The leader of an international team of genetics researchers is seething after a journal responded to critical tweets about their paper by issuing an expression of concern.
Really useful debate about who should be the arbiter of scientific debate. Can science be called out through public fora?
Less than a week after publication, according to Vilariño-Güell, the journal notified him that:
There are 93 tweets in the conversation about the paper started by Daniel MacArthur. It is overwhelmingly negative towards the journal and paper. In addition to MacArthur (32.9k followers) weighing in, other names and influencers including Jeffrey Ross-Ibarrra (UC Davis, 6.2k followers), Heidi Rehm (Mass General, 4.4k followers), Manuel Rivas (Stanford, 2.2k followers), etc. One positive tweet appears responding to PLOS Genetics’ own coverage of this paper.