David has published 3 papers on top journals in 2010, one in Nature, one in Science and the other in Geophysical Research Letters. Two of them are single-authored papers. He has published 5 Nature papers and 1 Science paper so far. How did he make it? We interviewed him and he is willing to share with us some thoughts ...
Publishing 3 papers in top journals (Nature, Science and Geophysical Research Letters) within 6 months is unbelievable. Can you describe the process?
Of course the work that went into these papers took much longer than 6 months. I think one of the most important parts is to maintain a big-picture outlook as far as what are the important questions to be answered. Then I try to figure out how to break down the much larger problem into small concrete steps. I think it also helps to evaluate your current strengths in a topic and then think about how you can best capitalize on these strengths for future work.
In layman's language, what did you discover and what makes it publish in Nature and Science?
I was investigating a phenomenon called "tectonic tremor". Tremor is a weak vibration of the earth recorded on seismometers, discovered quite recently (the first paper on the phenomenon was published in 2002). It appears to reflect many tiny earthquakes occurring in succession, and occurs on the deep extension of some faults, below the zone that generates regular earthquakes. One place that generates tremor is the central San Andreas fault in California. Because of the small amplitude and overlapping events, methods typically used to identify and locate earthquakes do not work well for tremor. I worked to partially overcome these challenges by using a matched filter technique, where ground velocity data is compared to a series of known "template events." This technique allowed tremor to be identified and located better than previously possible, enabling me to create a catalog of activity for the past several years. This catalog contains more than 500,000 events, reflecting complex patterns of slip on the deep San Andreas fault.
My recent papers have concentrated on the locations, physical mechanism, and temporal patterns of the tremor. This activity is especially interesting because it provides a means of illuminating behavior of parts of faults where we previously had very little information. This is important from a fundamental perspective (understanding the physics of deformation in these areas) and also from a practical standpoint, since slip on the deep fault may increase stress on the shallower part of the fault where earthquakes occur. It's like having a new type of instrument, but we're just starting to deploy it.
It’s becoming rare to publish single-authored papers in many fields such as biology. Is it still common in geophysics? Which one is easier for you, publishing alone or with other coauthors?
Single author papers are not unusual in geophysics, but many of these papers, including mine, rely heavily on community investments, such as seismic recording networks, whose data is made publicly available. In addition, even when you publish alone, it's critical to get other perspectives on the work. I benefited greatly from constructive reviews, especially those from colleagues before journal submission.
How do you like the manuscript handling process with Nature and Science? How did you handle reviewers' criticism?
I think it's important to be as responsive as possible to reviews. It's easy to think that a particular reviewer didn't understand an issue, but at the end of the day, it's your responsibility as an author to make the paper and its important points clear to the readers. So you have to consider that if a particular reviewer reacts in a certain way to the paper, it's likely that others will react this way also.
What practical tips do you have for students and postdocs to publish in a good journal such as Nature or Science?
Nature and Science are most attracted to papers that address important "big picture" problems in science. You have to be clear about why the problem you are addressing is important (and interesting!), and why your work presents a significant advance in understanding this problem. Since Nature and Science reject most papers before detailed peer-review, being able to communicate these things in the cover-letter and abstract is critical.
A biology student spends most of his time by the bench or staring at computers. What do you usually do in your work? Do you go to the fields often? Do you work often at night or weekend?
Most of my work is on the computer, although I occasionally go the field. I don't generally work on nights and weekends, but sometimes make an exception when there's a deadline or something I'm really excited about.
