Slack / Private Message Drop — page 723

SLACK_000937 [Robert Garry] Angie fights back https:/www.nature.con/articles/s41591-021-01314-9 [Robert Garry] Concerted attack on AR by DRASTIC - Yuri claims he's the victim. [Robert Garry] And in related news - Alina still with the attacks on Eddie and the Pango papers - but - of course - call her out for her bullying and she plays the victim. Gullible journos eat it up or in the case of some (e.g. Jackson Ryan) get into the act as well. Truly Focanuba. [shared file(s): image.png, image.png] [Andrew Rambaut] I got this last night: "Dear Dr. Rambaut, I hope this message finds you well. I am writing from the PLOS Publication Ethics team to ask if you might be able to help advise us on a pending post-publication case involving the above PLOS Pathogens article. Several concerns have been raised about the article, including about apparent overlap or redundancy with other publications and about the availability of the underlying data. The authors have worked with us to address these issues, and based on the outcome of these discussions we have prepared the attached notice draft. However, before we proceed further or decide whether this would be suitable for a Correction (vs. a different type of editorial notice), we are seeking to have the underlying data reviewed. The underlying data were not provided or evaluated during the pre-publication peer review, and the outcome of this post-publication case will depend on whether the data support the reported results and conclusions, and whether they fully address PLOS' Data Availability requirements. The data in question include pangolin SARS-CoV-2 sequencing data available through NCBI as well as gap-filling amplicon and contig sequencing datas provided in the attached files. In essence, we are seeking expert input as to whether the dataset provided is complete (per community data reporting standards for this type of study, and per the results reported in the article), whether the data are overall satisfactory, and whether the data provide clear and adequate support for the article's results and conclusions. If there are any concerns about the dataset or how the data align with the reported claims, we would also appreciate input on whether the issue could be addressed via a Correction or whether it has substantial implications for the reliability and/or validity of the article's conclusions. One of the PLOS Pathogens Editors-in-Chief suggested you may be able recommend possible reviewers (e.g. bioinformaticians or viral genomics researchers) who could help with this data review. Do you have any suggestions? Alternatively, if you would be able to help review the data yourself, we would also be truly grateful for that level of support. Thank you in advance for any help you can offer at this time. If you have any questions about this case or this request, please email me and I would be happy to provide any clarifications. Thank you for your time and consideration. I look forward to hearing from you. Best regards, Renee Renee Hoch, Ph.D. Senior Editor, Team Manager Publication Ethics PLOS I plos.org -- researchers to transform science CONFIDENTIAL: This email and any attachments are confidential and for the sole use of the individual(s) to whom