Looks like a pretty embarrassing paper, with embarrassing endorsements. Seriously: if the authors ran blastp, they surely saw hits with lots of other viruses, not just HIV! They may be right to note that 4 HIV hits is interesting. But *chose* not to report other matches. Why?https://twitter.com/polybiotique/status/1223417659485802496 …
-
Prikaži ovu nit
-
As per comments on the biorxiv article, even the 4 hits in HIV are debatable (ie, chance match for short seq when searching a huge database). And two of those appear in bat coronavirus.https://www.biorxiv.org/content/10.1101/2020.01.30.927871v1 …
0 proslijeđenih tweetova 4 korisnika označavaju da im se sviđaPrikaži ovu nit
The usual anti-preprint crowd may cite this as a negative for biorxiv. Fact is, shoddy work gets quickly and brutally shown up on biorxiv itself. Compare that with hordes of mediocre journals.
23:52 - 31. sij 2020.
0 replies
1 proslijeđeni tweet
17 korisnika označava da im se sviđa
Čini se da učitavanje traje već neko vrijeme.
Twitter je možda preopterećen ili ima kratkotrajnih poteškoća u radu. Pokušajte ponovno ili potražite dodatne informacije u odjeljku Status Twittera.