DOCSLIB.ORG

AAAS's Only Journal Some Tips for Success in High Impact Science

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
AAAS's Only Journal Some Tips for Success in High Impact Science An introduction to AAAS’s only journal & Some tips for success in high impact science publishing Presented by YOUR NAME Associate Editor, Science Advances YOUR ACADEMIC TITLE, YOUR ACADEMIC INSTITUTION 1 Instead think: Science is published by AAAS 2 AAAS and the Science family of journals: .org not .com The American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) is an international non-profit organization committed to its mission of promoting cooperation among scientists, defending scientific freedom, encouraging scientific responsibility, and supporting scientific education and science outreach for the betterment of all humanity. A Family of Quality Journals 1880 1999 2009 Launched 2015 2016 is the open access expansion of Today Over 20,000 manuscripts submitted 3,250 papers published to date ~15% acceptance rate Impact factor: 11.51 Authors of papers rejected by Science Have the option to transfer to EDITORIAL LEADERSHIP • Jeremy Berg, Ph.D., Editor-in-Chief • Ali Shilatifard, Ph.D., Editor • Philippa Benson, Ph.D., Managing Editor DEPUTY EDITORS Earth, Space and Environmental Science • Kip Hodges, Ph.D., Arizona State University 18 Deputy Editors • Jeremy Jackson, Ph.D., Smithsonian Institute • Shahid Naaem, Ph.D., Columbia University working with over Biology and Biomedicine 200 • Dale Dorsett, Ph.D., Saint Louis University • Sarah Fortune, Ph.D., Harvard University Associate Editors • Nicholas Peppas, Ph.D., U. of Texas at Austin • Ali Shilatifard, Ph.D., Northwestern University All of whom • Philip Yeagle, Ph.D., University of Connecticut are prominent researchers Neuroscience from around the globe • Kevin LaBar, Ph.D., Duke University • Leslie Vosshall, Ph.D., Rockefeller University Physical Science • Lynden Archer, Ph.D., Cornell University • Julia Chan, Ph.D., University of Texas at Dallas • Juan de Pablo, Ph.D., University of Chicago • Karen Gleason, Ph.D., MIT • John Rogers, Ph.D., Northwestern University representing an • Warren Warren, Ph.D., Duke University extraordinarily broad array Interdisciplinary & Social Sciences • Aaron Clauset, Ph.D., U. of Colorado at Boulder of • Jonathan Katz, Ph.D., California Institute of disciplines Technology. Dear Dr. Smith, We’re please to inform you that your manuscript has been accepted for publication Key tips for success in high impact science publishing 8 What do my colleagues What does my think about what and department and where I publish? institution think about What do my my publications? funders think about my publications? 9 Key TIP: Getting in the door is the first step Editor Editor Key TIP: Make the Editor HAPPY! So, your first task is to figure Your out what the Editor wants…… MS TIP: Remember top reasons articles get rejected • Outside of journal scope • Science not new • Science wrong or incomplete • Unethical practices are detected • Science not well explained or biased 12 I have trouble getting published because…… • Non-native speaker of English “My English writing is poor.” • Native speaker of English “My English writing is poor.” What does really mean? Rejected • Topic is not NEW (NOT a language problem) • Topic does not fit our topical scope (NOT a language problem) • Paper is better suited to another journal (NOT a language problem) • Paper is scientifically flawed (NOT a language problem) • Too many papers published recently (NOT a language problem) • SO badly written cannot be understood (Yes! A language problem) TIP: Remember what Editors want Editors want to publish information that is • New: Novel data and analyses • Relevant: Correct topic and article type • Useful: Correct timing for topic • Exciting: Clear writing that highlights the above • Fast and problem-free: Properly conducted and prepared manuscripts 15 TIP: Remember what Editors want Editors of leading international publishers want to • Publish more reliable and reproducible research • Provide better service to the research community • Reduce harm from unethical and non-reproducible science • Increase readership and reuse of research content • Support compliance with funder, institution, and government policies and legislation • TOP publishers want: Identifiers and information regarding researchers IDs (e.g., ORCID) Funders, Data repositories, Preprint server postings, Material Transfer Agreements, and similar kinds of information 16 TIP: Make your cover letter count • Keep to one page if possible. • Basic information: your name, paper title, correct journal name • Critical scientific information: What is new and why is it important • Journal match information: Why this journal, why now? • Ethical information: Authorship agreement, potential conflicts of interest, material transfer agreements, posting on preprint servers, other TIP: Plan for TOP requirements TOP Guidelines https://cos.io/our-services/top-guidelines/ 8 standards with 3 levels 1. Citation standards 2. Data transparency 3. Analytic methods (code) transparency 