I'm just about finished with a manuscript that summarizes the work I've been doing for the last year or so. I'm happy with how the research and results turned out, my analyses are solid, and I have drawn some interesting conclusions.
The research involved two subspecies that hybridize, and I used microsatellites (a genetic marker) to characterize the hybrids and better define the hybrid zone. The part that shows the genetic composition of individuals along the hybrid zone - grading from one subspecies to the other - is a classic example of hybridization. All that is good.
My supervisor doesn't like the introduction to the paper, and there's one bit of the discussion where I can't explain part of the results. This is completely due to the fact that I'm working with a critter instead of plants, as I have a good handle on the plant literature.
So I need to wait for my supervisor to rewrite part of the introduction, and come up with a reason why two introduced (i.e. non-native) subspecies would show different amounts of genetic diversity. The one in the south has little, the one in the north has a bunch.
Meanwhile, I'm starting some other stuff, and it feels really good to be back in the lab. I just have to wait for my very busy boss to find the time to sit down with my paper and apply his knowledge of the organism to my paper.
It IS good to be almost done with it, and (this is so geeky) I'm going to submit it to my favorite journal.
How's that going, by the way, with the submission? Which journal is your favorite?
ReplyDeleteI myself always liked the name Oikos, although I have no opinions on its content.
Now that I'm on the other side of the coin as a journal editor, I've completely stopped all efforts on my own stuff. Ugh.
On a more serendipitous note, I work with a fellow here who was best buds in grad school with Steingraeber. S said this guy taught him how to spelunk on double-dates with his girlfriend (now wife). Crazy.