?

Read Full Post »

Claws for alarm

Claws for alarm

Happy Third Blogoversary, WIJF blog! I am thick in some paper-writing, so I can’t write my usual detailed summary of the past year. Or so I thought, then I started writing and finished it, so here it is! I didn’t feel I needed to post this, but I like retrospectives and writing this helps me recall what happened here and gives me new ideas for the future (or things to avoid!). I continue to enjoy blogging here and you’re still here too, so that’s enough for me, regardless.

 Stomach-Churning Rating: 8/10; some unpleasantness in the images ahead…

Indeed, this year saw an odd leap in blog subscribers, from about 200ish to now >1500 since around August 2014; an astonishing sevenfold increase in about as many months! I did not see that coming. I’d love it if some of the new folks could speak up in the Comments and say what brought them here (this WordPress recommendations link? BBC Dinosaur story link?). Otherwise, Twitter won the social media “war” again against Facebook for bringing people here.

The top post of this past year was easily, and unsurprisingly, the evil takeover of the blog by my Sith nemesis. May she remain in her galaxy far, far away and not trouble us again. “Aren’t Adaptations Special?” (my ode to the 35th Spandrelversary) and “Co-Rex-Ions” (my chronicle of correcting a paper and reflecting on that experience) both did nicely, too, in terms of readers.

Insanity claws

Insanity claws

The latter post had parallel threads with others exploring my career and my role as a research manager/mentor, and pondering (with your input) research data “versus” conclusions as well as an awkward day earlier in my career involving crocodiles and karaoke. A recurrent theme that you may have noticed is that I am using the blog to explore my tolerance for humiliating myself (or at least self-effacement), and exploring why we humiliate others, which still fascinates me.

It was also a deeply introspective year for me, for reasons made clear by this post, which links to other posts like it exploring my experiences jousting with mortality and its reverberations. It has been an… eventful year. Leading to many thoughts bouncing around my head like happy little blood clots.

And then my crossover Conversation UK article was posted in full length here, “Anatomy: Dynamic, Not Defunct“, which was for me a highlight of the year on this blog (and my sci-comm efforts). I followed up on this big-picture anatomy motif in related posts on “In the Name of Morphology” and an ode (it was a year of many odes!) to anatomist Richard Owen.

My two-post stroll through the British Museum also got me writing about how animal anatomy plays a physical or at least visual role in human art and culture; that was fun for me. Likewise, I did another anatomically-focused museum exhibit review for the NHM’s mammoth exhibit, and yet another on my visit to another “home of anatomy” in Jena, Germany‘s equivalent of the NHM. That post’s ontogeny-phylogeny theme, echoed in my Owen post, also tied into a long-form version of a Nature News & Views article I wrote but also posted here, on “plastic fishapods.” Expect more evo-devo from me in the future; it has become part of my research programme to tie together form, function, development and evolution in my team’s work.

Ontogeny havoc

Ontogeny havoc: teratologies

In other, more random anatomy-based posts, there was an early one on cat dissections, another on the lives and deaths of penguins (there will be more on this topic soon!), and the most recent post on mammalian tails. Finally in 2014, as one of the highlights of my career lately, we published 3 papers about bird legs/knees on one day, in the open access journal PeerJ, right before Crimbo. I’m proud of the work my team put into those papers. 2015 looks to be at least as productive and fun!

This blog still has legs!

This blog still has legs!

Keep wearing layers of clothing. I’ve got plenty more freezerness in store on this blog; freezerburnout has been avoided. Expect posts on dissecting dinosaurs, that promised komodo dragon post, more cats and penguins and then definitely more bird (and lizard, and mammal!) knees, and something special about genomes. I also have some changes in mind for the blog, with a new flavour of regular, short posts. I’ll save the explanation for later.

What are your memories of the past year in my freezers?

Read Full Post »

Hey I almost forgot, it’s the blog’s second anniversary! What the hell happened this year?

