Alejandro Montenegro

bsky.app/profile/aemo...

Subscriptions allows us to put together curated and high-quality content in a sustainable manner. And in many venues, at zero cost for the authors.

Preprint mandates enable access while maintaining a healthy publishing ecosystem devoid of predatory and "questionable" journals/publishers

This should remind us of a very important thing in sci publishing: please take your time with the decision letter.

What at first may seem terrible or unfair, may turn out not to be like that once you think about it for a bit.

Also, don't impulse-reply to the editor. Again, please take your time 😊

On Gold Open Access...

www.linkedin.com/feed/update/...

Thanks!

Thanks!

which has been argued to encourage group thinking

Yes, we have it on our list, thanks!

Any suggestions/recommendations for a tool that would allow the audience at a conference to ask questions, but...

a. Those could only be seen by a moderator, with the relevant app and permissions (so that the moderator would ask the question on the person's behalf)
b. can be asked anonymously

Thx!

That's what has been happening in NYC, yes

📷Cover image info: cshprotocols.cshlp.org/content/2025...

📒Full issue: cshprotocols.cshlp.org/content/2025...

A new issue of CSH Protocols is out!

The cover image highlights a series of articles by Yang et al.,who describe a complete workflow for the generation of antigen binders from a chicken library, from immunization to the screening of the phage display library.

⬇️Links below

CRISPR-GPT for agentic automation of gene-editing experiments - Nature Biomedical Engineering An agent-based large language model (LLM) tool helps with CRISPR-based gene-editing experimental design and analysis.

"We present CRISPR-GPT, an LLM agent system to automate and enhance CRISPR-based gene-editing design and data analysis."

www.nature.com/articles/s41...

❤️

I commented already and said exactly this

#ThankYourEditor♥️

Our pleasure. Thank you for sharing your work with us.

Published in CSH Protocols :)

Only 2 months away!

Excited about the 4th edition of the premier meeting in Latin America on gene regulation: @molbiosystems.bsky.social

Looking forward to being around friends and colleagues, and learning about the latest advances in the field #mbiosys25

Guest Post - Society Publishers at a Crossroads: New Evidence of an Accelerating Crisis - The Scholarly Kitchen A recent survey of 66 learned societies (primarily in the UK) revealed a revenue crisis which threatens the very existence of community-driven publishing, and by extension learned societies themselves...

"Without urgent collaborative action, we risk losing the very publishers where society expertise and community connections are most valuable."

And yes, OA mandates have played a major role here...

scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org/2025/07/30/g...

It's odd to think an index is useless and then consciously decide to go against the criteria the indexer has for inclusion in their index, and then complain about being removed from the index and call for the indexer to change

I agree. Mine is mostly a rant against Gold OA and against funder mandates on journal versions instead of on the versions produced solely by their fundees.

I'm gonna leave this here 😅

bsky.app/profile/aemo...

The latter is not the case, though. Because some funders REQUIRE that the VoR is the version that is OA, which forces authors to submit to journals that offer that, in many cases paying an APC. My position is that any availability requirement should be met simply with the preprint

I'll just say that the 'accepted version' is not necessarily the same as the VoR. There can be significant changes post acceptance depending on the workflow of a specific journal.

If you are an "FFPE expert", could I ask you a few questions?

Let me know and I'll DM you 😊

Please RT

"Publisher X accepts everything!" "Publisher Y has no standards!"

At those publishers, each of those papers very often lists the corresponding academic editor & reviewers

There are multiple things that go wrong when those papers make it through. Part of our role as publishers, is to identify those

I do not. I was just saying that I think dissemination (and any access requirement) should be uncoupled from journal-organized peer review. And if a funder wants to demand access, they should do only to the version that was solely produced by the fundee: the preprint.

Thanks!

I envision sort of like "Tools of the Trade" -type articles (see www.nature.com/nrg/articles...)

bsky.app/profile/aemo...