4. Research materials transparency 5. Design & analysis transparency 6. Preregistration of studies 7. Preregistration of analysis plans 8. Replication Source: Nosek et al. Science 348, 1422-1425 (2015) DOI: 10.1126/science.aab2374 TIP: Register with ORCID Open Researcher and Contributor ID • Each ID is a unique, personal, and persistent alphanumeric code identifying one and only one person (like a DOI or ISBN) • Created because personal names are not unique people change names people move • The ORCID organization is an independent registry serving as the standard for contributor identification in STM publishing TIP: Plan for TOP Guidelines • Transparent reporting of results, methods and analysis enables reproducibility • Reproducibility starts long before publication with experimental design and data management plans—saves you time in the long run • Use of repositories like Figshare, Dryad and Github can enable reproducibility TOP TIP: Answer 10 critical questions when preparing to publish 1. What is publishable (new) science in your field now? 2. What is the most appropriate journal and format for your research now? 3. What are general and field-specific requirements (e.g., authorship, data sharing, reproducibility, COI, MTAs )? 4. Who should be an author on your paper, in what order? 5. What should go in your cover letter for the journal you’ve targeted? 6. What are the submission requirements of the target journal? 7. What do you need to know about editorial and peer review in the target journal? 8. How should you interpret your decision letter? 9. How should you be prepared to respond to reviewer comments? 10. What are trends in scientific publishing that might be impacting your submission? TIP: Plan for TOP requirements TOP Guidelines https://cos.io/our-services/top-guidelines/ 1. Register yourself (ORCID) 2. Register your institution (RingGold) 3. Register your funding (Fundref) 4. Deposit your data in accepted repository (e.g., Dryad, figShare) 5. Register your study (forthcoming…) 6. Publish in reputable journals, check pre- publication posting restrictions (arXiv, biorXiv) 7. Track journal TOP requirements Reproducibility counts! • Journals mandate different levels of transparency in reporting— be familiar with guide to authors before submitting • You help yourself by making your work as reproducible. Start early to ensure reproducibility during data collection and analysis. • Have a data access plan before submitting your manuscript. Make sure any restrictions on data access are clear at the point of submission. • Maximizing impact of your results is not limited to reporting findings—focus on data access, reusability, transparent reporting and discoverability. Resources • TOP guidelines: https://cos.io/our-services/top-guidelines/ • FAIR data principles: https://www.force11.org/group/fairgroup/fairprinciples • Data citation principles: https://www.force11.org/group/joint-declaration-data- citation-principles-final • ORCiD: https://orcid.org/ • Data management plans: http://www.dcc.ac.uk/resources • Open Science Framework (OSF) from COS: https://cos.io/our-products/open-science-framework/.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Chronology of the Evolution–Creationism Controversy by Randy Moore, Mark Decker, and Sehoya Cotner Santa Barbara (CA): Greenwood Press, 2010
    1 2 Published bimonthly by the OF National Center for Science Education EPORTS THE NATIONAL CENTER FOR SCIENCE EDUCATION REPORTS.NCSE.COM R ISSN 2159-9270 ARTICLE Recent Advances on the Origin of Life— Making Biological Polymers Michael A Buratovich The creationism–evolution debate almost always comes around to discussions about the or- igin of life. The enormousness of the problem of how organic chemicals (those compounds that contain the element carbon) reacted to synthesize biological molecules like proteins, nucleic acids, membrane lipids, and others, and how these self-replicated and assembled to form the rst protocells, represents an attractive target for critics. In addition, the respect- able degree of uncertainty that surrounds present answers to origin-of-life questions, and the large diversity of the proposed solutions, represent ample fodder for those who would question the validity of the entire origin-of-life research program. Consequently, creation- ists have said a great deal about origin-of-life research, and none of it is positive. According to the doyen of recent (or “young-earth”) creationist debaters, Duane Gish, the facts “establish beyond doubt that an evolutionary origin of life on this planet would have been impossible” (Gish 2007). In a review of the Miller-Urey experiment, prolic recent creationist author Jerry Bergman concluded that “this set of experiments—more than almost any other carried out by modern science—has done much more to show that abiogenesis is not possible on earth than to indicate how it could be possible” (Bergman 2004). “Intelligent design” proponent Stephen Meyer has written: “I have noted an increas- ing sense of futility and frustration arising among the scientists who work on the origin of life” (Meyer 2009:321).
