- Home
- Angry by Choice
- Catalogue of Organisms
- Chinleana
- Doc Madhattan
- Games with Words
- Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience
- History of Geology
- Moss Plants and More
- Pleiotropy
- Plektix
- RRResearch
- Skeptic Wonder
- The Culture of Chemistry
- The Curious Wavefunction
- The Phytophactor
- The View from a Microbiologist
- Variety of Life
Field of Science
-
-
From Valley Forge to the Lab: Parallels between Washington's Maneuvers and Drug Development4 weeks ago in The Curious Wavefunction
-
Political pollsters are pretending they know what's happening. They don't.4 weeks ago in Genomics, Medicine, and Pseudoscience
-
-
Course Corrections5 months ago in Angry by Choice
-
-
The Site is Dead, Long Live the Site2 years ago in Catalogue of Organisms
-
The Site is Dead, Long Live the Site2 years ago in Variety of Life
-
Does mathematics carry human biases?4 years ago in PLEKTIX
-
-
-
-
A New Placodont from the Late Triassic of China5 years ago in Chinleana
-
Posted: July 22, 2018 at 03:03PM6 years ago in Field Notes
-
Bryophyte Herbarium Survey7 years ago in Moss Plants and More
-
Harnessing innate immunity to cure HIV8 years ago in Rule of 6ix
-
WE MOVED!8 years ago in Games with Words
-
-
-
-
post doc job opportunity on ribosome biochemistry!9 years ago in Protein Evolution and Other Musings
-
Growing the kidney: re-blogged from Science Bitez9 years ago in The View from a Microbiologist
-
Blogging Microbes- Communicating Microbiology to Netizens10 years ago in Memoirs of a Defective Brain
-
-
-
The Lure of the Obscure? Guest Post by Frank Stahl12 years ago in Sex, Genes & Evolution
-
-
Lab Rat Moving House13 years ago in Life of a Lab Rat
-
Goodbye FoS, thanks for all the laughs13 years ago in Disease Prone
-
-
Slideshow of NASA's Stardust-NExT Mission Comet Tempel 1 Flyby13 years ago in The Large Picture Blog
-
in The Biology Files
Not your typical science blog, but an 'open science' research blog. Watch me fumbling my way towards understanding how and why bacteria take up DNA, and getting distracted by other cool questions.
We've received the #arseniclife reviews from Science
They're too long to include in a blog post so I've posted them here.
Bottom line: the reviews are largely favourable so our manuscript is provisionally accepted!
The main concern of the referees is the growth issues I've written about here: the cells would not grow in the medium specified by the original authors (I had to add glutamate) and the medium I used was supplemented with 3 µM phosphate and it's basal phosphate contamination had not been measured.
Most of the issues can either be just clarified in the text or declared to be beyond the scope of this work, but we're going to try to directly measure the basal phosphate contamination in the medium. (We're worried that previous analyses of phosphate-buffered materials may have decreased the sensitivity of the LC-MS system we used.)
Of course we'll also address the comments on the manuscript posted by readers of this blog. And we'll post the complete Response to Reviewers here.
4 comments:
Markup Key:
- <b>bold</b> = bold
- <i>italic</i> = italic
- <a href="http://www.fieldofscience.com/">FoS</a> = FoS
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
It's not clear how granting Science "an exclusive license to publish" is consistent with "retaining copyright". Maybe the actual form clears that up, maybe not, but in case of doubt you might consider using the SPARC Author Addendum to make sure you retain the rights you want: http://www.arl.org/sparc/author/addendum.shtml
ReplyDeleteCongrats!
ReplyDeleteYep - the new model of (S)science publishing. Revolutionary claims weren't justified by the data and experiments were done at least clumsily and without proper controls, but it is the skeptical scientist's follow-up story, that is rigorously reviewed and carefully checked (because: "the value of the work rests largely on the rigor of the experiments and data interpretation"). And still, poor Dr. Redfield your effort might be found futile, because YOU couldn't reproduce the GFAJ-1 growth in the original conditions (no glutamate).
ReplyDeleteO tempora, o mores!
Wow, from Reviewer 1:
ReplyDelete"Perhaps this manuscript gains weight as a way for Science to cover its backside. It seems a pity that one can sell newspapers by both committing and reporting a crime."