GenesForLife wrote:We haven't really had one for a long time now, candidate papers? MedGen taking charge and the paper I found on Chromothripsis ?

Abstract
To understand the emergence of Darwinian evolution, it is necessary to identify physical mechanisms that enabled primitive cells to compete with one another. Whereas all modern cell membranes are composed primarily of diacyl or dialkyl glycerol hospholipids, the first cell membranes are thought to have self-assembled from simple, single-chain lipids synthesized in the environment. We asked what selective advantage could have driven the transition from primitive to modern membranes, especially during early stages characterized by low levels of membrane phospholipid. Here we demonstrate that surprisingly low levels of phospholipids can drive protocell membrane growth during competition for single-chain lipids. Growth results from the decreasing fatty acid efflux from membranes with increasing phospholipid content. The ability to synthesize phospholipids from single-chain substrates would have therefore been highly advantageous for early cells competing for a limited supply of lipids. We show that the resulting increase in membrane phospholipid content would have led to a cascade of new selective pressures for the evolution of metabolic and transport machinery to overcome the reduced membrane permeability of diacyl lipid membranes. The evolution of phospholipid membranes could thus have been a deterministic outcome of intrinsic physical processes and a key driving force for early cellular evolution.

Mr.Samsa wrote:I imagine that the problem is this bit:

3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

This is why you can't copy and paste an entire news article and post it on a forum. So it would be illegal to distribute a full version of a copyrighted article (which is any that has been published), but it's fair use to reproduce sections of it for educational purposes.

Darwinsbulldog wrote:

Mr.Samsa wrote:I imagine that the problem is this bit:

3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and

This is why you can't copy and paste an entire news article and post it on a forum. So it would be illegal to distribute a full version of a copyrighted article (which is any that has been published), but it's fair use to reproduce sections of it for educational purposes.

So what about copying the Methods and Results sections of a paper, and the thesis? Because these are the educational "meat" of a paper. Posting just the discussion and conclusion [or abstract] really tells us nothing-we do not know how the authors got to a particular conclusion. Likewise, just publishing results does not tell us much, because one needs to know the methodology of how they obtained and massaged their data. Just the methods alone may allow you to repeat the experiment, but that does not tell you much about the published work, because you are ignorant of their results and discussion.

In short, there is limited value [at best] in copying and posting only part of a paper, so the educational value is in conflict with the Intellectual Property concerns.

So I say we boycott all papers that are not Open Access in the Journal Club thread.

mjpam wrote:Has anyone had the time to review the article?

Is there still any interest in the journal club?