No, she does not. Even ignoring the fact that posthumous Nobels aren't granted, her efforts towards the elucidation of DNA structure were not sufficient to mer

No, she does not. Even ignoring the fact that posthumous Nobels aren't granted, her efforts towards the elucidation of DNA structure were not sufficient to merit the prize. Specifically, the prize it not awarded for merely collecting experimental data. In this case it was awarded for building a model that was consistent with the data and also explained a fundamental biological problem ("it has not escaped our notice that the specific pairing we have postulated immediately suggests A possible copying mechanism for the genetic material?"). Franklin (and everybody else) knew it was a helix, but it was Watson and Crick (not Wilkins; he shouldn't have received the prize either) who had the fundamental realization that DNA was double helical and formed complementary base pairs.