class: center, middle, inverse, title-slide # Peer Review Discussion ### Jinliang Yang ### Oct. 7th, 2022 --- # Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine 2022 .pull-left[ <div align="center"> <img src="paabo.png" height=350> </div> ] .pull-right[ <div align="center"> <img src="ancientcorn.png" height=100> </div> A maize cob from the Ocampo Caves (Valenzuela cave), dated to 3890 ± 60 years before the present. Length, 47 mm. > from Paabo's 2003 Science ] ----------- Svante Paabo represents the field of __evolutionary genetics__ and/or __population genetics!!!__ --- # Points to cover in the review: - ### 1. Novelty - ### 2. Quality - ### 3. Clarity - ### 4. Reproduciblity --- # Points to cover in the review: ### Novelty - What are the main claims of the paper and how significant are they? - How novel is the work? Are the conclusions worth knowing? - Is this paper important in its discipline? - Are the claims properly placed in the context of the previous literature? --- # Points to cover in the review: ### Quality - Do the data and analyses support the authors’ claims? - Is the stated purpose achieved throughout the paper? - Would additional work improve the manuscript? - Is the experimentation design appropriate for the purpose of the study? --- # Points to cover in the review: ### Clarity - Evaluate clarity, style and readability of the paper to scientists in the field. - Would you recommend the author seek the service of a professional science writer? --- # Points to cover in the review: ### Reproduciblity - Are original data (and/or code) deposited in appropriate repositories? - Are details of the methodology sufficient to allow the experiments to be reproduced? -- ------ ### Paper for discussion Kielf et al., 2022 [BioRxiv](https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2022.03.02.482602v1)