Nature Biotech – nature biotechnology article types Retraction Watch
Nature Biotech – nature biotechnology article types Retraction Watch
Nature Biotechnology has issued an editorial expression of concern for a widely criticized study describing a potentially invaluable new lab tool. The investigation did find instances when Levon Khachigian  breached the code of conduct, but Continue reading Cancer researcher cleared of misconduct, inquiry finds “genuine error or honest oversight” Continue reading “The data have spoken:” Controversial NgAgo gene editing study retracted An investigation at the University of New South Wales in Australia has determined that a long-accused cancer researcher did not commit misconduct. Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process Here’s Continue reading Controversial gene-editing study flagged by Nature journal Nature Biotech – nature biotechnology article types Retraction WatchNature Biotech – nature biotechnology article types Retraction Watch
Earlier this month, we reported on a letter signed by 20 researchers which also raised concerns about the genome-editing activities of NgAgo — and alleged the lab that produced the initial results turned away investigators when they attempted to validate the tool in mammalian cells. According to a spokesperson for the journal, some of the paper’s authors have objected to the decision to issue an EOC. The paper had already been tagged with an Expression of Concern by the journal, nature biotechnology article types Nature Biotechnology , which included data from multiple groups casting  doubt on the original findings. Although the authors, led by Chunyu Han at Hebei University of Science and Technology in China, produced data to support their original findings, the journal has concluded — following “ feedback from expert reviewers” — that the additional data “ are insufficient to counter the substantial body of evidence that contradicts their initial findings,” according to an editorial released today: The author of a 2016 paper describing a potentially invaluable lab tool has retracted it, following heavy criticism from outside groups that could not reproduce the findings. The EOC mentions the lack of reproducibility of the gene-editing technique, how has the nature-versus-nurture debate evolved q