    [Show full text]
  • Lessons from a Pandemic for Systems- Oriented Sustainability Research
    Lessons from a pandemic for systems- oriented sustainability research The MIT Faculty has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters. Citation Selin, Noelle E. "Lessons from a pandemic for systems-oriented sustainability research." Science Advances 7, 22 (May 2021): eabd8988. © 2021 The Authors As Published http://dx.doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.abd8988 Publisher American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS) Version Final published version Citable link https://hdl.handle.net/1721.1/130897 Terms of Use Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 Detailed Terms https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/ SCIENCE ADVANCES | REVIEW ENVIRONMENTAL STUDIES Copyright © 2021 The Authors, some rights reserved; Lessons from a pandemic for systems-oriented exclusive licensee American Association sustainability research for the Advancement Noelle E. Selin* of Science. No claim to original U.S. Government Works. Distributed This review examines research on environmental impacts of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) from a systems- under a Creative oriented sustainability perspective, focusing on three areas: air quality and human health, climate change, Commons Attribution and production and consumption. The review assesses whether and how this COVID-19–focused research (i) ex- NonCommercial amines components of an integrated system; (ii) accounts for interactions including complex, adaptive dynamics; License 4.0 (CC BY-NC). and (iii) is oriented to informing action. It finds that this research to date has not comprehensively accounted for complex, coupled interactions, especially involving societal factors, potentially leading to erroneous conclusions and hampering efforts to draw broader insights across sustainability-relevant domains.
    [Show full text]
  • Where to Publish?
    Where to publish? A Handbook of Scientific Journals for Contributors to Marine Conservation Joshua Cinner and Anya Jaeckli ARC Centre of Excellence for Coral Reef Studies, James Cook University, Townsville, AUSTRALIA. Email: [email protected] Version: September 2018 1 Foreword Deciding where to publish can be important- even career changing. A paper in the right journal can make a career, sometimes even define a field, while the same type of research may fade to oblivion in the wrong venue. Knowing which journals are well suited to your research is an important part of being a scientist. For many scientists, there is a wide range of potential venues. So many, in fact, that many of us often forget what the available options are. Here, we compiled a guide of what we consider key journals in interdisciplinary field of marine resource management. We excluded journals that had a focus on pure, rather than applied ecology, geomorphology, or social science. A lot goes into deciding where to publish- popular metrics such as the impact factor are often used, but it is our feeling that this should be done with great caution. For example, just because a journal has a low impact factor does not mean it is not incredibly influential. Here, we present a number of journal metrics, including impact factor, Scimago Journal Rank (SJR), H-index, and others (which we describe in detail below) for 63 journals that publish interdisciplinary papers on marine resource management. We also provide a description of the aims and scope of the journal (from the journal’s website), and in a few cases, we provide some personal notes about the journal.
    [Show full text]
  • The More Multidisciplinary the Better? – the Prevalence and Interdisciplinarity of Research Collaborations in Multidisciplinar
    Journal of Informetrics 12 (2018) 736–756 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Journal of Informetrics journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/joi Regular article The more multidisciplinary the better? – The prevalence and interdisciplinarity of research collaborations in multidisciplinary institutions ∗ Zhiya Zuo, Kang Zhao University of Iowa, United States a r t i c l e i n f o a b s t r a c t Article history: Scientific research is increasingly relying on collaborations to address complex real-world Received 15 February 2018 problems. Many researchers, policymakers, and administrators consider a multidisciplinary Received in revised form 15 June 2018 environment an important factor for fostering research collaborations, especially inter- Accepted 16 June 2018 disciplinary ones that involve researchers from different disciplines. However, it remains unknown whether a higher level of multidisciplinarity within an academic institution is Keywords: associated with internal collaborations that are more prevalent and more interdisciplinary. Multidisciplinarity Analyzing 90,000 publications by 2500 faculty members in over 100 academic institutions Interdisciplinarity from three multidisciplinary areas, information, public policy, and neuroscience, we inves- Collaboration tigated the connection between multidisciplinarity and research collaborations. Based on Network analysis social network analysis and text mining, our analysis suggests that more multidisciplinary Text mining institutions are not necessarily more collaborative, although they do feature collaborations that are more interdisciplinary. Our findings provide implications for academic admin- istrators and policymakers to promote research collaborations and interdisciplinarity in academic institutions. © 2018 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved. 1. Introduction Knowledge creation in the scientific community depends heavily on collaborations (Dong, Ma, Shen, & Wang, 2017; Wuchty, Jones, & Uzzi, 2007).
