Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research?

Vikash Bhardwaj

doi:10.12688/f1000research.6854.1

Home Browse Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research?

ALL Metrics

-

Views

-

Downloads

Get PDF

Get XML

Export

▬

✚

Opinion Article

Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research?

[version 1; peer review: 2 approved]

Vikash Bhardwaj

PUBLISHED 30 Jul 2015

Author details Author details

Molecular Biology and Genetics Domain, Lovely Professional University, Punjab, India

OPEN PEER REVIEW

REVIEWER STATUS

Abstract

Worldwide, there is an issue of irreproducibility in life science research. In the USA alone $28 billion per year spent on preclinical research is not reproducible. Within this opinion article, I provide a brief historical account of the discovery of the Watson-Crick DNA model and introduce another neglected model of DNA. This negligence may be one of the fundamental reasons behind irreproducibility in molecular biology research.

Keywords

Reproducibility, Irreproducibility, Molecular biology, DNA, Research

Corresponding author: Vikash Bhardwaj

Competing interests: No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information: The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Copyright: © 2015 Bhardwaj V. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

How to cite: Bhardwaj V. Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research? [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2015, 4:438 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6854.1) First published: 30 Jul 2015, 4:438 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6854.1) Latest published: 30 Jul 2015, 4:438 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6854.1)

Introduction

Every year billions of dollars are invested in research worldwide to find solutions for deadly diseases like cancer, AIDS, TB etc. Much research is now focused on DNA and everyone is trying to understand what is happening within DNA at the molecular level. Whenever I ask my students within a molecular biology class, “Who discovered DNA?” many of my students give a very quick response “Watson and Crick”. It reminds me of a statement made by L. Pray that “Many people believe that American biologist James Watson and English physicist Francis Crick discovered DNA in the 1950s”¹. Then a few students respond, “No sir” Watson and Crick uncovered the structure of DNA. But still it remains a question to my students: who discovered DNA? When there is no answer, I start explaining history of DNA discovery. I remind them about Friedrich Miescher who isolated DNA for the first time in 1869 and how Watson and Crick deciphered the structure of DNA in 1953. It took almost 85 years to discover the molecular details of DNA structure. Friedrich Miescher was a brilliant scientist but he suffered when his findings were not published immediately and his boss published his results after repeating his experiments on his own. It took almost two years to get his results published. Even Miescher had the opinion that the new substance (“nuclein”) could be thought of as genetic material but various established theories stopped his journey. Many scientists at that time were of the opinion that some proteins could be genetic material and they were busy finding novel proteins which could act as genetic material. Friedrich Miescher died in 1895 without getting credit for his discovery². Later in 1919, the “Tetra nucleotide hypothesis” proposed by Levene become an obstacle in DNA structure discovery as he proposed DNA as an inert molecule having four nucleotides repeatedly arranged. Levene was also a brilliant scientist and had published more than 700 papers and many scientists followed his opinions^3,4. In the coming years scientists were not interested in doing work on DNA until 1928 when Griffith gave some evidence that it is not the proteins which acts as a genetic material⁵. His experimental findings were worked out further in 1944 by Avery et al. and they clearly demonstrated that it is DNA which acts as a transforming agent but still they faced opposition. Still, many scientists were slow to accept this clear proof that DNA, not protein, is the genetic molecule^6,7. From 1950 onwards Chargaff used to meet and discuss with scientists that he had different results showing that DNA cannot be an inert molecule thus clearly rejecting the “Tetra nucleotide hypothesis”. But his views were not given much importance (http://www.dnai.org)⁸. In 1952, Hershey and Chase did a classical experiment which proved without doubt that DNA is genetic material⁹. It created interest in others to solve out molecular details of DNA. In 1953 Linus Pauling (one of the famous Nobel laureates) proposed a triple helical model of DNA in which they proposed phosphate groups are inside while nitrogenous bases are outside¹⁰. Really Pauling’s authority in science might have become another obstacle in the discovery of the correct DNA model, if Watson and Crick had not realized that phosphate groups cannot be inside, as this would destabilize DNA due to high negative charge. Watson, Crick and Wilkinson proposed the double helical structure of DNA based on work done by Rosalin Franklin^11–13. Linus Pauling himself visited Watson and Crick and was convinced about their proposed model (https://paulingblog.wordpress.com/2009/04/30/the-watson-and-crick-structure-of-dna/). Watson, Crick and Wilkinson received the Nobel Prize in 1963 for solving the structure of DNA. Yes, truly their findings have changed molecular biology research worldwide. Many scientists started developing new molecular techniques and the fundamentals of biology are based on it. In 1973 E.M. Southern developed the Southern hybridization technique to detect DNA¹⁴ and later in 1977, northern hybridization was developed by Alwine et al. to detect levels of RNA¹⁵. In 1983, Dr Kary Mulis developed PCR (Polymerase Chain Reaction) for DNA amplification, which is also based on antiparallel complementary hybridization of DNA and for this he was awarded Nobel Prize in 1993¹⁶. In 1973, Boyer, Cohen and Chang developed cloning techniques which has allowed the production of recombinant protein and a whole new science of recombinant DNA technology has been developed based on this¹⁷. On the basis of Watson and Crick model of DNA and using Sanger DNA sequencing chemistry, scientists throughout the world invested billions of dollars and developed the Human Genome Project^18,19. Today efforts are being taken to sequence the genome of each organism. On the basis of homologous DNA sequence, gene knockout technology was developed and many scientists have tried to characterize functions of various proteins and DNA elements on the basis of gene knockouts^20–22. Capecchi, Evans and Smithies, were awarded the Nobel Prize for developing gene knockout technology in 2007. In 1998, siRNA technology was developed by Andrew Z. Fire and Craig C. Mello for which they were awarded Nobel Prize in 2006²³ and Microarray technology was developed by Pat Brown which provides powerful tools for global characterization of gene expression²⁴. Yes, truly whole molecular biology has flourished with much new information and technologies in last 60 years based on the Watson and Crick model of DNA and it will not be possible for me to write about all techniques.

