On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:58:27 +0530 Dr. Anthony Addlagatta wrote:
Bernhard,
I would be worried about sending the structure factors and the coordinates
along with
the manuscript.
I wonder why?
Cheers
Fred
, December 12, 2009 8:33 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:58:27 +0530 Dr. Anthony Addlagatta wrote:
Bernhard,
I would be worried about sending the structure factors and the coordinates
along with
the manuscript.
I wonder why
A number of years ago - we were asked to setup an ftp site a particular
reviewer could see the coordinates... I could have looked at the logs to
figure out where they were coming in from but chose not to. Some
journals also allow the author to upload additional info - that would be
available
After a thorough examination of the available data, which included a
re-analysis of each structure alleged to have been fabricated, the
committee
found a preponderance of evidence that structures 1BEF, 1CMW,
1DF9/2QID,
1G40, 1G44, 1L6L, 2OU1, 1RID, 1Y8E, 2A01, and 2HR0 were more likely
than
Matthew Franklin wrote:
Once again, I'd like to get the community's thoughts: should we ask the PDB to
stop using 0 and 1 in its IDs?
I'll get off the soapbox now.
I would be all for it... Having tried to downloade 1o08 and gotten it
screwed up Especially when journals use a