Stomach-Churning Rating: there’s an 8/10 photo of ostrich guts here; otherwise 2/10ish.

I bring you tidings from the past and future!

I bring you tidings from the past and future!

This was the Year of the Rant, and I enjoyed ranting to you on this blog. Sometimes you ranted with me, and that was even better. It kicked off with that cat documentary that spurned me in a feline dismissive fashion, then I lit off on documentaries in general and how they should give more back to scientists (what a discussion in the comments!!!!). Ooooh that felt good. And helped me sort out my thoughts about the topic. And after then, I got paid more often and still did a lot of documentaries– if you haven’t been watching Secrets of Bones on BBC4, you should be weeping bitter, bitter dregs (and be scrambling to get access). Catch me tomorrow (Tues) night with some of our emus! They paid me reasonably and in return I worked hard for them; before, during, and after filming, and I think we all felt good about it. Or I did anyway. The show is excellent, so I feel even better!

Sneak peek from BBC4's Secrets of Bones episode 3... recognize anyone?

Sneak peek from BBC4’s Secrets of Bones episode 3… recognize anyone? (from their website)

But no ranting palaeo-related blog would be complete without a good T. rex rant, and I did that this year. Took a big dump on the scavenger-predator non-troversy. That went over so well, Slate picked it up– I never had expected that to happen! I also appreciated how many colleagues joined in to condemn the senseless perpetuation of this dead issue by the media and a few scientists.

There were also some posts on more introspective things, like the feeling of being lost that pervades both visiting a strange foreign city and doing science. And like how science needs both the qualities of a Mr Spock and a Captain Kirk. Those were fun experiments in combining  a personal, internal experience with a broader message.

Darwin greets Chinese visitor Microraptor in my office.

Darwin greets Chinese visitor Microraptor in my office.

When I asked for suggestions last year, you wanted more coverage of other people’s stuff, and so I did that to a degree, reviewing the All Yesterdays and Unfeathered Bird books. And then I fell off that wagon, which I may come back to. But along the way I realized I don’t enjoy writing about papers that other people have already published because, generally, I then lack the personal experience of doing the science and showing it in progress, which is what this blog tends to be about and what excites me on a personal, visceral level. Once the paper is out, I feel like the cat is out of the bag and it’s not as fun to talk about unless it’s totally mind-blowingly (A) cool or (B) idiotic. Anyway, I might do a solicited post if someone gets me excited about a paper before it comes out, or who knows, I may change my mind.

Entirely unfeathered Indian peafowl in matching views.

Entirely unfeathered Indian peafowl in matching views, with Unfeathered Bird’s author-illustrator.

I also posted on a fabulous blog that more people need to hit, because you may be surprised just how fascinating it is- Veterinary Forensics. I get the feeling often, both on my blog and from scientific colleagues, that veterinary anatomy/pathology issues are seen as “lesser science” than basic, even descriptive anatomy. Somehow, insanely weird diseases or pathologies don’t excite people as much as insanely weird “normal” anatomies. I know there are exceptions to that generalization, but I think it’s a common (mis)perception people have, and part of it is likely because those fields (veterinary medicine and zoology, for example) are historically separate, and people tend to see anatomy and pathology as separate things- as opposed to points along a continuum. Since coming to the RVC, I have come from that kind of a misperception to one in which pathology enormously enriches my understanding of form, function and evolution. I also love the “applications of basic science to helping animals live better lives” angle. We should all be trying to do that as scientists, but from time to time I notice that it isn’t taken seriously (I even get reviewers’ comments bluntly stating that it’s none of our business as basic scientists, or for anatomy/experimental biology journals to mention!). Whoops better stop there or I’ll be writing a new ranty post!

Can't get enough of this -xray GIF, so here it is again.

Can’t get enough of this x-ray GIF, so here it is again.

