sterben

There is no doubt that the Human Genome Project has launched a golden age of genetic research. That said, it also seems to have set the stage for many other "Big Science" projects such as HapMap, 1000 Genomes Project, ENCODE, and now the new announcement of the Brain Activity Map. Given the current landscape of academic research funding, what are your thoughts regarding the tradeoff between funding many R01 "small lab" research projects and the potential advancement gained from funding these large consortium projects?

You describe eLife as publishing the "most important advances in the life and biomedical sciences". Other than journal reputation / historic presence and accessibility (open access), how does this differ from the goals and current status of CNS? Specifically, when you start judging science based on some level of "significance", aren't you falling into the same trap as other publishers or are you planning on publishing -everything- that meets your significance criteria? Is there anything you are doing different to judge this criteria, or is more of the standard pre-publication peer review type of system?