Co-publishing?

[solitude]

---

Members do not see this ad.

So the grad student and the PI with whom I've been working for about a year think that we might get scooped by a lab that is larger and has more resources, and can thereby pump out the necessary experiments faster than the two of us. One raised the possibility of co-publishing, since (if our presumptions are correct), our lab and the other basically have the same story. They said that you can just contact the other lab and propose separate but concurrent publications in the same journal, in order to ensure that one lab doesn't get powned. How does everybody feel about this? Any experience with this type of situation? Our only alternative is simply to bust balls and get this paper out ASAP. We're meeting tomorrow morning to talk about the paper and the possibilities, but I was just wondering what the wise members of this board think about the situation. If it matters, the probable journal for publication (based on previous, arguably weaker publications in this area) is one of Nature, Science, Cell, PNAS (I don't want to reveal the exact journal for my paranoid fear of identifying the area of research and lab).

 

[Ecthgar]

So the grad student and the PI with whom I've been working for about a year think that we might get scooped by a lab that is larger and has more resources, and can thereby pump out the necessary experiments faster than the two of us. One raised the possibility of co-publishing, since (if our presumptions are correct), our lab and the other basically have the same story. They said that you can just contact the other lab and propose separate but concurrent publications in the same journal, in order to ensure that one lab doesn't get powned. How does everybody feel about this? Any experience with this type of situation? Our only alternative is simply to bust balls and get this paper out ASAP. We're meeting tomorrow morning to talk about the paper and the possibilities, but I was just wondering what the wise members of this board think about the situation. If it matters, the probable journal for publication (based on previous, arguably weaker publications in this area) is one of Nature, Science, Cell, PNAS (I don't want to reveal the exact journal for my paranoid fear of identifying the area of research and lab).

From my experience, you can never really trust other labs/PI's that don't have a vested interest in your work......ESPCECIALLY in this situation. The other lab you speak of doesn't gain anything by publishing concurrent papers in a top-tier journal with you....to the contrary, they may actually be hurt. If they know they can scoop you, turst me they will. And besides this, (except for the rare case like sequencing the human genome) publishing concurrent papers in Nature, Science, PNAS, ect. will probably not happen. Those guys are always having to weed out great papers for space......why would they want to take up more space with another paper showing the same results? Basically, if you want this publication you need to scoop THEM. I imagine what will happen is one lab will get Nature (if its good enough of course) and the other will get a mid to low tier journal in your specific field. Labs are scooped all the time.....don't negotiate with them, beat them at their own game. Anyway, just my two pennies.

 

[Shatterstar17]

That's definitely all true, but people do copublish all the time in Science and Nature. Just in this week's issue (in Nature) was a copublish on what looks to be pretty definitive evidence on Golgi physiology (in yeast). In fact I bet Nature copublishes something big maybe even once every 2 or 3 issues (I get a free subscription at work, couldn't say about Science or Cell or PNAS). If you can avoid acrimony, why not..

 

[Vader]

Yes, I have definitely seen many papers co-published in Nature, Science and Cell. If the story is interesting and high-impact, the editors would mostly likely be interested.

 

[passion4atcg]

So the grad student and the PI with whom I've been working for about a year think that we might get scooped by a lab that is larger and has more resources, and can thereby pump out the necessary experiments faster than the two of us. One raised the possibility of co-publishing, since (if our presumptions are correct), our lab and the other basically have the same story. They said that you can just contact the other lab and propose separate but concurrent publications in the same journal, in order to ensure that one lab doesn't get powned. How does everybody feel about this? Any experience with this type of situation? Our only alternative is simply to bust balls and get this paper out ASAP. We're meeting tomorrow morning to talk about the paper and the possibilities, but I was just wondering what the wise members of this board think about the situation. If it matters, the probable journal for publication (based on previous, arguably weaker publications in this area) is one of Nature, Science, Cell, PNAS (I don't want to reveal the exact journal for my paranoid fear of identifying the area of research and lab).

Don't jump to conclusions until you actually get accepted. Nature, Science, and Cell are very hard to get accepted to and it will probably take a while to submit, review, accept. So basically, before you start worrying about these top journals, actually see if you don't get rejected.

 

[passion4atcg]

So the grad student and the PI with whom I've been working for about a year think that we might get scooped by a lab that is larger and has more resources, and can thereby pump out the necessary experiments faster than the two of us. One raised the possibility of co-publishing, since (if our presumptions are correct), our lab and the other basically have the same story. They said that you can just contact the other lab and propose separate but concurrent publications in the same journal, in order to ensure that one lab doesn't get powned. How does everybody feel about this? Any experience with this type of situation? Our only alternative is simply to bust balls and get this paper out ASAP. We're meeting tomorrow morning to talk about the paper and the possibilities, but I was just wondering what the wise members of this board think about the situation. If it matters, the probable journal for publication (based on previous, arguably weaker publications in this area) is one of Nature, Science, Cell, PNAS (I don't want to reveal the exact journal for my paranoid fear of identifying the area of research and lab).

Don't jump to conclusions until you actually get accepted. Nature, Science, and Cell are very hard to get accepted to and it will probably take a while to submit, review, accept. So basically, before you start worrying about these top journals, lets see if you don't get rejected. I'm just being honest.

 

[solitude]

From my experience, you can never really trust other labs/PI's that don't have a vested interest in your work......ESPCECIALLY in this situation. The other lab you speak of doesn't gain anything by publishing concurrent papers in a top-tier journal with you....to the contrary, they may actually be hurt. If they know they can scoop you, turst me they will. And besides this, (except for the rare case like sequencing the human genome) publishing concurrent papers in Nature, Science, PNAS, ect. will probably not happen. Those guys are always having to weed out great papers for space......why would they want to take up more space with another paper showing the same results? Basically, if you want this publication you need to scoop THEM. I imagine what will happen is one lab will get Nature (if its good enough of course) and the other will get a mid to low tier journal in your specific field. Labs are scooped all the time.....don't negotiate with them, beat them at their own game. Anyway, just my two pennies.

So we pretty much came to a consensus in line with your advice. We do think it is high-impact and will probably merit a publication in one of these journals, but the other lab really doesn't have anything to gain from co-publishing with us. Thus, we have decided to go for broke. Hopefully we scoop them before they scoop us.

 

[MasonPrehealth]

I'm not sure what you mean by co-publishing. When I was at Duke, I arranged it with another lab to have back-to-back manuscripts in the same journal because both of our studies complemented each other. But I did not really arrange this with that lab prior to publishing; rather it was facilitated by a "special issue" editor (in my case). I'd suggest that the PI's talk to each other, but don't lose your momentum hoping to co-pub.

 

[solitude]

I'm not sure what you mean by co-publishing. When I was at Duke, I arranged it with another lab to have back-to-back manuscripts in the same journal because both of our studies complemented each other. But I did not really arrange this with that lab prior to publishing; rather it was facilitated by a "special issue" editor (in my case). I'd suggest that the PI's talk to each other, but don't lose your momentum hoping to co-pub.

To my understanding, competing labs that both make the same discovery roughly concurrently will occasionally communicate and submit independent publications of the same discovery in the same issue of a journal to ensure that neither is scooped. This co-publication usually doesn't take place in a special issue edition. This practice is somewhat common in Science, Nature, Cell, etc., as noted above.

 

[MasonPrehealth]

No, it's not the norm to have it done in a special issue; it just was in my case. But yes, normally the PI's and the labs would be communicating with each other and write independent manuscripts.