3 ms·

I would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob) - or if data in a datasheet (something like test specificity, level of detection, etc)

I would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob) - or if data in a datasheet (something like test specificity, level of detection, etc) was wrong Now, if while preparing the images they needed to do some editorial choices (or it is well possible a person in the editorial group was told to 'enhance the images' but wasn't aware of the details) because of limitations in doing the experiment then this is probably not a big deal

bonsai_spool 4mo ago
Do you work in biology? > would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob) - or if data in a datasheet (something like test specificity, level of detection, etc) was wrong These images are provided on the datasheet and form the basis for the level of detection / specificity claims
flobosg 4mo ago
> I would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob) Or if more than one blob is present (i.e. blobs at different molecular weights) for a supposedly selective and specific antibody that should show exactly one blob on the blot. > Now, if while preparing the images they needed to do some editorial choices Editorial choices on raw scientific data are a big no-no.
- raverbashing 4mo ago
  > Editorial choices on raw scientific data are a big no-no. I don't think you can find a picture in an article that hasn't been photoshopped in one way or another (which is mostly ok as long as it is not misleading) Edit: TF's reply is interesting https://www.thermofisher.com/es/es/home/life-science/antibodies/invitrogen-antibody-validation/image-transparency-frequently-asked-questions.html https://www.thermofisher.com/es/es/home/life-science/antibod... Basically they say they are reviewing the images
  - flobosg 4mo ago
    Usually, journals require raw, unmodified data to be deposited as supplementary information.
    - raverbashing 4mo ago
      Yes, as supplementary information (Also journals are usually more rigorous than marketing material)
      - flobosg 4mo ago
        > Yes, as supplementary information Still part of the article.
codedokode 4mo ago
It is obvious that they edited the images to make blobs look shorter vertically. And in some cases, simply copy-pasted non-existing blobs.

bonsai_spool 4mo ago

Do you work in biology? > would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob) - or if data in a datasheet (something like test specificity, level of detection, etc) was wrong These images are provided on the datasheet and form the basis for the level of detection / specificity claims

flobosg 4mo ago

> I would be more worried if the blotted area was different (the dark blob) Or if more than one blob is present (i.e. blobs at different molecular weights) for a supposedly selective and specific antibody that should show exactly one blob on the blot. > Now, if while preparing the images they needed to do some editorial choices Editorial choices on raw scientific data are a big no-no.

raverbashing 4mo ago
> Editorial choices on raw scientific data are a big no-no. I don't think you can find a picture in an article that hasn't been photoshopped in one way or another (which is mostly ok as long as it is not misleading) Edit: TF's reply is interesting https://www.thermofisher.com/es/es/home/life-science/antibodies/invitrogen-antibody-validation/image-transparency-frequently-asked-questions.html https://www.thermofisher.com/es/es/home/life-science/antibod... Basically they say they are reviewing the images
- flobosg 4mo ago
  Usually, journals require raw, unmodified data to be deposited as supplementary information.
  - raverbashing 4mo ago
    Yes, as supplementary information (Also journals are usually more rigorous than marketing material)
    - flobosg 4mo ago
      > Yes, as supplementary information Still part of the article.

codedokode 4mo ago

It is obvious that they edited the images to make blobs look shorter vertically. And in some cases, simply copy-pasted non-existing blobs.