Would the exact analysis of how each of these things were wrong and
fabricated be somewhere
available???? Would be fair (apart from the known case of C3b) to have
the whole analysis available
instead of just this kind of news feed. I suspect its not obvious by
five minute check in all cases.
Perhaps there needs to be ways within PDB in form of automated tools
that would raise those red
flags in suspicious cases (e.g. some data analysis --such as the
contribution by solvent etc now that data beyond 8Å
is by default used in refinement) - as it appears peer review/editing
by journals isn't/cant always be(?) stringent enough.
In any case, some type of automated analysis of the whole data base
might be a good idea, as there can be
other cases (with another couple of thousand papers citing them..).
tommi
On Dec 10, 2009, at 4:16 PM, Ibrahim Moustafa wrote:
"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 not
falsified and/or fabricated and recommended that they be removed
from the
public record," the university said in its statement this week."
