PubPeer Selections: More stem cell questions; “is the hassle of a correction really needed?”

Here’s another installment of PubPeer Selections:

• The authors of an ACS Nano paper that earned an In the Pipeline headline of “Electromagnetic Production of Stem Cells? Really?” respond to criticism.
• “If it’s an innocent mistake that truly does not impact any of the findings of the study, is the hassle of a correction really needed?” writes a commenter after the author of a paper acknowledges an error.
• “The authors made a very good effort to improve the reproducibility of the work, as they provide an R/Sweave package on their website, including all the data and scripts used for the analysis.” Not all researchers make the effort these Cell authors did.
• A 2007 paper on Asian climate variability comes under scrutiny. It’s the fourth such paper to garner comments at PubPeer.
• A Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) paper on the forensic evidence in the Amanda Knox case contains errors, according to a commenter.