►2016年5月2日,《自然·生物技术》在线发表了河北科技大学副教授韩春雨担任通讯作者的一篇论文,论文报道了一种新的基因编辑工具NgAgo可以在哺乳动物细胞中使用。
● ● ●
过去几个月,韩春雨论文结果的可重复性争议引发公众的巨大关注。
10月10日,12名(后增加1人变为13名)中国科学家通过媒体发表声明称无法重复或再现韩春雨今年5月2日发表在《自然·生物技术》(Nature Biotechnology)的论文实验结果。
10月20日,《知识分子》获悉,包括这12名科学家在内的多位中国科学家已经向《自然·生物技术》期刊提交他们的实验结果及批评意见。随后,《知识分子》与《自然·生物技术》取得联系,询问他们是否已经接收到中国科学家的反馈意见。
10月22日,《自然·生物技术》的一位新闻发言人回答了我们的问题。
►Q1: 你们是否收到了中国科学家提交的关于韩春雨等人发表在《自然·生物技术》论文的批评意见?
A1:我们无法对收到的具体的反馈置评,但我们可以确认的是,我们已经收到了关于这一文章的多个意见,并且已经考虑了或正在谨慎考虑这些意见。
我们提供一些关于《自然·生物技术》如何处理针对论文不同批评的说明,希望这会有所帮助:
总的来说,对《自然·生物技术》的批评意见经过同行评议之后,可能会被刊登。
如果来函(Correspondences)特别令人感兴趣,或是对原始研究论文重要的科学评论和澄清说明,或是关于其他已经发表、经过同行评议的材料,它们会与原文作者的回应一起刊登(如果原文作者选择提供回应的话)。
来函与原始论文的网址相互链接。
有一些提交的批评意义如此重大,以至于让作者或编辑(在同行评议的帮助下)推断出论文的基本结论是无效的——这种情况下,论文会被撤稿。如果有必要突出和澄清原始论文的问题,来函可能会与撤稿声明一起刊登。
►Q2: 《自然·生物技术》如何看待这些中国科学家的批评?《自然·生物技术》会为它们安排同行评议吗?如果会,《自然·生物技术》会披露结果吗?
A2:《自然·生物技术》对提交给杂志的一切批评和关注都认真对待,并谨慎考虑。如上所说,如果合适,我们将与发表的论文一起刊登读者来函。
我们认真对待自己对已发表论文更新的责任,但没有两个调查是一样的,调查可能需要相当一段的时间。让调查按照应有的程序进行,不预先判断结果很重要,因为指控可能被证明是基于事实或没有根据的。
● ● ●
附:《自然·生物技术》答复原文
Q1:Have you received the complaint of Gao et al. Nat. Biotechnol 34, 768-773 submitted by these Chinese scientists?
A1:We cannot comment on specific feedback received but we can confirm that we have received numerous communications relating to this paper and have considered or are considering them carefully.
We hope it will be useful to provide some information about how criticisms are handled for any Nature Biotechnology papers:
In general, critical comments of Nature Biotechnology papers may, after peer review, be published.
Correspondences are exceptionally interesting or important scientific comments and clarifications on original research papers or other published peer-reviewed material and they are published alongside a response from the original authors (if they choose to provide one).
Correspondences are linked bidirectionally with the original published paper.
Some submitted criticisms are so significant that they lead the authors or editors (with the assistance of peer reviewers) to conclude that the fundamental conclusions of the paper are invalid. In these cases a paper would be retracted.
Correspondences may be published alongside retractions if it is important to highlight and clarify issues in the original paper.
Q2: What does Nature Biotechnology think of this complaint? Will Nature Biotechnology start a peer review of this complaint? If so, will Nature Biotechnology disclose the conclusion?
A2: Nature Biotechnology takes all complaints and concerns raised with the journal seriously and considers them carefully. As described above, where appropriate, we will publish Correspondences alongside published papers.
We take our responsibility to keep published literature up to date seriously, but no two investigations are the same and investigations can take a considerable length of time. It is important to allow them to run their course and not prejudge the results, as accusations may or may not be proven to have foundation.
欢迎个人转发到朋友圈,
公众号、报刊等转载请联系授权
copyright@z
知识分子为更好的智趣生活ID:The-Intellectual
投稿:zizaifenxiang@163.com授权:copyright@z
▼▼▼点击牵手科学队长!
http://kxdz.z/Home/Index/packages.html