Whew!

Whirlwind final three days at work prior to my vacay. Trying to wrap up the last of the reviewer comments for my 100+ day peer-review manuscript. Why must they suggest removing the most difficult figures/tables to replicate in the text? They're big because they condense a lot of information into a single figure/table! Like they say, a picture says a million words (or a million data points as the case may be), no? Of course, that's the worst of the review, so I should be thankful. Here is hoping this is accepted by the time I return from my lighthouse gazing! Then received a rough draft of a paper I'm doing with a collaborator in which my lab performed a fair number of RISA's. It was the first time we used this particular RISA protocol, and we're publishing results done with the protocol a couple of times this year, but I have to admit ... despite my reasons to use RISA over T-RFLP to begin with, we're switching to T-RFLP, which seems a whole lot cleaner. I'm sure my lab appreciates me having them perfect this RISA protocol over three or so months only to change directions nine months later. Besides, using a designed pair of ligated linker ends, getting sequence on these fragments is now possible. That sort of eliminates RISAs main "pro". Anyways, have to modify a couple of my figures, which is no biggie now that I've finally managed to nail down Photoshop Elements (thanks confocal microscopy class!). Good thing I saved the TIFs with their prospective documenting layers.

And I want to do the Isis transcript meme! I just need to find a copy of my undergrad transcripts. Wonder if HR will give me a copy.