The leading model of open access publishing discriminates against academics unable to pay publication charges

The present academic publishing system obstructs the free communication of research findings. By erecting paywalls, commercial publishers prevent scientists from downloading research papers unless they pay substantial fees. Libraries similarly pay huge amounts (up to £1m or more per annum) to give their readers access to online journals.

There is general agreement that free and open access to scientific knowledge is desirable. The way this might be achieved has come to the fore in recent debates about the future of scientific and scholarly journals.

The announcement by the UK government's universities and science minister, David Willetts, of free access to all publicly funded research findings, Jimmy Wales's appointment as a government adviser and Dame Janet Finch's working group set up to advise on open access, all reflect the importance of this issue. Nevertheless, we have a real concern that the process of opening up academic publication may exclude some key interests as a result of the methods used to achieve it.

Our concern lies with the major proposed alternative to the current system. Under this arrangement, authors are expected to pay when they submit papers for publication in online journals: the so called "article processing cost" (APC). The fee can amount to anything between £1,000 and £2,000 per article, depending on the reputation of the journal. Although the fees may sometimes be waived, eligibility for exemption is decided by the publisher and such concessions have no permanent status and can always be withdrawn or modified.

The APC approach is increasingly favoured by funding bodies such as the Wellcome Trust. These funding bodies make provision in academic research grants to pay for publication charges for the research they fund.

A major problem with the APC model is that it effectively shifts the costs of academic publishing from the reader to the author and therefore discriminates against those without access to the funds needed to meet these costs. Among those excluded are academics in, for example, the humanities and the social sciences whose research funding typically does not include publication charges, and independent researchers whose only means of paying the APC is from their own pockets. Academics in developing countries in particular face discrimination under APC because of their often very limited access to research funds.

Not only is APC discriminatory, but within a finite research funding budget its costs are likely to be met from funds otherwise available for the research itself, thereby potentially penalising the whole research community.

There is another approach that could be implemented for a fraction of the cost of commercial publishers' current journal subscriptions. "Access for all" (AFA) journals, which charge neither author nor reader, are committed to meeting publishing costs in other ways. We have been involved with the funding of a journal, Longitudinal and Life Course Studies (LLCS), which is free for authors and readers, and was initially established with the support of a three-year development grant from the Nuffield Foundation. We don't benefit financially from the journal, and the editorial and reviewing services are supplied free.

The costs for an AFA journal include copy-editing, layout, editorial meetings and journal management, including the peer review process, together with website hosting charges and publishing software support. For LLCS these amount to about £15,000 per year for three issues and are met with the help of the Society for Longitudinal and Lifecourse Studies, independent research centres and a nominal readership registration fee.

How can AFA be encouraged? We propose that university libraries set aside some of their journal acquisition funds, currently paid to commercial publishers through bulk arrangements, in the form of grant aid to support new or existing AFA journals. Allocations would take account of the many years it can take to build the readership and submissions base on which the journals' reputation and future viability will depend. Governance details would need to be decided and ideally would involve library consortia, universities, learned societies and research funders.

What we need is some clear thinking about how online publishing should develop. In particular we strongly urge the Finch working group to give serious attention to the alternative AFA strategy for journal funding and for Willetts to adopt it within his vision for open access.

We are not advocating a sudden major shift to this form of publication, rather a funding regime that would encourage its growth and explore how it might best be managed. Such a publication model would not only be cost-efficient, we believe that it would also find greater acceptance within the academic community as a legitimate return on the editorial and refereeing resources that are currently provided for free.

John Bynner is emeritus professor of social sciences in education, Institute of Education, University of London. Harvey Goldstein is professor of social statistics, University of Bristol

Discussion of the economic crisis must be made democratic – and economists have a role to play in that

At the fag end of one university term, two Cambridge economists set about persuading a prime minister to do a U-turn. Somehow, they thought a letter would do the trick. So opposed were Frank Hahn and Robert Neild to Margaret Thatcher's austerity economics that in March 1981 that they asked fellow academics to sign a memo warning: "Present politics will deepen the depression, erode the industrial base … and threaten … stability." The protest was signed by 364 of Britain's most eminent economists, including the eventual head of the Bank of England, Mervyn King, and published in the Times.

Thirty years on, and you already know what good the protest did: none whatsoever. The lady was not for turning. At the time, however, it was big news. Thatcher was challenged in parliament to name even two economists who supported her (an aide remarked she was lucky not to be asked for a third).

The current crisis of capitalism is bigger, and more multi-faceted, than the one Britain faced at the turn of the 80s, yet it hasn't triggered anything like the same response from our faculties.

Last month on this page, I discussed this absence and the dearth of sociologists and other non-economists analysing how we got into this mess. Nothing particularly controversial there, I thought, upon filing the piece, especially since I had canvassed opinion from a number of academics and presented the argument to a broadly supportive forum of sociologists at the LSE.

I was of course utterly wrong. Over the next few days my 800-odd words triggered notes of protest from sociologists, attacks from Cambridge professors, and so much correspondence I began to worry that the Guardian's letters editors would bury me in the envelopes.

Two things stood out. First, the personal mail I received typically agreed with the piece – even while much of the stuff for public consumption condemned it. Second, some of those who had signed the public condemnations were also sending me private notes of agreement. Amid all the industrial defensiveness, some of the responses it has garnered also make a big point, which I'd like to discuss here.

The criticisms can be broken into two strands. First, there were those who pointed out there had been some good sociological research in this area in particular by the Centre for Research on Socio-Cultural Change (Cresc) at Manchester University. Pick any old article of mine and the chances are you'll come across a citation of Cresc's research, a mention of Aeron Davis's work on fund managers' working lives, or a tip of the hat to heterodox economists such as Ha-Joon Chang. As those academics will tell you, their research is the exception within their fields rather than the rule.

Two things are at work here. First, there has been an intellectual cleansing at many universities. Economics in particular has become a narrower, overwhelmingly mathematical, subject, so that to find a Keynesian economist you are often better off phoning a university's business school rather than its economics faculty. The second is that many academics haven't begun digging into the banking crisis, but instead ploughed on with researching – to pick examples from the last British Sociological Association conference – the real-ale industry, or whether Asian cricketers lose out by not going for a post-match pint.

This point triggered a vein-bulging outburst from Andrew Gamble, a professor of politics at Cambridge who I have long admired but who could perhaps have read what I had actually said. No, Andrew, I didn't claim that academics are "a bottomless pit of irrelevance". Precisely the opposite: I think discussions of public policy are enriched when academics get stuck in and provide interesting analysis.

The second main strand was to argue that non-economists have published a great deal on neo-liberalism. True, but that breadth of analysis needs to be combined with a depth of research on finance – which probably requires different combinations of knowledge and ways of working, as evidenced by the way organisational studies academic Hugh Willmott has teamed up with the accountancy professor (and splendid trouble-maker) Prem Sikka.

And the third? Before writing this piece, I tried talking to the British Sociological Association, but no one would agree to a chat on the phone. Their spokesman claimed they were "wary" after my previous criticism – hardly the spirit of academic debate. The only thing on offer was an email exchange. Later, I received a list of sociological research on financial issues. Confronted with the biggest crisis since the 30s, the trade body for British sociologists proudly displayed its engagement by enumerating articles in the Journal of Niche Studies.

All this is a long way from that letter of 1981, let alone Keynes. Perhaps it shows how far academics have been forced to conform to their research assessment exercises and turn out measurable output.

To return to Andrew Gamble, I don't think that sociologists picking over Wall Street would mean that "revolution would come overnight". But I do think that our discussion of the economic crisis needs to be made democratic, and that academics have a role to play in that. Otherwise, we're guaranteed that the people who steered us  into the mess will be the ones prescribing how we get out.

Research shows annual elevation increases between 1mm and 2mm along the 400-mile range between Nevada and California

The Sierra Nevada range in the US grows about half an inch in elevation every 10 years, according to scientists. Researchers at the University of Nevada's geodetic laboratory in Reno and the University of Glasgow in the UK say they have recorded annual elevation increases between 1mm and 2mm for more than 10 years along the entire 400-mile range between Nevada and California. A combination of GPS data and space-based radar has provided them with unprecedented accuracy. "The exciting thing is we can watch the range growing in real time," said Bill Hammond, lead researcher of the multi-year project at the University of Nevada,.

"Using data back to before 2000 we can see it with accuracy better than 1 millimeter per year. Perhaps even more amazing is that these minuscule changes are measured using satellites in space."

The research was funded by the National Science Foundation and Nasa, along with the UK's Natural Environment Research Council.

Hammond said the findings would be published in July in the journal Geology and may help resolve an active debate regarding the age of the modern Sierra in California and Nevada.

The Sierra Nevada stretches from 10,000-foot peaks in the north around Lake Tahoe to the highest peak in the continental US 400 miles south – Mt Whitney at about 14,500 feet.

"Combined with more GPS stations, and more radar data, detecting motions in the Earth is becoming more precise and ubiquitous," he said. "We can see the steady and constant motion of the Sierra in addition to episodic events such as earthquakes."

Hammond said the history of the Sierra's elevation is complex and the uplift process "fairly unique on Earth." It exhibits features of both ancient elevation – as old as 40 million years – and relatively young elevation dating to less than 3 million years ago.

"Our data indicate that uplift is … active and could have generated the entire range in less than 3 million years, which is young compared to estimates based on some other techniques," he said. "It basically means that the latest pulse of uplift is still ongoing."

This mystery bird is from Thailand. From where does it get its brilliant colours? (includes videos)

Rufous-bellied niltava, Niltava sundara, Hodgson, 1837, also known as the black-and-orange niltava or as the blue-and-orange niltava or orange-bellied niltava, also (appropriately) as the beautiful niltava, or as the Sundara/Sundra niltava, photographed at the Ban Luang Resort, Doi Ang Khang, Chiang Mai province in the far north of Thailand.

Image: Alex Vargas, 15 February 2011 (with permission, for GrrlScientist/Guardian use only) [velociraptorise].
Nikon D5000, Nikkor 300mm f/2.8G ED-IF AF-S VR 1/25s f/4.0 at 300.0mm iso200

Question: This mystery bird is from Thailand. From where does it get its brilliant colours? (Is it Thai-dyed?) Can you identify this bird's taxonomic family and species?

Response: This is an adult male rufous-bellied niltava, Niltava sundara, a member of Muscicapidae, the chats and Old World flycatchers. This species is very similar to the small niltava, N. macgrigoriae, with nearly identical colouring and patterning of the upperparts, but the male rufous-bellied niltava is considerably, and has orange underparts (small niltava has grey-blue underparts).

The rufous-bellied niltava lives in the brushy undergrowth in a variety of moist and tropical forest types, including mixed, broadleafed, secondary and disturbed lowland montane forests throughout the Himalayas. The bird ranges from central China through Myanmar (Burma) and into northern Thailand and Indochina.

As typical for its family, this species is mainly insectivorous and it also consumes fruit. This species constructs an open cup nest hidden in dense vegetation. The hen lays 3-4 eggs per clutch, which she incubates alone, and both parents feed and care for the chicks. Young birds are primarily fed insects.

The male gets his brilliant colouring from a combination of pigments and structural colours. The orange underparts come from pigment-based colouring, created by a group of pigments known as carotenoids. The carotenoids are produced by plants, and are acquired by eating plants and storing the pigments until moult, at which time the carotenoids are placed inside the growing feathers.

Blue is a combination of structural colouring and pigment-based colouring. The rich dark blue of the bird's upperparts is the result of tiny air pockets inside the feather barbs that scatter incoming light, creating the blue colouring. The feather itself contains pigments -- melanins -- that strengthen the feather structure and deepen the blue colouring. When you see this bird in low light or when it is backlit, the blue colouring resulting from light scattering is lost, so the bird will look black-and-orange instead of blue-and-orange. Here is a video of an adult male:

[video link]

This species is strongly dimorphic. The female has olive-brown upperparts, greyer crown and nape, a buffy eyering around large black eyes, rufous wings with white streaking, rufous tail. The underparts are greyish-olive, the throat is buffy and there is a small but very noticeable incomplete white neck band in the middle of the neck with a tiny iridescent blue at each end. Here's a video of an adult female:

[video link]

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

You are invited to review all of the daily mystery birds by going to their dedicated graphic index page.

If you have bird images, video or audio files that you'd like to share with a large and (mostly) appreciative international audience here at the Guardian, feel free to contact me to learn more.

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

twitter: @GrrlScientist
facebook: grrlscientist
Pinterest: grrlscientist
email: grrlscientist@gmail.com

This North American mystery bird has a "twin" that resembles it very closely even though these two taxa are not closely related

Mystery Bird photographed in a backyard in Houston, Texas (North America). [I will identify this bird in 49 or so hours]

Image: Joseph Kennedy, 6 April 2012 (with permission, for GrrlScientist/Guardian use only) [velociraptorise].
Nikon D200, Kowa 883 telescope with TSN-PZ camera eyepiece 1/320s f/8.0 at 1000.0mm iso400

Question: This North American mystery bird is a difficult ID to make, especially from this particular image. This is because this species has a "twin" that resembles it very closely even though these two taxa are not closely related. Can you identify this bird and its "twin" and explain why they resemble each other so much?

The Game:

1. This is intended to be a learning experience where together we learn a few things about birds and about the process of identifying them (and maybe about ourselves, too).
2. Each mystery bird is usually accompanied by a question or two. These questions can be useful for identifying the pictured species, but may instead be used to illustrate an interesting aspect of avian biology, behaviour or evolution, or to generate conversation on other topics, such as conservation or ethics.
3. Thoughtful comments will add to everyone's enjoyment, and will keep the suspense going until the next teaser is published. Interesting snippets may add to the knowledge of all.
4. Each bird species will be demystified approximately 49 hours after publication.

The Rules:

1. Keep in mind that people live in zillions of different time zones, and some people are following on their smart phones. So let everyone play the game. Don't spoil it for everyone else by providing the bird's common or scientific names in the first 24 to 36 hours.
2. If you know the mystery bird's identity, answer the accompanying questions and provide subtle ID hints that may be helpful clues for less experienced players. Keep in mind that some hints, such as puns and anagrams, may read like "inside jokes" and thus, may discourage others from participating.
3. Describe the key field marks that distinguish this species from any similar ones.
4. Comments that spoil others' enjoyment may be deleted.

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

You are invited to review all of the daily mystery birds by going to their dedicated graphic index page.

If you have bird images, video or audio files that you'd like to share with a large and (mostly) appreciative international audience here at the Guardian, feel free to contact me to learn more.

.. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. ..

twitter: @GrrlScientist
facebook: grrlscientist
Pinterest: grrlscientist
email: grrlscientist@gmail.com

Researchers have concluded that beans are less likely to give you flatulence than you think

"People's concerns about excessive flatulence from eating beans may be exaggerated." That conclusion emerges loud and clear at the end of a study published recently in the Nutrition Journal.

Donna Winham, of Arizona State University, and Andrea Hutchins, of the University of Colorado, call their report Perceptions of Flatulence From Bean Consumption Among Adults in 3 Feeding Studies.

"Many consumers avoid eating beans because they believe legume consumption will cause excessive intestinal gas or flatulence", they explain.

Winham and Hutchins had volunteers eat half a cup of beans daily. Every week everyone answered a questionnaire.