Darwin Day got into some of the vet-y issues regarding feet, in a post on hooves and then another on pigs’ feet.

Toward the end of the year I got some guest posts going, by two main people from my team: Sophie Regnault on rhino feet, and Julia Molnar on crocodile spines. I liked those posts a lot, and so did you, it seems, so there will be more of those coming in year 3. Quite a few are planned already.

One of my favourite papers I’ve ever done came out this year, by Vivian Allen et al. on dinosaur body shape/postural evolution, and that went nicely as a blog post with tons of extra context and stuff. Digital 3D dinos, what’s not to love?

I was on sabbatical for much of the year, so I was posting a lot about patellae (kneecaps) and how fun they are to study, which led to posts about basal bird skeletons and more, like Darwin’s chickens and a joke about cake that only I seemed to find funny, and ending with a grand summary of avian kneecaps. I also reported on some new (post-sabbatical) research, still ongoing, with Dr. Stephanie Pierce and Dr. Maedeh Borhani at the RVC, on how salamanders walk. During Freezermas, I plugged our new comparative cat project.

The mesenteries are so gorgeous!!!!!!

The mesenteries are so gorgeous!!!!!!

Speaking of Freezermas: It happened, it was terrifying, and we’ve all grown from the experience of surviving it. I had a blast dissecting that ostrich, and the x-ray pics were a hit with everyone, too!

Then there was random “freezer love” and assorted posts to give insight into the daily life of a freezer manager, such as doing an inventory and reflections on childhood. I snuck in a tour of Dublin museums and the amazing Crocodiles of the World near Oxford. I meant to do more of those “anatomy road trip posts” and still aim to.

And we ended the year by ending the ongoing drama of the Mystery Anatomy competition, starting off a new year with a new scoreboard. We got more poetic and lyrical in 2013 with the answers to those mysteries, and that will continue (groans from those who are poetically challenged).

Elephant skull mystery x-ray

Elephant skull mystery x-ray

Some brief numbers: view-wise the blog has been pretty close to last year; about 87,000 views in the past 12 months for a total of almost 200,000, wow! This year, Twitter just barely edged out Facebook for bringing people to the blog (3,134 vs 3,022 clicks) but then geenstijl.nl bizarrely brought 2,732! There was no big Reddit or other social media site moment this year, but various sites and links continued to bring in a steady flow of visitors to add to the Google-search-firehose’s. Thanks to folks who linked here!!!

What google searches brought people here the most often? The top 3 are the most interesting; the fifth one just makes me laugh because I’ve never discussed Deepstaria enigmatica anatomy here, but will continue to promote people finding the site by searching for it, if only to annoy cnidariologists:

rhino 83
giraffe 76
camel anatomy 62
what’s in john’s freezer 60
deepstaria enigmatica 56

I’m a little surprised “elephant” and “dinosaur” don’t bring as many searches here, but there are probably more sites about those animals and hence I get fewer of the hits. Looking forward to more hits on “ostrich anatomy”…

My two top rants were the top posts this year, and that’s no surprise given the comments and other attention they got. Thanks for helping by participating! Those were nice group-rants. Healthy and vigorous. Shockingly, a poetry round of mystery anatomy came in 3rd! People just liked the chickens + bones + poetry. Those, and some hits from year 1, broke the 1000-views marks.

Americans came here in a 3:1 ratio to Brits, which means that Brits punched above their weight per capita (~5:1 ratio)! Canadians, you tried, too. Here, have some back bacon of dubious provenance. :) Saint Kitts and Nevis with 670 views, wow! Very unexpected- you beat Italy and many others!

Most importantly, the blog has been about sharing my passion for anatomy (as preserved via freezers). I shared a conference talk about this subject here, using the blog as a prime example, to a warm reception. I want to try experimenting in new ways to use the blog to share things this year. I think you will like what I (we!) have lined up. Thanks for showing up and staying with me!

Read Full Post »

Older Posts »