In the very early days, solving a protein structure was an enormous amount of
work and since hardly any protein structures were solved there was a huge pool
of unsolved structures. Under these circumstances, it was a waste of resources
if two groups would work on the same protein. To prevent this, people would
publish crystallization notes so other groups could choose another protein to
work on and this is what usually happened. Also, the purpose of scientific
publications is that other people can use this information to progress their
results.
Unless unethical actions were involved (holding up referee reports, making
shortcuts to publish before the competition) I do not see a reason why you
could not publish your paper. As Jürgen suggested, you may want to contact the
other group to see if you could publish back to back.
my two cents,
Herman
________________________________
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of
Lukacs, Christine
Sent: Tuesday, September 25, 2012 3:33 PM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] Etiquette on publishing if there is a crystallization
report from someone else.
I'd like to get a community opinion on something.
If a group has published crystallization and diffraction data (Acta
Cryst F style crystallization report), and you happen to have the same crystal
form and have solved the structure, is there an unspoken rule that you don't
publish, or an amount of time that you wait to allow the other group to publish
before you do? I am not talking about a high impact structure with a race to
publish.
Just looking for a general consensus.
Thanks
Christine
Christine Lukacs, Ph.D.
Principal Scientist
Roche
christine.luk...@roche.com
This message is intended for the use of the named recipient(s) only and
may contain confidential and/or proprietary information. If you are not the
intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete this message. Any
unauthorized use of the information contained in this message is prohibited.