Villain of molecular biology

There are many publications which have reported huge errors of various molecular techniques (for more details see 25–36). You may have experienced, non-specific amplification of DNA in a PCR reaction, non-specific hybridization in Southern and northern hybridization and then have tried harder to find out conditions which give you better results. You may have experienced, non-specific cloning reactions and then must have tried to screen out a specific clone out of non-specific ones. Even today we do not have answer as to why petunia flowers turn white on overexpression of a gene which should have made it more purple³⁷. None of our gene knockout technology explains whether they have taken out one and only one gene and the remainder of the genes have not been affected. To the best of my knowledge, there is no whole genome sequence information available for knock out organisms. I wish to inform readers that the Human Genome Project is not yet complete even though its first draft was announced 15 years ago³⁸. All over the world, billions of dollars are still invested in a hope to find solutions for various diseases. How can we find solutions if the molecular techniques used show errors and many times we are unable to reproduce the same findings in different labs. In 2012 the Biotechnology Company Amgen with a team of 100 scientists found that only 10% (6 out of 53) of research published by reputable labs in top journals is reproducible and 90% of money ($28 billion) is wasted. It looks like that even after development of high throughput techniques and instruments, research worldwide is losing accuracy and precision. It is a worse situation for biotechnology/pharmaceutical industries who are going to invest or have invested millions of dollars for their new drug development programme. It’s again a far worse situation for the public who are looking forward to scientists one day finding solutions to deadly diseases and producing cheaper drugs and the best treatments soon^39,40. Recently Professor Eric Lander (one of the leaders of the Human Genome Project, and a member of US President Barack Obama’s scientific advisory panel) visited India and gave an exclusive interview stating that we will have a solution for most cancers in the next 25–30 years (http://www.ndtv.com/video/player/ndtv-special-ndtv-24x7/mapping-the-human-genome-the-eric-lander-interview/358410). I totally disagree with his statements as with the current ways of doing research, it may take many thousand years to find ultimate solutions for mankind’s problems. A recent report by John Arrowsmith revealed that the Phase II success rate for new development projects has decreased by 10% in the last few years. It will definitely increase the cost of new drugs in the future. It will also decrease the trust of the public Government and funding agencies in scientific activities⁴¹. But still a question arises, who is the ‘villain’ behind these problems? Yes, the B- form of DNA is a ‘hero’ of molecular biology but there is also a ‘villain’ of molecular biology. It’s a form of DNA which is actually much less studied, discussed and used in designing molecular techniques. It is “parallel stranded duplex DNA” which was first reported by Ramsing & Jovin and Sande et al. in 1988. There are few reports in favour of parallel stranded DNA which summarize that there is no drastic difference in parallel and antiparallel DNA having mixed AT/GC composition^42–47. Recently we have developed a PD-PCR technology based on parallel stranded DNA and we have concluded that two PCR products can be synthesized from a single stranded template DNA, one by conventional PCR and another by our approach⁴⁸. In 2008, Lestienne et al. reported a novel property of TFO (Triplex forming oligonucleotides-known for transcription inhibition) that Triple helix primer (THP) bounded to the duplex DNA in a parallel orientation can initiate DNA synthesis by various DNA polymerases of phage, retrovirus, bacteria and humans^49,50. There are reports which state that Southern hybridization reaction can be performed using parallel complementary probe and gene silencing can be applied using parallel complementary RNA^51–53. It also makes me think whether earlier scientists have developed a 100% accurate genome sequence of Human which has only been developed on the basis of antiparallel complementarity in DNA. I strongly believe technical errors observed in various molecular techniques can be ruled out by considering both parallel and antiparallel complementarity of DNA. A probe for Southern blotting/northern blotting can be designed such that it binds to its target only in an antiparallel manner. Primers for PCR can be designed in a similar way. There is a need to develop siRNA and microarray chips keeping in mind parallel and antiparallel hybridization of DNA. Science without errors will increase reproducibility in research worldwide (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Image by Paul Blow in article “Reproducibility: The risks of replication drive” by Mina Bissel, Nature, 2013.

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Faculty Opinions recommended

References

1. Pray LA: Discovery of DNA structure and function: Watson and Crick. Nature Education. 2008; 1(1): 100. Reference Source
2. Dahm R: Discovering DNA: Friedrich Miescher and the early years of nucleic acid research. Hum Genet. 2008; 122(6): 565–581. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
3. Levene PA: The structure of yeast nucleic acid. Studies from the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. 1919; 30: 221. Reference Source
4. Hargittai I: The tetranucleotide hypothesis: a centennial. Struct Chem. 2009; 20(5): 753–756. Publisher Full Text
5. Griffith F: The Significance of Pneumococcal Types. J Hyg (Lond). 1928; 27(02): 113–159. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
6. Avery OT, MacLeod CM, McCarty M: Studies on the chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of pneumococcal types : induction of transformation by a desoxyribonucleic acid fraction isolated from pneumococcus type III. J Exp Med. 1944; 79(2): 137–158. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
7. Deichmann U: Early responses to Avery et al.’s paper on DNA as hereditary material. Hist Stud Phys Biol Sci. 2004; 34(2): 207–232. Publisher Full Text
8. Dahm R: From discovering to understanding. Friedrich Miescher’s attempts to uncover the function of DNA. EMBO Rep. 2010; 11(3): 153–160. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
9. Hershey AD, Chase M: Independent functions of viral protein and nucleic acid in growth of bacteriophage. J Gen Physiol. 1952; 36(1): 39–56. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
10. Pauling L, Corey RB: A Proposed Structure For The Nucleic Acids. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1953; 39(2): 84–97. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
11. Watson JD, Crick FH: Molecular structure of nucleic acids; a structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature. 1953; 171(4356): 737–738. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
12. Wilkins MHF, Stokes AR, Wilson HR: Molecular structure of deoxypentose nucleic acids. Nature. 1953; 171(4356): 738–740. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
13. Franklin RE, Gosling RG: Molecular configuration in sodium thymonucleate. Nature. 1953; 171(4356): 740–741. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
14. Southern EM: Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. J Mol Biol. 1975; 98(3): 503–517. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
15. Alwine JC, Kemp DJ, Stark GR: Method for detection of specific RNAs in agarose gels by transfer to diazobenzyloxymethyl-paper and hybridization with DNA probes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1977; 74(12): 5350–5354. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
16. Mullis KB: Process for amplifying nucleic acid sequences. U.S. Patent No. 4,683,202 1987. Reference Source
17. Cohen SN, Chang ACY, Boyer HW, et al.: Construction of biologically functional bacterial plasmids in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1973; 70(11): 3240–3244. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
18. Lander ES, Linton LM, Birren B, et al.: Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature. 2001; 409(6822): 860–921. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
19. Schuler GD, Boguski MS, Stewart EA, et al.: A gene map of the human genome. Science. 1996; 274(5287): 540–546. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
20. Thomas KR, Capecchi MR: Site-directed mutagenesis by gene targeting in mouse embryo-derived stem cells. Cell. 1987; 51(3): 503–512. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
21. Evans MJ, Kaufman MH: Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature. 1981; 292(5819): 154–156. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
22. Doetschman T, Gregg RG, Maeda N, et al.: Targetted correction of a mutant HPRT gene in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature. 1987; 330(6148): 576–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
23. Fire A, Xu S, Montgomery MK, et al.: Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature. 1998; 391(6669): 806–811. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
24. Brown P: You say you want a revolution: an interview with Pat Brown. Interview by Jane Gitschier. PLoS Genet. 2009; 5(7): e1000560. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
25. Kothapalli R, Yoder SJ, Mane S, et al.: Microarray results: how accurate are they? BMC Bioinformatics. 2002; 3(1): 22. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
26. Draghici S, Khatri P, Eklund AC, et al.: Reliability and reproducibility issues in DNA microarray measurements. Trends Genet. 2006; 22(2): 101–109. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
27. Irizarry RA, Warren D, Spencer F, et al.: Multiple-laboratory comparison of microarray platforms. Nat Methods. 2005; 2(5): 345–350. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
28. Xu J, Deng X, Chan V, et al.: Variability of DNA microarray gene expression profiles in cultured rat primary hepatocytes. Gene Regul Syst Bio. 2007; 1: 235–249. PubMed Abstract | Free Full Text
29. Koltai H, Weingarten-Baror C: Specificity of DNA microarray hybridization: characterization, effectors and approaches for data correction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36(7): 2395–2405. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
30. Castanotto D, Rossi JJ: The promises and pitfalls of RNA-interference-based therapeutics. Nature. 2009; 457(7228): 426–433. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
31. Jackson AL, Linsley PS: Noise amidst the silence: off-target effects of siRNAs? Trends Genet. 2004; 20(11): 521–524. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
32. Jackson AL, Bartz SR, Schelter J, et al.: Expression profiling reveals off-target gene regulation by RNAi. Nat Biotechnol. 2003; 21(6): 635–637. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
33. Scacheri PC, Rozenblatt-Rosen O, Caplen NJ, et al.: Short interfering RNAs can induce unexpected and divergent changes in the levels of untargeted proteins in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101(7): 1892–1897. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
34. Tschuch C, Schulz A, Pscherer A, et al.: Off-target effects of siRNA specific for GFP. BMC Mol Biol. 2008; 9(1): 60. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
35. Jackson AL, Burchard J, Schelter J, et al.: Widespread siRNA “off-target” transcript silencing mediated by seed region sequence complementarity. RNA. 2006; 12(7): 1179–1187. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
36. Gumienny R, Zavolan M: Accurate transcriptome-wide prediction of microRNA targets and small interfering RNA off-targets with MIRZA-G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015; 43(3): 1380–1391. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
37. Napoli C, Lemieux C, Jorgensen R: Introduction of a Chimeric Chalcone Synthase Gene into Petunia Results in Reversible Co-Suppression of Homologous Genes in trans. Plant Cell. 1990; 2(4): 279–289. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
38. Blow N: Decoding the unsequenceable. Biotechniques. 2015; 58(2): 52–58. PubMed Abstract
39. Begley CG, Ellis LM: Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature. 2012; 483(7391): 531–533. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
40. Freedman LP, Cockburn IM, Simcoe TS: The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research. PLoS Biol. 2015; 13(6): e1002165. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
41. Arrowsmith J: Trial watch: Phase II failures: 2008–2010. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011; 10(5): 328–329. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
42. Ramsing NB, Jovin TM: Parallel stranded duplex DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 1988; 16(14A): 6659–6676. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
43. van de Sande JH, Ramsing NB, Germann MW, et al.: Parallel stranded DNA. Science. 1988; 241(4865): 551–557. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
44. Shchyolkina AK, Borisova OF, Livshits MA, et al.: Parallel-stranded DNA with mixed AT/GC composition: role of trans G.C base pairs in sequence dependent helical stability. Biochemistry. 2000; 39(33): 10034–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
45. Shchyolkina AK, Borisova OF, Livshits MA, et al.: Parallel-stranded DNA with natural base sequences. Mol Biol (Mosk). 2003; 37(2): 255–265. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
46. Borisova OF, Shchyolkina AK, Chernov BK, et al.: Relative stability of AT and GC pairs in parallel DNA duplex formed by a natural sequence. FEBS Lett. 1993; 322(3): 304–306. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
47. Li H, Peng X, Leonard P, et al.: Binding of actinomycin C₁ (D) and actinomin to base-modified oligonucleotide duplexes with parallel chain orientation. Bioorg Med Chem. 2006; 14(12): 4089–4100. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
48. Bhardwaj V, Sharma K: Parallel DNA polymerase chain reaction: Synthesis of two different PCR products from a DNA template [v1; ref status: indexed, http://f1000r.es/4sm]. F1000Res. 2014; 3: 320. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
49. Lestienne PP, Boudsocq F, Bonnet JE: Initiation of DNA Replication by a Third Parallel DNA Strand Bound in a Triple-Helix Manner Leads to Strand Invasion. Biochemistry. 2008; 47(21): 5689–5698. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
50. Lestienne PP: Priming DNA replication from triple helix oligonucleotides: Possible threestranded DNA in DNA polymerases. Mol Biol Int. 2011; 2011: 562849. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text
51. Tchurikov NA, Shchyolkina AK, Borissova OF, et al.: Southern molecular hybridization experiments with parallel complementary DNA probes. FEBS Lett. 1992; 297(3): 233–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
52. Tchurikov NA, Chistyakova LG, Zavilgelsky GB, et al.: Gene-specific silencing by expression of parallel complementary RNA in Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem. 2000; 275(34): 26523–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
53. Liu YS, Zhang YQ, Yang LX, et al.: Gene-specific silencing induced by parallel complementary RNA in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Biotechnol Lett. 2009; 31(10): 1571–1575. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text
54. Bissell M: Reproducibility: The risks of the replication drive. Nature. 2013; 503(7476): 333–334. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Comments on this article Comments (2)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 30 Jul 2015

Reader Comment 22 Feb 2016

Victor Zhurkin, National Cancer Institute, NIH, USA

22 Feb 2016

Reader Comment

I have read this article with a great interest. I agree with the author that the current level of negligence is frighteningly high — maybe, this is related to a large ... Continue reading I have read this article with a great interest. I agree with the author that the current level of negligence is frighteningly high — maybe, this is related to a large amount of mol. biology information accumulated in the last 20-30 years…

In addition to the refs. 49-50 [Lestienne et al.] I would like to add refs. to our papers on the ‘parallel’ R-triplex that can be formed by the DNA and RNA strands with arbitrary sequence :

1. Zhurkin, V. B., Raghunathan, G., Ulyanov, N. B., Camerini-Otero, R. D. and Jernigan, R. L.
A parallel DNA triplex as a model for the intermediate in homologous recombination. J. Mol. Biol. 239: 181-200, 1994.
2. Shchyolkina, A. K., Kaluzhny, D. N., Arndt-Jovin, D. J., Jovin, T. M., and Zhurkin, V. B.
Recombination R-triplex: H-bonds contribution to stability as revealed with minor base substitutions for adenine. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: 3239–3245, 2006.

Knowledge of the R-triplex stereochemistry may be critical for understanding of the mechanism of RNA-DNA recognition (and subsequent formation of the heteroduplex) by a parallel complementary RNA.

Thanks!
I have read this article with a great interest. I agree with the author that the current level of negligence is frighteningly high — maybe, this is related to a large amount of mol. biology information accumulated in the last 20-30 years…

In addition to the refs. 49-50 [Lestienne et al.] I would like to add refs. to our papers on the ‘parallel’ R-triplex that can be formed by the DNA and RNA strands with arbitrary sequence :

1. Zhurkin, V. B., Raghunathan, G., Ulyanov, N. B., Camerini-Otero, R. D. and Jernigan, R. L.
A parallel DNA triplex as a model for the intermediate in homologous recombination. J. Mol. Biol. 239: 181-200, 1994.
2. Shchyolkina, A. K., Kaluzhny, D. N., Arndt-Jovin, D. J., Jovin, T. M., and Zhurkin, V. B.
Recombination R-triplex: H-bonds contribution to stability as revealed with minor base substitutions for adenine. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: 3239–3245, 2006.

Knowledge of the R-triplex stereochemistry may be critical for understanding of the mechanism of RNA-DNA recognition (and subsequent formation of the heteroduplex) by a parallel complementary RNA.

Thanks!
Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close
Report a concern
Reader Comment 21 Sep 2015

Chithan Kandaswami, Castle Hills Health, India

21 Sep 2015

Reader Comment
1. This is an interesting article, the theme of which is reminiscent of the following papers in general.
  
  Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
  
  How to Make More Published Research True. John
... Continue reading
This is an interesting article, the theme of which is reminiscent of the following papers in general.

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

How to Make More Published Research True. John P. A. Ioannidis
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747

Horton R. Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma? Lancet 2015; 385(9976): 1380.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1

There is a typographical error in an author's name: it needs to be Rosalind Franklin, and not Rosalin Franklin.

