Neurogeekery: The Genealogy

September 18, 2007

Just ran across the Neurotree site. They are trying to build training-relationship trees for neuroscience and depend on user input.
I’ve been sort of interested in training genealogy ever since I ran across an acquaintance’s tree which got back to Newton in rapid order.

Go contribute if you are a neuroscientist and have nothing better to do…

UPDATE: After browsing around a little bit on this thing it looks to have potential as a networking and mentor seeking tool. Although obviously it will not be comprehensive you can get an idea whether someone has launched a  lot of independent careers or not.

8 Responses to “Neurogeekery: The Genealogy”

  1. drugmonkey Says:

    Interesting find. You can get a bite on a lot of “questions” about career too. We were discussing the job prospects of those from “big name” versus “just plain big” labs in another thread. At least for neuroscience, you can troll around some of the PIs who have trained an unending string and say “gee, how many have gone on to careers”. ‘course, as you say, there’s a huge selection bias here.

    One thing I note is that there are a lot of essentially unconnected people in here so it could still use a lot of work…

    Like

  2. PhysioProf Says:

    “One thing I note is that there are a lot of essentially unconnected people in here so it could still use a lot of work…”

    That is an understatement. I would say that it is completely useless and uninteresting in its present state.

    Like

  3. bikemonkey Says:

    Heh. Sounds like your genealogy is under represented my friend!

    How about in a fully-realized state? Would you still find it uninteresting?

    Like

  4. PhysioProf Says:

    If it were reasonably complete, then I would find it interesting.

    Like

  5. Piled Higher, Deeper Says:

    What are you people, freakin’ monarchists? One’s scientific value established by pedigree rather than papers?

    Sheeesh.

    Like

  6. PhysioProf Says:

    Where do you get the cockamamie idea that the only reason someone would find a scientific pedigree interesting is because it provides some measure of “scientific value”? They are interesting for many reasons, and none of them have anything to do with attribution of “scientific value”.

    Like

  7. AnonPI Says:

    yeah, like how fast your history links back to Uncle Siggy ! Bet you didn’t know that, did you? LOL.

    seriously though, pretty cool to track back to the psychodynamic, neuroanatomy and behaviorist traditions and see how they came together (in the same people frequently) to form the basis of neuroscience…

    Like


  8. […] 30, 2007 I had a note before on the Neurotree.org site which is databasing neuroscientists’ training genealogies. The […]

    Like


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: