<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss"
	xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#"
	
	>
<channel>
	<title>
	Comments on: New Lab Rodent Recommendations Rile Researchers	</title>
	<atom:link href="https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:31:24 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>
	hourly	</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>
	1	</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>https://wordpress.org/?v=6.4.8</generator>
	<item>
		<title>
		By: E Gluck		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/#comment-490432</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[E Gluck]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Jan 2012 01:31:24 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/#comment-490432</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[This peaked my interest because I know someone who is doing to research involving rodents but I am curious as to how much a difference a mere 70 square feet will make. I found a link: http://labanimals.awionline.org/pubs/cq02/Cq-mice.html that talks more about creating a more &quot;comfortable quarters for mice in research institutions&quot; and explores some reasons as to why this is a good idea. ]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>This peaked my interest because I know someone who is doing to research involving rodents but I am curious as to how much a difference a mere 70 square feet will make. I found a link: <a href="http://labanimals.awionline.org/pubs/cq02/Cq-mice.html" rel="nofollow ugc">http://labanimals.awionline.org/pubs/cq02/Cq-mice.html</a> that talks more about creating a more &#8220;comfortable quarters for mice in research institutions&#8221; and explores some reasons as to why this is a good idea. </p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: Greg Laden		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/#comment-490431</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[Greg Laden]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 04:49:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/#comment-490431</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[There is no doubt that this conversation is  happening.  I actually know some of the people who make some of these things... archaeologists building labs have similar needs, though the things we store are dead, the containers have to be efficient, able to be put in freezers and heaters (ideally) inert, sturdy, etc. etc. etc.  If you are a company making these things, having a change in specs is great because you get big orders but having consistent requirements across institutions is very important as well, if you can manage it.

One of the early examples of this sort of thing was herbaria sheets ... the blotting paper sheets on which herberia specimens  are  stored.  There was a big battle between the Smithsonian and Harvard over which size they should be. Samples would be routinely prepared by collectors and sent to multiple institutions, or exchanged between institutions, so everyone having the same size cabinets and thus the same size sheets would be important.  The American Museum and the New York State museum got into the act.  Harvard did some strong arming stuff and won.  Cabinets were discarded and rebuilt in New York.  There are people in Botany who are still not over this, and it all went down before the Civil War.

]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>There is no doubt that this conversation is  happening.  I actually know some of the people who make some of these things&#8230; archaeologists building labs have similar needs, though the things we store are dead, the containers have to be efficient, able to be put in freezers and heaters (ideally) inert, sturdy, etc. etc. etc.  If you are a company making these things, having a change in specs is great because you get big orders but having consistent requirements across institutions is very important as well, if you can manage it.</p>
<p>One of the early examples of this sort of thing was herbaria sheets &#8230; the blotting paper sheets on which herberia specimens  are  stored.  There was a big battle between the Smithsonian and Harvard over which size they should be. Samples would be routinely prepared by collectors and sent to multiple institutions, or exchanged between institutions, so everyone having the same size cabinets and thus the same size sheets would be important.  The American Museum and the New York State museum got into the act.  Harvard did some strong arming stuff and won.  Cabinets were discarded and rebuilt in New York.  There are people in Botany who are still not over this, and it all went down before the Civil War.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
		<item>
		<title>
		By: F		</title>
		<link>https://gregladen.com/blog/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/#comment-490430</link>

		<dc:creator><![CDATA[F]]></dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 17 Jan 2012 04:05:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://scienceblogs.com/gregladen/2012/01/16/new-lab-rodent-recommendations/#comment-490430</guid>

					<description><![CDATA[Here, ethical capitalists might find a business opportunity providing the cheapest well-made cages designed to spec, plus support infrastructure (shelves or whatever) and maybe in recycling old cages as well. The apparently highly-specialized system used by Johns Hopkins might be a different ball of wax, but I&#039;m sure there are clever solutions available from clever people, like those who designed such systems in the first place.]]></description>
			<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Here, ethical capitalists might find a business opportunity providing the cheapest well-made cages designed to spec, plus support infrastructure (shelves or whatever) and maybe in recycling old cages as well. The apparently highly-specialized system used by Johns Hopkins might be a different ball of wax, but I&#8217;m sure there are clever solutions available from clever people, like those who designed such systems in the first place.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