PCR technique is mentioned in this article; however there is no mention of the Meselsen-Stahl experiment. Watson and Crick speculated that DNA duplication would occur by a semiconservative replication of DNA. The experimental proof for such a model, however, came from M. S. Meselson and F. W. Stahl. Classic, groundbreaking, and momentous findings of Meselson and Stahl helped firm up the model of double helix, which had not gained wide acceptance until after the publication of the Meselson and Stahl article, 5 years after the publication of the DNA double helix model.

"The Perspective by Philip Hanawalt of Stanford University (Stanford, CA), in this issue of PNAS, reviews the scientific Revolution of this crowning achievement and outlines its subsequent impact on four decades of DNA replication, recombination, and repair research. The two men behind the laborious steps in discovering the semiconservative replication of DNA credit much of their success to timing, hard work, and serendipity."
Meselson and Stahl: The art of DNA replication.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539798/

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Meselson_Stahl.html

The Meselson - Stahl Experiment.

"the most beautiful experiment in biology"

Thanks!
This is an interesting article, the theme of which is reminiscent of the following papers in general.

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

How to Make More Published Research True. John P. A. Ioannidis
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747

Horton R. Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma? Lancet 2015; 385(9976): 1380.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1

There is a typographical error in an author's name: it needs to be Rosalind Franklin, and not Rosalin Franklin.

PCR technique is mentioned in this article; however there is no mention of the Meselsen-Stahl experiment. Watson and Crick speculated that DNA duplication would occur by a semiconservative replication of DNA. The experimental proof for such a model, however, came from M. S. Meselson and F. W. Stahl. Classic, groundbreaking, and momentous findings of Meselson and Stahl helped firm up the model of double helix, which had not gained wide acceptance until after the publication of the Meselson and Stahl article, 5 years after the publication of the DNA double helix model.

"The Perspective by Philip Hanawalt of Stanford University (Stanford, CA), in this issue of PNAS, reviews the scientific Revolution of this crowning achievement and outlines its subsequent impact on four decades of DNA replication, recombination, and repair research. The two men behind the laborious steps in discovering the semiconservative replication of DNA credit much of their success to timing, hard work, and serendipity."
Meselson and Stahl: The art of DNA replication.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539798/

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Meselson_Stahl.html

The Meselson - Stahl Experiment.

"the most beautiful experiment in biology"

Thanks!
Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close
Report a concern
Comment

Author details Author details

Molecular Biology and Genetics Domain, Lovely Professional University, Punjab, India

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Article Versions (1)

version 1

Published: 30 Jul 2015, 4:438

https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6854.1

Copyright

© 2015 Bhardwaj V. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Download

Export To

metrics

	Views	Downloads
F1000Research	-	-
PubMed Central Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.	-	-

Citations

0

SEE MORE DETAILS

CITE

how to cite this article

Bhardwaj V. Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research? [version 1; peer review: 2 approved]. F1000Research 2015, 4:438 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.6854.1)

NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

track

receive updates on this article

Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Version 1

VERSION 1

PUBLISHED 30 Jul 2015

Views

79

Reviewer Report 10 Aug 2015

Nirajkumar Singh, Department of Biotechnology, Shri A. N. Patel PG Institute, Anand, India

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.7374.r9738

The article presented here “Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research?” deals mainly with the issue of non-reproducibility of research citing many examples including the example of DNA structure elucidated by Watson and Crick.

I feel this is very ... Continue reading

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Views

97

Reviewer Report 03 Aug 2015

Sukrat Sinha, Emory Vaccine Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

Approved

https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.7374.r9734

The article written by Dr. Vikas Bharadwaj throws light on the issue of non reproducibility of research citing the example of DNA structure elucidated by Watson and Crick. Every year billions of dollars are being spent on this part of ... Continue reading

CITE

Report a concern

Respond or Comment

Comments on this article Comments (2)

Version 1

VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 30 Jul 2015

Reader Comment 22 Feb 2016

Victor Zhurkin, National Cancer Institute, NIH, USA

22 Feb 2016

Reader Comment

I have read this article with a great interest. I agree with the author that the current level of negligence is frighteningly high — maybe, this is related to a large ... Continue reading I have read this article with a great interest. I agree with the author that the current level of negligence is frighteningly high — maybe, this is related to a large amount of mol. biology information accumulated in the last 20-30 years…

In addition to the refs. 49-50 [Lestienne et al.] I would like to add refs. to our papers on the ‘parallel’ R-triplex that can be formed by the DNA and RNA strands with arbitrary sequence :

1. Zhurkin, V. B., Raghunathan, G., Ulyanov, N. B., Camerini-Otero, R. D. and Jernigan, R. L.
A parallel DNA triplex as a model for the intermediate in homologous recombination. J. Mol. Biol. 239: 181-200, 1994.
2. Shchyolkina, A. K., Kaluzhny, D. N., Arndt-Jovin, D. J., Jovin, T. M., and Zhurkin, V. B.
Recombination R-triplex: H-bonds contribution to stability as revealed with minor base substitutions for adenine. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: 3239–3245, 2006.

Knowledge of the R-triplex stereochemistry may be critical for understanding of the mechanism of RNA-DNA recognition (and subsequent formation of the heteroduplex) by a parallel complementary RNA.

