Stephen Royle

I'm into chord changes and cell biology.

Professor at University of Warwick. Director of The Company of Biologists. Affiliate of bioRxiv. Author of "The Digital Cell". Views are my own and do not represent any organisation I am associated with.

#CellBiology #MembraneTrafficking #CellDivision #Microscopy #ImageAnalysis #Science #ScienceMastodon #Academia #AcademicMastodon and #Music #Running #Cycling

Public Key

npub1x2hhwy3lf9hkhsa83t9u39jl6xgsfpdxvz5jj6s4ndqwj55z5lds4vty0w

NIP-05 Address

steveroyle@biologists-social.mostr.pub

Profile Code

nprofile1qqsr9tmhzgl5jmmtcwnc4j7gje0arygysknxp2ffdg2eks8f22p20kcpz4mhxue69uhhyetvv9ujuerfw36x7tnsw43qxw9hvn

Publishing to

relay.ditto.pub

Author Public Key

npub1x2hhwy3lf9hkhsa83t9u39jl6xgsfpdxvz5jj6s4ndqwj55z5lds4vty0w

Show more details

Last Notes

2026-04-29 09:24:40 UTC

These tips are great. #1 I needed earlier this week! Ended up hacking a solution. #2 and #3 I wish i'd known last week when faffing around with font sizes.
#nevent1q…pw4x

2026-04-27 15:58:33 UTC

New from UKRI: a change in policy around OA.
"Funding will continue to support transitional agreements, but from 2028/29 UKRI funding will focus on fully OA publishing and will no longer be available for hybrid OA.
We will also work in partnership to make targeted investments that strengthen Green OA and repository infrastructure.” ... "more details in the coming months”
Caution: this is a LinkedIn link.
https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7454463005188210688/

2026-04-22 12:46:00 UTC

New Value: increasing cost of UKRI research grants
https://quantixed.org/2026/04/22/new-value-increasing-cost-of-ukri-research-grants/
#funding #funding #GtR #research #Rstats #UKRI

2026-04-17 06:46:14 UTC

Guess who's back? Back again.
(context in ALT)
#Microslop #CopilotZombie
https://cdn.masto.host/biologistssocial/media_attachments/files/116/418/698/762/784/886/original/c1af8d03058a96c7.png
https://cdn.masto.host/biologistssocial/media_attachments/files/116/418/698/998/850/109/original/e60e84a12bbf60e5.png

2026-04-15 09:20:59 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…yx65 my first thought is - as a reviewer - I would love to review them! Maybe not love but I’d prefer that over a multipart long form used for most things. In fact I could see reviewing five or so in a round being less work than one current proposal.

2026-04-11 21:01:50 UTC

Artemis II photos. Some wonderful shots here.
HT @nprofile…3rm8
https://www.flickr.com/photos/nasa2explore/albums/72177720307234654/

2026-03-30 11:25:28 UTC

Unique opportunity to lead the most wonderful not-for-profit scientific publishing organisation (slightly biased here). The Company of Biologists is searching for a CEO.
https://www.inspiredselection.com/jobs/jo0000015727/chief-executive-officer

2026-03-25 10:19:17 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…yx65 OK. But currently, I write a proposal and my colleagues give me feedback (this won't work, have you thought of this). Then I submit it and the reviewers give me more feedback to hone the plan. There's no hiding details beyond not having space to describe everything. And I think an applicant needs to say how they would tackle the question to know that it is tractable. So, there's independent critical opinion already in the current process.

2026-03-25 09:43:39 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…yx65 I can see this working for some fields, in the way that pre-registration works for research that can be planned and executed linearly. IME wet lab experimental science is more messy and convoluted. A back-and-forth with a committee could hone a perfect plan on paper, and even with consensus that this is the best approach, failure is a likely outcome (for unforeseen reasons). To quote Mike Tyson "everyone has a plan until they get punched in the mouth”.

2026-03-09 22:02:01 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…yx65 my prediction is meaningless drivel. Using this as evidence:
https://www.reddit.com/r/ChatGPT/comments/1kbj71z/i_tried_the_create_the_exact_replica_of_this/

2026-03-08 20:29:26 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…63pg Direct Submission is the same as at any other journal. The unusual one is Contributed, where NAS members get a privileged track to submit their work.

2026-03-02 15:13:15 UTC

First two months of 2026 in #PeerReview
I've reviewed:
4 papers
3 grant applications
I've submitted:
1 paper
1 grant application
so I've “requested” ~6 reviews from the system.
So I'm in credit at the Bank of Peer Review so far.
#LifeOfPI

2026-02-28 06:57:45 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…e5qa @nprofile…rweu @nprofile…ywj0 hell yes, go for it!!

