BioNB 392 Research Paper

BioNB 392 - Drugs and the Brain

Research Paper Instructions

General:
The research paper should be written in the form of a grant proposal to the NIH, to address a specific problem in neuropharmacology that you find interesting. Since this is a neurobiology course, a purely psychological or sociological problem (with no neurobiological methods) is not acceptable; however, many psychological issues can now be addressed with neurobiological approaches (such as brain imaging), which is fine. You should start thinking about your topic early, since many of the publications in neuropharmacology are not available locally or on line, and can only be obtained by (free) interlibrary loan accessed from the Cornell Library web page, http://www.library.cornell.edu/.

Coming up with an idea:
This is often the major problem for students just entering a field. We recommend that you start out reading our textbook about the topic (or drug) that you might be interested in. It is up to date and has some major references that can then be followed up with the Science Citation Index (SCI) for new publications. Read through the chapter, asking yourself which areas are interesting, and looking for questions that have not yet been answered. I will also be mentioning research areas that are not understood in my lectures. As you come up with an idea, then go to the original literature (using PubMed and SCI) to find out what other people have already published on this topic. As you do this, read critically, and try to look for questions that have not yet been fully answered (often these are mentioned in the discussion of the paper), and to which you have a possible answer. We discuss the use of the basic methods of neuropharmacology in class, and you should try to apply those to your idea. You are of course not allowed to select one of the questions designed for our discussion sections, but if your preparation for the section raises additional questions in your mind, you are welcome to pursue them. The major thing is to make the question very concrete and focused, not vague. For example, “looking for cures for schizophrenia” is too vague, but “understanding the effects of the atypical neuroleptic clozapine on the D4 receptor” is more to the point. I encourage you to come and discuss your ideas with me, and I will help you find references and think about experimental plans to answer the question.

Annotated bibliography:
This is due on Thursday, Oct. 25 in class. It should be no more than one page long, and should show your plans for your paper. Write 2-3 sentences to set the stage for your problem, rapidly zeroing in from the general to the specific problem you have chosen. You should very succinctly state your idea or hypothesis in a few sentences. In a short paragraph, outline your preliminary plans for the experiments to test your hypothesis (this should all be less than half a page total). Then list at least 5 critical papers that you have identified from PubMed or SCI (or any source) which show that you have worked on the literature review of who has done what on your problem. We will read these preliminary proposals and get them back to you ASAP with our comments and criticisms.

Final paper:
This is due on Tuesday, Nov. 27, though it can be turned in earlier. In accordance with NIH regulations on deadlines, late papers will not be accepted. It should be in the form of an NIH grant proposal, although shorter and focusing on only one major question. Think of it as work you might be able to do, for example, during several years of work for a senior honors thesis, or conceivably as a Ph.D. project. The paper should have three parts and fit into 5-7 pages, 12 point font, DOUBLE SPACED (we will not read more than 7 pages! This is also an NIH rule, where any proposals longer than their page limit (25 pages) are returned unread):

Specific Aims: In half a page or less, give a brief background and state your hypothesis. Outline the experiments that you will do. This is more or less a revision of what you handed in on October 25.
Significance: This has two parts. First, put the problem into perspective with regard to the bigger issues of neuropharmacology, as well as potential medical relevance (although this is not necessary). Start general, then zero in on the details of your question. Second, give a good literature review of previous work on this subject, emphasizing what is NOT known, leading up to the hypothesis you will test. You can include figures from earlier papers if needed to make your point, but this is not required.
Experimental Design: In this section, you describe the experiments you will do to test your hypothesis. Don’t give all the tiny details of the experimental protocol (such as the concentration of Tris buffer in a binding assay) but do make it clear that you understand the logical flow of the experiment, and what data you will collect. Describe how you will analyze your data (Scatchard plot, competition binding assay, statistics, for example), and predict what you will find if your hypothesis is correct. Also consider possible problems with the experiments that would make them difficult to interpret or carry out, and what you would do if you faced such problems. Include important controls that help you to interpret your data. You can include figures or sketches if they will help to make your ideas more clear. Of course, no one knows whether your idea is right or wrong; so long as it is reasonable and consistent with previous research, let your imagination run wild!
Bibliography: Be sure to give all the authors, with their initials, the full title of the paper, the journal, volume, page numbers and year. This is standard in neuroscience and pharmacology journals.

Remember: I am here to help you get going on this project, so feel free to come to office hours or to contact me for another time to meet and talk about your ideas. But before you see us, get started with the area you are interested in and one or two ideas of what you might want to pursue.