    [Show full text]
  • Li Et Al., Sci
    DNA polymerase α interacts with H3-H4 and facilitates the transfer of parental histones to lagging strands Zhiming Li, Xu Hua, Albert Serra-Cardona, Xiaowei Xu, Songlin Gan, Hui Zhou, Wen-Si Yang, Chun-Long Chen, Rui-Ming Xu, Zhiguo Zhang To cite this version: Zhiming Li, Xu Hua, Albert Serra-Cardona, Xiaowei Xu, Songlin Gan, et al.. DNA polymerase α interacts with H3-H4 and facilitates the transfer of parental histones to lagging strands. Science Advances , American Association for the Advancement of Science (AAAS), 2020, 6 (35), pp.eabb5820. 10.1126/sciadv.abb5820. hal-03015005 HAL Id: hal-03015005 https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-03015005 Submitted on 24 Nov 2020 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. SCIENCE ADVANCES | RESEARCH ARTICLE MOLECULAR BIOLOGY Copyright © 2020 The Authors, some a rights reserved; DNA polymerase interacts with H3-H4 and facilitates exclusive licensee American Association the transfer of parental histones to lagging strands for the Advancement Zhiming Li1,2,3,4*, Xu Hua1,2,3,4*, Albert Serra-Cardona1,2,3,4*, Xiaowei Xu1,2,3,4*, Songlin Gan5,6, of Science. No claim to 1,2,3,4 5,6 7,8 5,6 1,2,3,4† original U.S.
    [Show full text]
  • Toward an Alternative Dialogue Between the Social and Natural Sciences
    Copyright © 2018 by the author(s). Published here under license by the Resilience Alliance. Persson, J., A. Hornborg, L. Olsson, and H. Thorén. 2018. Toward an alternative dialogue between the social and natural sciences. Ecology and Society 23(4):14. https://doi.org/10.5751/ES-10498-230414 Research, part of a Special Feature on Integration of Social and Natural Dimensions of Sustainability Toward an alternative dialogue between the social and natural sciences Johannes Persson 1, Alf Hornborg 2, Lennart Olsson 3 and Henrik Thorén 3,4 ABSTRACT. Interdisciplinary research within the field of sustainability studies often faces incompatible ontological assumptions deriving from natural and social sciences. The importance of this fact is often underrated and sometimes leads to the wrong strategies. We distinguish between two broad approaches in interdisciplinarity: unificationism and pluralism. Unificationism seeks unification and perceives disciplinary boundaries as conventional, representing no long-term obstacle to progress, whereas pluralism emphasizes more ephemeral and transient interdisciplinary connections and underscores the autonomy of the disciplines with respect to one another. Both approaches have their merits and pitfalls. Unification runs the risk of scientific imperialism, while pluralism can result in insurmountable barriers between disciplines. We made a comparison of eight distinct interdisciplinary attempts at integration of knowledge across social and natural sciences. The comparison was carried out as four pairwise comparisons: environmental economics versus ecological economics, environmental history versus historical ecology, resilience theory versus political ecology, and socio-biology versus actor- network theory. We conclude by showing that none of these prominent eight interdisciplinary fields in and of itself manages to provide, in a satisfactory way, such an integrated understanding of sustainability.
