<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
Hi,<br>
But for those who are paranoid (and there really may be people out
to get you, so perhaps the paranoia is warranted) the main danger in
the review process is that your conclusions become known, perhaps to
your competitors. So I do not view the map as more important than
the conclusions, which are no longer secret. But while the reviewers
are anonymous to the authors, they are certainly not anonymous to
the editor. So if one suspects that material was compromised during
the review process, you can simply write to the editor of the
journal and say that you suspect Dr. X of using your results, and it
is important to determine whether Dr. X was one of the reviewers.
Almost all editors would take this extremely seriously, as it goes
to the foundation of peer-review. I speak as a former editor of a
journal, where I did receive such inquiries (and in every instance,
Dr. X was not one of the reviewers!).<br>
Regards,<br>
Ed<br>
<br>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/30/15 5:48 PM, Mike Strauss wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:274BC568-E0CE-4D8B-B637-1CE49F4F5590@crystal.harvard.edu"
type="cite">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;
charset=windows-1252">
Hi,
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Unlike Ed, I do understand the basis for the
paranoia, but I do not see a sensible way around it. Our system
is currently based on anonymous peer review, be that good or
ill. As such, if we expect thorough, honest, accurate, and
ultimately helpful reviews, it only makes sense that the
reviewer can look at the maps to assess the claims made, and to
suss out potential errors in processing or methodology.
Ultimately they will have to be deposited regardless. I don’t
see how you can avoid trusting the reviewers to behave
honourably.</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">Having said that, perhaps we should consider
implementing a system where reviewers are de-anonymised in the
event of a controversy (ie. your paper is scooped after a 4
month review process).</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
</div>
<div class="">mike</div>
<div class=""><br class="">
<div>
<blockquote type="cite" class="">
<div class="">On Apr 30, 2015, at 5:01 PM, Edward Egelman
<<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:egelman@virginia.edu" class="">egelman@virginia.edu</a>>
wrote:</div>
<br class="Apple-interchange-newline">
<div class="">
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type" class="">
<div bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000" class=""> Hi,<br
class="">
First, let me say that I was not the reviewer! Second,
I recently spoke at an NIH workshop on reproducibility
in structural biology:<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="http://wals.od.nih.gov/reproducibility/">http://wals.od.nih.gov/reproducibility/</a><br
class="">
and making maps and models available to reviewers BEFORE
publication, and not AFTER, was one of my
recommendations. I gave several examples of papers in
high profile journals that would never have been
published had reviewers actually compared the maps and
models during review. I do not understand the basis for
the paranoia.<br class="">
Regards,<br class="">
Ed<br class="">
<br class="">
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 4/30/15 4:19 PM,
Friedrich Foerster wrote:<br class="">
</div>
<blockquote
cite="mid:CALtyCEi3HpeKiciMXgV59T2XZT3TsfLyfCMn4qg-vXffCvZ=6w@mail.gmail.com"
type="cite" class="">
<div dir="ltr" class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">dear colleagues,<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
i would be interested in experiences /
suggestions / views of others in the field
on the following issue that may be of
interest to many of us:<br class="">
</div>
the editor of our manuscript forwarded the
request of a peer-reviewer to access the
cryo-em map of our beloved complex. this has
never happened to us, but to our surprise the
editor did not consider the request to be
unusual.<br class="">
of course, we share the point that the map
would be of great help in judging the
interpretation of the data. however, we also
feel very uncomfortable sending the condensed
result of lengthy research to an anonymous
colleague, who could theoretically make
considerable misuse of it. nevertheless, the
policy of the journal seems to let us little
choice: "<font class="" size="2">Supporting
data must be made available to editors and
peer</font><font class="" size="2">-</font><font
class="" size="2">reviewers at the time of</font><font
class="" size="2"> submission for the
purposes of evaluating the manuscript.</font><font
class="" size="2"> Peer</font><font class=""
size="2">-</font><font class="" size="2">reviewers</font><font
class="" size="2"> may be asked</font><font
class="" size="2"> to comment on the terms
of access to materials, methods and/or data
sets</font><font class="" size="2">"</font>.<br
class="">
</div>
in any case we would be curious whether others
indeed got similar requests and how they dealt
with it. a good solution for (paranoid?) people
like us could be a good web-based viewer that
lets others view our map, but i would not know
of such a tool.<br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
Thanks <br class="">
<br class="">
</div>
Friedrich<br class="" clear="all">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class="">
<div class=""><br class="">
-- <br class="">
<div class="gmail_signature">Dr.
Friedrich Foerster<br class="">
Max-Planck Institut fuer Biochemie<br
class="">
Am Klopferspitz 18<br class="">
D-82152 Martinsried<br class="">
<br class="">
Tel: +49 89 8578 2632<br class="">
Fax: +49 89 8578 2641<br class="">
<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="http://www.biochem.mpg.de/foerster"
target="_blank" class="">www.biochem.mpg.de/foerster</a><br
class="">
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<br class="">
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br class="">
<pre class="" wrap="">_______________________________________________
3dem mailing list
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:3dem@ncmir.ucsd.edu">3dem@ncmir.ucsd.edu</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem">https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem</a>
</pre>
</blockquote>
<br class="">
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Edward H. Egelman, Ph.D.
Professor
Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics
University of Virginia
President
Biophysical Society
phone: 434-924-8210
fax: 434-924-5069
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:egelman@virginia.edu">egelman@virginia.edu</a>
<a moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.people.virginia.edu/%7Eehe2n">http://www.people.virginia.edu/~ehe2n</a>
</pre>
</div>
_______________________________________________<br
class="">
3dem mailing list<br class="">
<a moz-do-not-send="true"
href="mailto:3dem@ncmir.ucsd.edu" class="">3dem@ncmir.ucsd.edu</a><br
class="">
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem">https://mail.ncmir.ucsd.edu/mailman/listinfo/3dem</a><br
class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br class="">
</div>
</blockquote>
<br>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Edward H. Egelman, Ph.D.
Professor
Dept. of Biochemistry and Molecular Genetics
University of Virginia
President
Biophysical Society
phone: 434-924-8210
fax: 434-924-5069
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:egelman@virginia.edu">egelman@virginia.edu</a>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.people.virginia.edu/~ehe2n">http://www.people.virginia.edu/~ehe2n</a>
</pre>
</body>
</html>