In the first week, fewer than half of the bean eaters reported increases in gas production. Then came a further surprise: "Seventy per cent or more of the participants who experienced flatulence felt that it dissipated by the second or third week of bean consumption."

Winham and Hutchins suggest that beans owe their unhappy reputation to "psychological anticipation of flatulence problems".

Their opinion of 2011 is opposite, nearly, to one expressed by Geoffrey Wynne-Jones of Waikato Hospital in Hamilton, New Zealand, in 1975. Dr Wynn-Jones published a treatise in The Lancet, with the alarming title Flatus Retention is the Major Factor in Diverticular Disease.

Dr Wynne-Jones said: "Diverticular disease is confined to modern urban communities: flatus retention in a rural, primitive society would be pointless … [The disease] afflicts the cultured, the refined, the considerate … It should be recognised as originating in suppression of a normal bodily function."

He declared that patients must "avoid 'windy' foods". He identified beans as a chief example of a "windy" food.

(Thanks to Pedro Marques-Vidal for bringing the Colorado bean study to my attention.)

• Marc Abrahams is editor of the bimonthly Annals of Improbable Research and organiser of the Ig Nobel prize

Astraea prototypes follow programmed instructions, with the aim that they could fly missions autonomously for days at a time

BAE Systems has taken a step closer to removing pilots from fighter jets by launching the first major test flights for a new generation of intelligent drone aircraft.

The defence group is assessing software for unmanned aircraft that will operate with an unprecedented level of independence. Defence experts believe pilotless planes are the next progression from manned fighters such as the Typhoon jet, made by BAE.

The project, named Astraea, differs from the current drone models in use in Afghanistan, which are flown remotely by pilots on the ground. Instead the prototypes will follow a set of programmed instructions, with the aim that they could fly difficult missions autonomously for days at a time.

BAE is using a conventional aircraft – an 18-seater Jetstream propeller plane – for the flights over the Irish Sea and will have technicians on board. The Jetstream will fly autonomously during some tests but there will be a pilot at the controls at all times, ready to take over if there is a problem.

The tests will include a collision avoidance trial, using a light aircraft that will gauge the plane's ability to dodge potential hazards. A BAE spokesperson said: "This will demonstrate to regulators such as the Civil Aviation Authority and air traffic control service providers the progress made towards achieving safe routine use of UAVs [unmanned air vehicle] in UK airspace."

The test flights started at the beginning of the month and will run until September, and are taking place in controlled airspace. The Astraea programme is run by a consortium whose members include BAE and other UK companies such as Cobham, Qinetiq and Rolls-Royce. Thales, the French defence and security group, is also a member.

Edward Hunt, a senior consultant at IHS Jane's, the defence analysis firm, said the argument for intelligent, unmanned aircraft was compelling. "There are some doubts as to how many more generations of manned aircraft there might be. There could be one or two more, but you can make these planes smaller and more robust without someone onboard. Also, of course, you reduce the likelihood of losing crew."

However, Hunt said technical and legal hurdles remained. "Giving them any autonomy is going to be complicated in terms of technical developments, such as the software, and legally allowing a fighter without a human being in it to launch a weapon and kill someone," he said. BAE executives have already stated that "there has to be a man in the loop" when combat drones operate, ruling out the possibility of a computer deciding whether to take a life.

BAE has already built a number of UAV prototypes including the Mantis, for civilian missions such as rescue searches, and the Taranis, a weaponised cousin. Neither will reach the mass-manufactured stage but are being developed at BAE's Warton facility in Lancashire.

BAE expects to build widely used unmanned aircraft with France's Dassault under an Anglo-French defence pact. The project, dubbed Telemos, aims to produce an eight-tonne, twin-propeller surveillance aircraft by 2016. Underlining the plane's monitoring role, the programme is named after the Cyclops of Greek mythology that warned of an attack by Ulysses.

The drone will be designed to carry laser-guided bombs. Dassault has estimated that the companies will invest €500m (£403m).