Thanks!
I have read this article with a great interest. I agree with the author that the current level of negligence is frighteningly high — maybe, this is related to a large amount of mol. biology information accumulated in the last 20-30 years…

In addition to the refs. 49-50 [Lestienne et al.] I would like to add refs. to our papers on the ‘parallel’ R-triplex that can be formed by the DNA and RNA strands with arbitrary sequence :

1. Zhurkin, V. B., Raghunathan, G., Ulyanov, N. B., Camerini-Otero, R. D. and Jernigan, R. L.
A parallel DNA triplex as a model for the intermediate in homologous recombination. J. Mol. Biol. 239: 181-200, 1994.
2. Shchyolkina, A. K., Kaluzhny, D. N., Arndt-Jovin, D. J., Jovin, T. M., and Zhurkin, V. B.
Recombination R-triplex: H-bonds contribution to stability as revealed with minor base substitutions for adenine. Nucleic Acids Res. 34: 3239–3245, 2006.

Knowledge of the R-triplex stereochemistry may be critical for understanding of the mechanism of RNA-DNA recognition (and subsequent formation of the heteroduplex) by a parallel complementary RNA.

Thanks!
Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close
Report a concern
Reader Comment 21 Sep 2015

Chithan Kandaswami, Castle Hills Health, India

21 Sep 2015

Reader Comment
1. This is an interesting article, the theme of which is reminiscent of the following papers in general.
  
  Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
  http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/
  
  How to Make More Published Research True. John
... Continue reading
This is an interesting article, the theme of which is reminiscent of the following papers in general.

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

How to Make More Published Research True. John P. A. Ioannidis
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747

Horton R. Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma? Lancet 2015; 385(9976): 1380.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1

There is a typographical error in an author's name: it needs to be Rosalind Franklin, and not Rosalin Franklin.

PCR technique is mentioned in this article; however there is no mention of the Meselsen-Stahl experiment. Watson and Crick speculated that DNA duplication would occur by a semiconservative replication of DNA. The experimental proof for such a model, however, came from M. S. Meselson and F. W. Stahl. Classic, groundbreaking, and momentous findings of Meselson and Stahl helped firm up the model of double helix, which had not gained wide acceptance until after the publication of the Meselson and Stahl article, 5 years after the publication of the DNA double helix model.

"The Perspective by Philip Hanawalt of Stanford University (Stanford, CA), in this issue of PNAS, reviews the scientific Revolution of this crowning achievement and outlines its subsequent impact on four decades of DNA replication, recombination, and repair research. The two men behind the laborious steps in discovering the semiconservative replication of DNA credit much of their success to timing, hard work, and serendipity."
Meselson and Stahl: The art of DNA replication.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539798/

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Meselson_Stahl.html

The Meselson - Stahl Experiment.

"the most beautiful experiment in biology"

Thanks!
This is an interesting article, the theme of which is reminiscent of the following papers in general.

Why Most Published Research Findings Are False
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1182327/

How to Make More Published Research True. John P. A. Ioannidis
http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1001747

Horton R. Offline: What is medicine's 5 sigma? Lancet 2015; 385(9976): 1380.
DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(15)60696-1

There is a typographical error in an author's name: it needs to be Rosalind Franklin, and not Rosalin Franklin.

PCR technique is mentioned in this article; however there is no mention of the Meselsen-Stahl experiment. Watson and Crick speculated that DNA duplication would occur by a semiconservative replication of DNA. The experimental proof for such a model, however, came from M. S. Meselson and F. W. Stahl. Classic, groundbreaking, and momentous findings of Meselson and Stahl helped firm up the model of double helix, which had not gained wide acceptance until after the publication of the Meselson and Stahl article, 5 years after the publication of the DNA double helix model.

"The Perspective by Philip Hanawalt of Stanford University (Stanford, CA), in this issue of PNAS, reviews the scientific Revolution of this crowning achievement and outlines its subsequent impact on four decades of DNA replication, recombination, and repair research. The two men behind the laborious steps in discovering the semiconservative replication of DNA credit much of their success to timing, hard work, and serendipity."
Meselson and Stahl: The art of DNA replication.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC539798/

http://users.rcn.com/jkimball.ma.ultranet/BiologyPages/M/Meselson_Stahl.html

The Meselson - Stahl Experiment.

"the most beautiful experiment in biology"

Thanks!
Competing Interests: No competing interests. Close
Report a concern
Comment

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

	Invited Reviewers
	1	2
Version 1 30 Jul 15	read	read

Sukrat Sinha, Emory University, Atlanta, USA
Nirajkumar Singh, Shri A. N. Patel PG Institute, Anand, India

Comments on this article

All Comments(2)

Add a comment

Sign up for content alerts

Browse by related subjects

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

79 Views

10 Aug 2015 | for Version 1

Nirajkumar Singh, Department of Biotechnology, Shri A. N. Patel PG Institute, Anand, India

79 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The article presented here “Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research?” deals mainly with the issue of non-reproducibility of research citing many examples including the example of DNA structure elucidated by Watson and Crick.

I feel this is very serious issue throughout the world. The author claims only about 10% research paper work is reproducible. However, keeping the recent development of genetic engineering and its product (used in day to day life e.g., Insulin, BT Cotton, and many more..) in mind, I think this figure should be more than that mentioned by authors, even though the authors are very much correct about the reproducibility of scientific work.

Overall the manuscript is written in a very systematic way which fully justifies the title of the manuscript. In my opinion the manuscript is adequate for indexing.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

Back to all reports

Reviewer Report

97 Views

03 Aug 2015 | for Version 1

Sukrat Sinha, Emory Vaccine Center, Emory University, Atlanta, GA, USA

97 Views Cite this report Responses(0)

Approved

The article written by Dr. Vikas Bharadwaj throws light on the issue of non reproducibility of research citing the example of DNA structure elucidated by Watson and Crick. Every year billions of dollars are being spent on this part of research. The article envisages the very valid point that there is a dire need to revise the concepts so that our research could be more fruitful and result oriented. I highly appreciate Dr. Bhardwaj for bringing this issue on forefront.