    [Show full text]
  • Fee Waivers for Open Access Journals
    Publications 2015, 3, 155-167; doi:10.3390/publications3030155 OPEN ACCESS publications ISSN 2304-6775 www.mdpi.com/journal/publications Communication Fee Waivers for Open Access Journals Stuart Lawson Birkbeck, Department of English and Humanities, University of London, Malet Street, London WC1E 7HX, UK; E-Mail: [email protected]; Tel.: +4420-7631-6000 Academic Editor: Remedios Melero Received: 23 June 2015 / Accepted: 30 July 2015 / Published: 5 August 2015 Abstract: Open access journals which charge article processing charges (APCs) sometimes offer fee waivers to authors who cannot afford to pay them. This article measures the extent of this practice among the largest toll access and open access publishers by gathering stated fee waiver policies from publishers’ websites. A majority (68.8%) were found to offer fee waivers and sometimes they are only available to authors from low- and middle-income countries. This has implications for the ability of authors without funding to publish in journals from these publishers. Keywords: article processing charges; fee waivers; open access publishing 1. Introduction Open access journals make their content openly available for anyone to read and re-use without needing to pay a subscription fee to access it. There are a variety of funding mechanisms to cover the costs of this publication model, as identified by Suber [1]. For example, some small open access journals are run entirely by volunteers with minimal overheads, which they meet themselves, and others are funded by institutional subsidies. Still others are funded by charging fees known as article processing charges (APCs) in order to publish articles.
    [Show full text]
  • THE UNIVERSAL EVOLUTION and the ORIGIN of LIFE Gennady
    THE UNIVERSAL EVOLUTION AND THE ORIGIN OF LIFE Gennady Shkliarevsky DOI: 10.13140/RG.2.2.18564.86404 Abstract: The origin of life occupies a very important place in the study of the evolution. Its liminal location between life and non-life poses special challenges to researchers who study this subject. Current approaches in studying the origin and evolution of early life are reductive: they either reduce the domain of non-life to the domain of life or vice versa. This contribution seeks to provide a perspective that would avoid reductionism of any kind. Its goal is to outline a frame that would include both domains and their respective evolutions as its particular cases. The study examines the main theoretical perspectives on the origin and evolution of early life and provides a constructive critique of these perspectives. An objective view requires viewing an object or a phenomenon from all available points of view. The goal of this contribution is not to prove the current perspectives wrong and to deny their achievements. It seeks to provide an angle that would be sufficiently wide and would allow synthesizing current perspectives for a comprehensive and objective interpretation of the origin and evolution of early life. In other words, it seeks to outline a frame for an objective view that will help understand life’s place within the universe. Key words: origin of life, prokaryotes, eukaryotes, multicellular life, process of creation, evolution, conservation, and levels of organization. Introduction Life is perhaps the most intimately familiar experience that all humans have. It begins even before we are born.
    [Show full text]
  • Research Futures Monitoring Framework
    Research Futures Monitoring Framework Supplementary report to the study by Elsevier and Ipsos MORI, published February 2019 See the full report: www.elsevier.com/connect/elsevier‐research‐futures‐report Through the charts in this report, we’ll track progress towards the scenarios we’ve imagined in our Research futures report. Monitor our page on Elsevier.com to follow updates to this report. Scenario one: Brave open world Globally, state funders and philanthropic organizations have joined forces and pushed through the creation of platforms where the research they fund must be published open access (OA). But the form of that OA varies by region; Europe is mostly gold, while North America and Asia Pacific is generally green. Rapid advances in artificial intelligence (AI) and technology mean these platforms are flourishing – they are interoperable, and content is easy to access and showcase. As a result, there are fewer subscription‐based journals. A number of broad science, gold OA megajournals with low article publishing charges exist to publish content not captured by open platforms. Major society journals remain active, many operating a gold OA model, but struggle for manuscript submissions, so revenue is low. Preprints thrive in this world and are linked to the final article versions, which are still recognized as the authoritative version. Researchers benefit from access to data in a variety of ways, for example, via bite‐sized publications and dynamic notebook‐style articles. The advances in AI and technology have also provided new methods of generating and communicating results. While research quality is still an important measure of performance, journal publication plays a diminishing role in determining a researcher’s career progress.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Journals
    SCIENCE ADVANCES | RESEARCH ARTICLE SOCIAL NETWORKS 2017 © The Authors, some rights reserved; The nearly universal link between the age of past exclusive licensee American Association knowledge and tomorrow’s breakthroughs in science for the Advancement of Science. Distributed and technology: The hotspot under a Creative Commons Attribution 1,2 1,2,3 1,4 1,2 NonCommercial Satyam Mukherjee, Daniel M. Romero, Ben Jones, Brian Uzzi * License 4.0 (CC BY-NC). Scientistsandinventorscandrawonanever-expanding literature for the building blocks of tomorrow’s ideas, yet little is known about how combinations of past work are related to future discoveries. Our analysis parameterizes the age distribution of a work’s references and revealed three links between the age of prior knowledge and hit papers and patents. First, works that cite literature with a low mean age and high age variance are in a citation “hotspot”;these works double their likelihood of being in the top 5% or better of citations. Second, the hotspot is nearly universal in all branches of science and technology and is increasingly predictive of a work’s future citation impact. Third, a scientist or inventor is significantly more likely to write a paper in the hotspot when they are coauthoring than whey they are working alone. Our findings are based on all 28,426,345 scientific papers in the Web of Science, 1945–2013, and all 5,382,833 U.S. patents, 1950–2010, and reveal new antecedents of high-impact science and the link between prior Downloaded from literature and tomorrow’s breakthrough ideas. INTRODUCTION new work, an idea reflected in Isaac Newton’sfamousremark,“If I have Scientists and inventors can combine information from an ever- seen further than others, it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants” expanding knowledge base dispersed across documents, experiments, (10).
