> "After a thorough examination of the available data, which included a > re-analysis of each structure alleged to have been fabricated, the > committee > found a preponderance of evidence that structures 1BEF, 1CMW, > 1DF9/2QID, > 1G40, 1G44, 1L6L, 2OU1, 1RID, 1Y8E, 2A01, and 2HR0 were more likely > than not > falsified and/or fabricated and recommended that they be removed from > the > public record," the university said in its statement this week."
I think it's worth pointing out, as I did when this came up last time, that one needs to read this list of PDB codes very carefully, and in a font that distinguishes 0 from O, and 1 from I. It would be very unfortunate, for example, if an innocent bacterial enzyme structure (2HRO) was called into question in some people's minds because of the apparent fabrication of the structure 2HR0. Once again, I'd like to get the community's thoughts: should we ask the PDB to stop using 0 and 1 in its IDs? I'll get off the soapbox now. - Matt (who has nothing to do with any of these structures...) -- Matthew Franklin , Ph.D. Senior Scientist, ImClone Systems, a wholly owned subsidiary of Eli Lilly & Company 180 Varick Street, 6th floor New York, NY 10014 phone:(917)606-4116 fax:(212)645-2054 Confidentiality Note: This e-mail, and any attachment to it, contains privileged and confidential information intended only for the use of the individual(s) or entity named on the e-mail. If the reader of this e-mail is not the intended recipient, or the employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that reading it is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please immediately return it to the sender and delete it from your system. Thank you.
