Alexander Zehnder

Gregor Mendel’s paper on the inheritance of characteristics in pea plants was published in 1866 in the Journal of the Brno Natural History Society. Although his paper described the rules of inheritance for the first time, it was a very localised publication and nobody paid any attention to it. It was not until almost forty years later that the Dutchman Hugo de Vries and the German Carl Correns rediscovered Mendel’s investigations during their own studies. They published a report about them in 1900 in their paper in the Proceedings of the French Academy of Sciences, an extremely renowned journal at that time. From this date onwards the theory of evolution with Mendel’s Laws has found its way into school textbooks.

A good idea, a brilliant design, a super result, who wouldn’t want to broadcast it to the whole world and do so in such a way that everyone would hear of it, even those with only a marginal interest? Many channels, opportunities and media are available to allow us to do this. Writing is probably still the most lasting, or building if you are an architect. Writing always means communicating something to someone, aiming the text at the target audience, wording it so it captures their attention. Who hasn’t received letters and e-mails in which it was impossible to discover what the sender really wanted to say? Reading a book or report that makes you feel the author is speaking to you quite personally is always a pleasure. The messages they contain stay with you for a long time.

This is all equally true for scientific publications. Referees (peer reviewers) are to researchers what a critical publisher is to the author of a book. Sales figures and impact go together in the same way. Firing referees’ enthusiasm and convincing them of the importance of one’s own research results also demands literary craftsmanship and enormous efforts as well as hard scientific work. A good publication that is going to make its mark must be endured and suffered.

So wouldn’t it be easier to publish one’s work in lower quality journals or reports in order to save oneself part of the effort? Gregor Mendel’s case is an impressive example of what can happen then. As an Augustinian monk he had no need to give an account to anyone for his research work in the monastery garden, or at most to his abbot.

ETH Board President Alexander Zehnder, currently also an ' ETH Life' columnist.

It’s a different matter for today’s university scientists. They are paid from the public purse, i.e. by taxpayers and ultimately by all of us. Financial sponsors have a right to know what is happening to their money. Publications in excellent journals are also, among other things, statements of account to the community that enables scientists like us to carry out research.

This situation is summarised pointedly by the American bon mot “publish or perish”. High-quality publication is an indication that the financial backers are being taken seriously. Good articles enhance the parent institution’s reputation at the same time. Of course nobody wants to see a scientist’s downfall, but the motto should remind us very clearly of our duty. The Dutch express it in a more positive, more subtle and slightly more widely applicable proverb that puts it all in a nutshell. It says: “Writers live on”.