    [Show full text]
  • Science Advances
    EDITORIAL Science Advances Marcia McNutt is Editor- THE MISSION OF THE NONPROFIT AMERICAN ASSOCIATION FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF SCIENCE in-Chief of Science. (AAAS), the publisher of Science, is to advance science for the benefi t of all humankind. Science contributes to that mission by communicating the very best research across the full range of scientifi c fi elds to an extremely broad international audience. The research enter- prise has grown dramatically in the past few decades in the number of high-quality practi- tioners and results, but the capacity for Science to accommodate those works in our journal has not kept pace. Its editors turn away papers that are potentially important, well written, of broad interest, and technically well executed. Although other journals provide publishing venues for more papers, many authors still desire to be published in Science, a journal known for its selectivity, high standards, rapid publication, and high visibility. To help meet this need, as well as expand the current content of Science so as to include even more diverse topics in science, engineering, technology, math- ematics, and the social sciences, AAAS will be launching, in early Alan I. Leshner is Chief 2015, a digital-only journal, Science Advances. Like Science, this Executive Offi cer of new publication is designed to encourage transformative research AAAS and Executive and serve a wide readership. Our view at AAAS is that science is Publisher of Science. becoming more integrated and interdisciplinary, and therefore we on February 19, 2014 prefer to provide one additional broad journal rather than a number of disciplinary titles, each with more limited scope, that would all have to be searched to fi nd the papers of most interest.
    [Show full text]
  • Science Journals — AAAS
    REVIEW MATERIALS SCIENCE 2016 © The Authors, some rights reserved; exclusive licensee American Association for the Advancement of Science. Distributed Self-organization in precipitation reactions far under a Creative Commons Attribution NonCommercial License 4.0 (CC BY-NC). from the equilibrium 10.1126/sciadv.1601144 Elias Nakouzi and Oliver Steinbock* Far from the thermodynamic equilibrium, many precipitation reactions create complex product structures with fascinating features caused by their unusual origins. Unlike the dissipative patterns in other self-organizing reactions, these features can be permanent, suggesting potential applications in materials science and engineering. We review four distinct classes of precipitation reactions, describe similarities and differences, and discuss related challenges for theoretical studies. These classes are hollow micro- and macrotubes in chemical gardens, polycrystalline silica carbon- ate aggregates (biomorphs), Liesegang bands, and propagating precipitation-dissolution fronts. In many cases, these systems show intricate structural hierarchies that span from the nanometer scale into the macroscopic world. We Downloaded from summarize recent experimental progress that often involves growth under tightly regulated conditions by means of wet stamping, holographic heating, and controlled electric, magnetic, or pH perturbations. In this research field, progress requires mechanistic insights that cannot be derived from experiments alone. We discuss how mesoscopic aspects of the product structures can be modeled by reaction-transport equations and suggest important targets for future studies that should also include materials features at the nanoscale. http://advances.sciencemag.org/ INTRODUCTION The rational design of systems that create complex materials and func- is not surprising that reaction-transport phenomena are ubiquitous in tional devices by externally controlled self-organization holds great nature and represent the de facto mode of operation in living systems.
    [Show full text]