Competing Interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

I confirm that I have read this submission and believe that I have an appropriate level of expertise to confirm that it is of an acceptable scientific standard.

Respond to this report

Responses (0)

[1] 1. Pray LA: Discovery of DNA structure and function: Watson and Crick. Nature Education. 2008; 1(1): 100. Reference Source

[2] 2. Dahm R: Discovering DNA: Friedrich Miescher and the early years of nucleic acid research. Hum Genet. 2008; 122(6): 565–581. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[3] 3. Levene PA: The structure of yeast nucleic acid. Studies from the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research. 1919; 30: 221. Reference Source

[4] 4. Hargittai I: The tetranucleotide hypothesis: a centennial. Struct Chem. 2009; 20(5): 753–756. Publisher Full Text

[5] 5. Griffith F: The Significance of Pneumococcal Types. J Hyg (Lond). 1928; 27(02): 113–159. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[6] 6. Avery OT, MacLeod CM, McCarty M: Studies on the chemical nature of the substance inducing transformation of pneumococcal types : induction of transformation by a desoxyribonucleic acid fraction isolated from pneumococcus type III. J Exp Med. 1944; 79(2): 137–158. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[7] 7. Deichmann U: Early responses to Avery et al.’s paper on DNA as hereditary material. Hist Stud Phys Biol Sci. 2004; 34(2): 207–232. Publisher Full Text

[8] 8. Dahm R: From discovering to understanding. Friedrich Miescher’s attempts to uncover the function of DNA. EMBO Rep. 2010; 11(3): 153–160. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[9] 9. Hershey AD, Chase M: Independent functions of viral protein and nucleic acid in growth of bacteriophage. J Gen Physiol. 1952; 36(1): 39–56. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[10] 10. Pauling L, Corey RB: A Proposed Structure For The Nucleic Acids. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1953; 39(2): 84–97. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[11] 11. Watson JD, Crick FH: Molecular structure of nucleic acids; a structure for deoxyribose nucleic acid. Nature. 1953; 171(4356): 737–738. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[12] 12. Wilkins MHF, Stokes AR, Wilson HR: Molecular structure of deoxypentose nucleic acids. Nature. 1953; 171(4356): 738–740. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[13] 13. Franklin RE, Gosling RG: Molecular configuration in sodium thymonucleate. Nature. 1953; 171(4356): 740–741. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[14] 14. Southern EM: Detection of specific sequences among DNA fragments separated by gel electrophoresis. J Mol Biol. 1975; 98(3): 503–517. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[15] 15. Alwine JC, Kemp DJ, Stark GR: Method for detection of specific RNAs in agarose gels by transfer to diazobenzyloxymethyl-paper and hybridization with DNA probes. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1977; 74(12): 5350–5354. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[16] 16. Mullis KB: Process for amplifying nucleic acid sequences. U.S. Patent No. 4,683,202 1987. Reference Source

[17] 17. Cohen SN, Chang ACY, Boyer HW, et al.: Construction of biologically functional bacterial plasmids in vitro. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1973; 70(11): 3240–3244. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[18] 18. Lander ES, Linton LM, Birren B, et al.: Initial sequencing and analysis of the human genome. Nature. 2001; 409(6822): 860–921. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[19] 19. Schuler GD, Boguski MS, Stewart EA, et al.: A gene map of the human genome. Science. 1996; 274(5287): 540–546. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[20] 20. Thomas KR, Capecchi MR: Site-directed mutagenesis by gene targeting in mouse embryo-derived stem cells. Cell. 1987; 51(3): 503–512. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[21] 21. Evans MJ, Kaufman MH: Establishment in culture of pluripotential cells from mouse embryos. Nature. 1981; 292(5819): 154–156. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[22] 22. Doetschman T, Gregg RG, Maeda N, et al.: Targetted correction of a mutant HPRT gene in mouse embryonic stem cells. Nature. 1987; 330(6148): 576–8. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[23] 23. Fire A, Xu S, Montgomery MK, et al.: Potent and specific genetic interference by double-stranded RNA in Caenorhabditis elegans. Nature. 1998; 391(6669): 806–811. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[24] 24. Brown P: You say you want a revolution: an interview with Pat Brown. Interview by Jane Gitschier. PLoS Genet. 2009; 5(7): e1000560. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[25] 25. Kothapalli R, Yoder SJ, Mane S, et al.: Microarray results: how accurate are they? BMC Bioinformatics. 2002; 3(1): 22. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[26] 26. Draghici S, Khatri P, Eklund AC, et al.: Reliability and reproducibility issues in DNA microarray measurements. Trends Genet. 2006; 22(2): 101–109. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[27] 27. Irizarry RA, Warren D, Spencer F, et al.: Multiple-laboratory comparison of microarray platforms. Nat Methods. 2005; 2(5): 345–350. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[28] 28. Xu J, Deng X, Chan V, et al.: Variability of DNA microarray gene expression profiles in cultured rat primary hepatocytes. Gene Regul Syst Bio. 2007; 1: 235–249. PubMed Abstract | Free Full Text