2026-02-24 07:36:11 UTC

In fact, Yoda and Mace Windu failed to do a proper risk assessment for the Jedi. The whole nine-film series is a cautionary tale about Health & Safety in the workplace.
#nevent1q…pkha

2026-02-23 11:27:20 UTC

Rewatching the Star Wars films. It seems Palpatine has no problem finding Jedis to turn to the dark side: Dooku, Annekin, Maul(?) I feel that the Jedi organisation lacks sufficient workplace training about the risks of the dark side.
A one-day workshop with a six-monthly online refresher course (with a PDF certificate they can download) should do it!
#StarWars #Academia

2026-02-23 07:47:45 UTC

Flyer for an “Improve your writing" workshop for postdocs has an AI slop graphic on it. Not sure that's sending the right message….

2026-02-17 09:33:18 UTC

Latest statement from Ian Chapman (UKRI CEO) on the changes at UKRI.
"UKRI CEO updates the research community on areas of uncertainty”
https://www.ukri.org/news/ukri-ceo-updates-the-research-community/

2026-02-03 07:39:37 UTC

If you're interested in divesting yourself of US-based tech and reducing your digital footprint, there's plenty of guides to help (like these two).
https://disconnect.blog/getting-off-us-tech-a-guide/
https://www.optoutproject.net/tags/cleanse/

2025-08-21 06:22:21 UTC

This poll made me laugh. Isn’t it amazing that not a single person (out of 1,386) clicked yes. Even in error.
https://cdn.masto.host/biologistssocial/media_attachments/files/115/065/312/876/984/863/original/276a1bb759bff418.png

2025-08-01 07:08:13 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…5wev love Ezra Collective. Such joyous music!

2025-07-30 14:54:43 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk @nprofile…xm42 that's one way to view it. The other way is that if there's no criteria you get people with no outputs wanting a promotion, or you get favouritism and nepotism and all kinds of other behaviours coming in to play.

2025-07-30 14:23:59 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…xm42 @nprofile…cvwk it's not really though. Your Uni needs some promotion criteria and it needs to be tied somehow to scientific output, which is fine. Promotions do increase salary, also fine. It's tenuous whether IF is definitely used at your Uni to decide this, but even if so, there are many factors that go into a promotion decision. So IMHO it's a long way from 10,000 yuan x 1.5 x IF bonuses per paper.

2025-07-30 13:37:34 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…xm42 a cynical person might conclude that they just use journal impact factor (in fact a post-hoc analysis of a previous REF suggests that if they had done exactly that, they would have got the same outcome!). Folks on the panels say that they use a range of metrics, e.g. imagine a paper in a low-IF journal but is highly cited.
It is to some extent correlated: a Nature paper is likely to be a 4* paper because the panel can easily see that. But a Nature Comms paper can be amazing or meh…

2025-07-30 13:15:00 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…xm42 4* is “world-leading", 3* is "internationally excellent but short of the highest standards”. How it's determined is by the panel that the papers are submitted to.
The official line is that the panel read each and every paper (even though to do this is not possible due to diversity of topics and time available). The reality is that it’s informed by metrics and is an appraisal of the title and abstract. A cynical person might give you a different answer about how it is done.

2025-07-23 08:40:27 UTC

Got to Inbox Zero so promptly closed my email client.
If I don't see the next email come in, it doesn’t exist, right?
#TreeFallsInAForest #LifeOfPI

2025-07-22 16:55:33 UTC

Colleague A sends manuscript to me and Colleague B, asking for comments. Colleague B replies a couple of minutes later to say that he's quickly read it and noticed that one of his papers* is not cited. 😆
#LifeOfPI
* = to be fair, it was a VERY relevant paper.

2025-07-18 05:24:36 UTC

2023 paper in Nature that claimed that science has become less disruptive over time is challenged.
It is argued here that a dataset artefact (exclusion) can explain the reported effect.
https://arxiv.org/abs/2402.14583

2025-07-16 17:12:47 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk I agree and I do value and respect groups that follow this approach. Not sure vast swathes of my field are motivated to meet those ideals though. I remain hopeful for change!

2025-07-16 10:14:11 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk I agree with your points here. Just to say that a conversation with a “public understanding of science” person years ago woke me up to the fact that the public really have no idea about peer review or that it even happens in science. While peer review may be cursory/dubious at some places, the fact that there is any checking going on is superior to all other (unverified) messaging that the public receive.

2025-07-14 11:58:01 UTC

Interesting post on the important limitations of #AlphaFold in helping us to truly understand protein structure and function.
Sorry, the post is on substack.
https://clauswilke.substack.com/p/no-alphafold-has-not-completely-solved

2025-07-09 07:49:45 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk ha ha. I just checked and someone has already registered warwickX dot com and imperialX dot com…

2025-07-09 07:01:54 UTC

My university has recently had a rebrand (details in Alt text). The tagline is “This is Beyond”.
Hilariously, Birmingham City University - which is 25 km away - recently rebranded their website to read “Beyonder”.
https://cdn.masto.host/biologistssocial/media_attachments/files/114/821/988/714/098/711/original/d9dd341d57d983f4.png
https://cdn.masto.host/biologistssocial/media_attachments/files/114/821/988/993/784/452/original/df927e4049d61344.png

2025-07-08 06:16:37 UTC

A colleague showed me a disturbing interaction with Gemini (AI/LLM).
Asked for an interpretation of a scientific result, it suggested something and hallucinated a paper to support its idea (no news here). Upon repeated questioning and showing that the paper did not exist, the AI showed really disturbing behaviour.
1/2

2025-06-29 10:01:46 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…5wev OK, I sort of assumed that they wouldn’t last long out of captivity. @nprofile…9374 is saying something similar in a different reply.

