 |
 |
how about this scenario: the structure really is as published, or very like it, but upon refinement, R-factors were high, other indicators were dodgy etc. so the authors were afraid to publish as is and made up a dataset to support their structure - this would be a bit less bad. let's see how the authors, Nature (and the other journals) respond. As some remarked, this is important, because if we let it pass, it could damage the prestige of protein crystallography. I think, as the crystallographic community, we should quickly act to put proper controls in place like submission of raw images etc. Mark