Perhaps paper and structure should be peer-reviewed independently, and only when both have been given the green-light should both be released, simultaneously.
I don't see why we should be especially precious about reviewing structural data - we gladly hand functional data, protocols, etc to reviewers on trust, and a pdb file and the Sf file is only another part of the process. Imho, etc Dave -- Hand delivered by Androids On 11 Aug 2011 09:31, "Eric Sauvage" <eric.sauv...@ulg.ac.be> wrote: Any structure deposited at the PDB should be peer-reviewed by a crystallographer before acceptance by the PDB and his name should be asociated to the pdb. This job cannot be done by the pdb team but a crystallographer, not working in the field of the depositor to avoid conflict, could detect errors or improve the structure, as reviewers do with papers. Guidelines could be given for a fair reviewing of the structure and depositors should be notified the name of the reviewer. Eric