2025-06-29 09:39:45 UTC

Beyond the usual sheep and rabbits, the wildlife highlights of my xc run this morning were a grey heron, a stoat/mink thing, some peacocks and finally a bright green parrot (this must have escaped from a nearby house). All quite surreal.
#running

2025-06-13 11:15:10 UTC

A lab member sent this photo of an ongoing situation around the back of the Medical School.
So many questions…
https://cdn.masto.host/biologistssocial/media_attachments/files/114/675/764/844/754/872/original/8365d33180ff5efc.jpeg

2025-05-23 11:38:23 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…2386 I enjoyed this post. Can I ask whether you had fun making the deliberately bad chart?!

2025-05-08 18:24:57 UTC

This is a fascinating #dataviz of taxation rates in different European countries. Hungary has a brutal flat rate across income brackets.
https://www.datawrapper.de/blog/progressive-tax-rates-europe

2025-05-02 16:20:46 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk that makes sense. I was imaging a more complicated scenario of book chapters being assigned the year of first edition or something. Someone with the same name is bound to cause confusion to the system!!

2025-04-09 12:23:31 UTC

Two rounds of review for this manuscript. I hope we don't go to a third because my #TeXLaTeX skills don't stretch to making another layer of indentation for the rebuttal letter.
#HeSaidSheSaid #LifeOfPI

2025-04-02 08:55:44 UTC

Nature News story covering @nprofile…5d76's experiment with paying peer reviewers.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00968-6

2025-03-29 20:29:22 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…s0cr some youtube yoga could help? Kassandra or Adriene have neck and shoulders videos that I've found are good for loosening off a strain, and they're gentle enough to not make it worse.

2025-03-18 10:48:17 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk that's a great story! There's merit in repeating work and two studies are unlikely to be completely overlapping I guess. But that story makes me sad that we're supposed to build on knowledge not reinvent the wheel every time. I doubt poor scholarship is to blame most of the time. I think we could vastly improve the searchability of past literature (I mean, a lot of it is not properly searchable for a start).

2025-03-18 10:17:09 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…cvwk curious how you didn’t come across the paper earlier. No shade intended. It’s hard to unearth all previous work that's relevant to a project. I guess the peer reviewers weren't aware of this paper either?

2025-03-13 09:12:20 UTC

PROOFS! Fully aware that this is a joyous occasion rather than something to whine about. However…
I think the #1 thing that would help with checking proofs would be for the journal to provide a plain text diff so it is possible to see what has been changed by the copy editors.
These days, the fancy online proofing web tools don't make it easy to copy the text out and diff it yourself.
#LifeOfPI

2025-03-06 19:53:37 UTC

Standing offer: any ECRs out there who have a paper stuck awaiting approval on bioRxiv (especially if you need it for an application), hmu and I will screen it.
https://biologists.social/@steveroyle/114116718927655398

2025-03-06 17:42:22 UTC

I don't think I am breaking any confidences in saying that the bioRxiv queue is completely crazy right now.
Increased preprinting/output/research activity? Possibly
Affiliates struggling to find bandwidth for screening? Likely
Situation in US contributing to both? Wouldn’t bet against it!

2025-03-04 10:01:12 UTC

Weren’t Springer Nature in the “don’t use AI to do your peer reviewing as it will compromise confidentiality” camp?
Today: a how-to guide to use AI to boost your reviewing activity.
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-025-00526-0
#academicchatter

2025-02-19 10:32:25 UTC

IDEA: a linter for Microsoft Word that fixes all the units in science manuscripts.
Brought to you by someone who had this covered with siunitx in #TeXLaTeX and now has to submit a Word version to the journal.

2025-02-13 11:50:15 UTC

- reply

@nprofile…xm42 well, they say you shouldn't believe what you read in the papers… I'm not sure. Dorothy's post yesterday had more info on what has been happening (parallel to these letters) at the RS https://deevybee.blogspot.com/2025/02/seven-reasons-for-keeping-elon-musk-as.html @nprofile…zxue @nprofile…xsjt

2025-02-13 10:39:07 UTC

The Daily Mirror cover @nprofile…zxue’s letter to the Royal Society on their continued inaction over Musk.
https://mastodonapp.uk/@cambskeptics/113996005642078004