BioEssays, Journal Year: 2025, Volume and Issue: unknown
Published: Feb. 9, 2025
Recently, I have become more aware of the fact that scientific mores are changing when it comes to publishing results or theories. After a period increased rigor (no "unpublished results" in papers, please), rules seem be relaxing somewhat. One example: referring papers not undergone peer review (yet). Preprint repositories, such as bioRxiv, were around from nineties but they really multiplied and got intensely used about 2010 onward. To honest, one manuscript, reflecting unfinished business, repository myself. It is been there since 2013 was, my surprise, quoted on several occasions. would still hesitate do so myself will explain why. Current Biology an excellent journal with, for example, high-quality reviews joy read. encountered great paper evolutionary arms race with defense systems anti-defense constantly evolving prokaryotes hand phages plasmids other [1]. While perusing it, stumbled upon surprising fact: than 5% (6 out 103) references non-peer reviewed manuscripts bioRxiv (deposited 2023 2024). This example illustrates pronounced development over last decade: use preprints manner now widely accepted [2]. The positive aspects clear. Researchers can get rapid feedback community review, well hasten dissemination, all this open access form. In mathematics, meeting abstracts even standard encouraged by major journals (the actual publication process almost afterthought). On minus side stands possible loss safeguards quality: review. However, balance, preprint publicly available clearly identified having undergo scrutiny, does help neutralizing potential harm sub-standard research. Indeed, quality itself could under pressure. At risk anecdotal misrepresentation, strong impression seeing mistakes published articles nowadays compared few decades before. just reflect greater "publish perish" pressure, ever complicated techniques algorithms associated massively datasets. rapidly new areas expertise, time pressures, "courtesy" basis relatively unrewarded reviewing taking their toll. give error should spotted before publication, own hobbyhorses, mitochondrial electron transport chain (ETC). A highly interesting PNAS perspective looks at how modern-day ETCs tell us something earliest stages evolution might harnessed electrochemical gradients [3]. Alas, figure 2 authors make unfortunate mistake, reduced carrier Q (carrying two electrons protons) giving off protons intermembrane space (IMS) contacting complex III which then shown "pumping" another four into IMS same kind mistake depicted chloroplast ETC). But those coming part calculation III! Actually, way complexes IV do. oxidizes QH2 side, releasing protons, reduces matrix up two-step "Q-cycle"). net effect oxidation QH2, without proton channel inside complex. oldest coupling gradient transport, also deduce correctly depict next figure. previous depiction obscured old mechanism operation For further details, see [4]. era where many most powerful people rather strained relations truth facts, accurate checking control science important ever, let's institute mechanisms strengthen it. Data sharing applicable article no datasets generated analyzed during current study.
Language: Английский