[29] 29. Koltai H, Weingarten-Baror C: Specificity of DNA microarray hybridization: characterization, effectors and approaches for data correction. Nucleic Acids Res. 2008; 36(7): 2395–2405. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[30] 30. Castanotto D, Rossi JJ: The promises and pitfalls of RNA-interference-based therapeutics. Nature. 2009; 457(7228): 426–433. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[31] 31. Jackson AL, Linsley PS: Noise amidst the silence: off-target effects of siRNAs? Trends Genet. 2004; 20(11): 521–524. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[32] 32. Jackson AL, Bartz SR, Schelter J, et al.: Expression profiling reveals off-target gene regulation by RNAi. Nat Biotechnol. 2003; 21(6): 635–637. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[33] 33. Scacheri PC, Rozenblatt-Rosen O, Caplen NJ, et al.: Short interfering RNAs can induce unexpected and divergent changes in the levels of untargeted proteins in mammalian cells. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004; 101(7): 1892–1897. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[34] 34. Tschuch C, Schulz A, Pscherer A, et al.: Off-target effects of siRNA specific for GFP. BMC Mol Biol. 2008; 9(1): 60. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[35] 35. Jackson AL, Burchard J, Schelter J, et al.: Widespread siRNA “off-target” transcript silencing mediated by seed region sequence complementarity. RNA. 2006; 12(7): 1179–1187. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[36] 36. Gumienny R, Zavolan M: Accurate transcriptome-wide prediction of microRNA targets and small interfering RNA off-targets with MIRZA-G. Nucleic Acids Res. 2015; 43(3): 1380–1391. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[37] 37. Napoli C, Lemieux C, Jorgensen R: Introduction of a Chimeric Chalcone Synthase Gene into Petunia Results in Reversible Co-Suppression of Homologous Genes in trans. Plant Cell. 1990; 2(4): 279–289. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[38] 38. Blow N: Decoding the unsequenceable. Biotechniques. 2015; 58(2): 52–58. PubMed Abstract

[39] 39. Begley CG, Ellis LM: Drug development: Raise standards for preclinical cancer research. Nature. 2012; 483(7391): 531–533. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[40] 40. Freedman LP, Cockburn IM, Simcoe TS: The Economics of Reproducibility in Preclinical Research. PLoS Biol. 2015; 13(6): e1002165. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[41] 41. Arrowsmith J: Trial watch: Phase II failures: 2008–2010. Nat Rev Drug Discov. 2011; 10(5): 328–329. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[42] 42. Ramsing NB, Jovin TM: Parallel stranded duplex DNA. Nucleic Acids Res. 1988; 16(14A): 6659–6676. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[43] 43. van de Sande JH, Ramsing NB, Germann MW, et al.: Parallel stranded DNA. Science. 1988; 241(4865): 551–557. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[44] 44. Shchyolkina AK, Borisova OF, Livshits MA, et al.: Parallel-stranded DNA with mixed AT/GC composition: role of trans G.C base pairs in sequence dependent helical stability. Biochemistry. 2000; 39(33): 10034–44. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[45] 45. Shchyolkina AK, Borisova OF, Livshits MA, et al.: Parallel-stranded DNA with natural base sequences. Mol Biol (Mosk). 2003; 37(2): 255–265. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[46] 46. Borisova OF, Shchyolkina AK, Chernov BK, et al.: Relative stability of AT and GC pairs in parallel DNA duplex formed by a natural sequence. FEBS Lett. 1993; 322(3): 304–306. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[47] 47. Li H, Peng X, Leonard P, et al.: Binding of actinomycin C₁ (D) and actinomin to base-modified oligonucleotide duplexes with parallel chain orientation. Bioorg Med Chem. 2006; 14(12): 4089–4100. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[48] 48. Bhardwaj V, Sharma K: Parallel DNA polymerase chain reaction: Synthesis of two different PCR products from a DNA template [v1; ref status: indexed, http://f1000r.es/4sm]. F1000Res. 2014; 3: 320. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[49] 49. Lestienne PP, Boudsocq F, Bonnet JE: Initiation of DNA Replication by a Third Parallel DNA Strand Bound in a Triple-Helix Manner Leads to Strand Invasion. Biochemistry. 2008; 47(21): 5689–5698. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[50] 50. Lestienne PP: Priming DNA replication from triple helix oligonucleotides: Possible threestranded DNA in DNA polymerases. Mol Biol Int. 2011; 2011: 562849. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text | Free Full Text

[51] 51. Tchurikov NA, Shchyolkina AK, Borissova OF, et al.: Southern molecular hybridization experiments with parallel complementary DNA probes. FEBS Lett. 1992; 297(3): 233–6. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[52] 52. Tchurikov NA, Chistyakova LG, Zavilgelsky GB, et al.: Gene-specific silencing by expression of parallel complementary RNA in Escherichia coli. J Biol Chem. 2000; 275(34): 26523–9. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[53] 53. Liu YS, Zhang YQ, Yang LX, et al.: Gene-specific silencing induced by parallel complementary RNA in Pseudomonas aeruginosa. Biotechnol Lett. 2009; 31(10): 1571–1575. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

[54] 54. Bissell M: Reproducibility: The risks of the replication drive. Nature. 2013; 503(7476): 333–334. PubMed Abstract | Publisher Full Text

Villain of Molecular Biology: Why are we not reproducible in research?

Abstract

Keywords

Introduction

Villain of molecular biology

Figure 1. Image by Paul Blow in article “Reproducibility: The risks of replication drive” by Mina Bissel, Nature, 2013.

Competing interests

Grant information

References

Comments on this article Comments (2)

Open Peer Review

Comments on this article Comments (2)

Open Peer Review

Reviewer Status

Reviewer Reports

Comments on this article

Browse by related subjects

Competing Interests Policy

Stay Updated