What makes us go to work? For most of us, I think the answer lies in the realm of doing something that we see as valuable to the community. I get to spend my days finding out the most interesting news and innovative advances in this fascinating field of large-scale biology, and then spread the word to scientists to help keep the community connected and up to date. So many scientists I’ve met during my time at this magazine tell me they got into their careers because they wanted to help others — through medicine, science, education, and other disciplines.
But no matter how much we love what we do, the simple reality is that most of us go to work to make a living. How else would we pay for housing, food, clothes, and those twice-weekly banjo lessons that, we’re convinced, will one day make us good enough to have our own bluegrass band?
In that spirit, we here at Genome Technology offer our third annual salary survey. This is something I’m particularly proud of — in addition to being the only publication to offer you this kind of information, we’ve had terrific reader participation that increases every year. Last year, more than 1,100 readers responded to our survey to provide their salary and benefit data. This year, that number rose to more than 1,400. My sincere thanks to all of you who took time out of your frenetic schedules to give us such useful information.
The salary survey is clearly a valuable resource, and that’s why we’re so delighted to offer it to you. One of our readers actually responded to our e-mail asking him to fill out the survey by saying he simply couldn’t wait till June to find out the information, and could I please send him last year’s survey results? I pictured him bringing the issue into his next performance review — talk about news you can use. This month you’ll find the salary survey results on p. 24.
Speaking of valuable information, anyone who’s involved in mass spec sample prep won’t want to miss our feature story this month. Our senior editor, John MacNeil, delved into this topic, in part to check out why this question is coming up more often lately. As mass spec gets ever more advanced, the dilemmas of sample prep become even more noticeable — and that much more of a bottleneck. So far, there’s no single solution that people can agree on to strip out the high-abundance proteins and focus on the lower-abundance ones, but at least there are plenty of options, and lots of bright minds working on the problem. John reports on the latest innovations in the field in our feature story that starts on p. 19.
And for more on proteins, be sure to check out Ron Beavis’ column on the devilish problem of gene and protein nomenclature. That starts on p. 17.
Meredith W. Salisbury, Editor
What do you think of Genome Technology? Let me know how we’re doing by e-mailing me at [email protected] genomeweb.com or by calling me at +1.212.651.5635.