PNAS butterfly flap heats up

The __Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences__ has halted the print publication of a controversial scientific paper, saying it's investigating the conditions under which it was ushered through peer review by a distinguished academy member who advocated for its inclusion in the journal. The linkurl:paper;http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/08/25/0908357106.abstract, written by University of Liverpool researcher linkurl:Donald Williamson,;http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/williamso

Written byBob Grant
| 2 min read

Register for free to listen to this article
Listen with Speechify
0:00
2:00
Share
The __Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences__ has halted the print publication of a controversial scientific paper, saying it's investigating the conditions under which it was ushered through peer review by a distinguished academy member who advocated for its inclusion in the journal. The linkurl:paper;http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/08/25/0908357106.abstract, written by University of Liverpool researcher linkurl:Donald Williamson,;http://www.edge.org/3rd_culture/bios/williamson.html posited that butterflies are the evolutionary result of a long-ago mating between worm-like and winged ancestors. It appeared in the early edition on __PNAS__'s website on August 28th and was to appear in the print version of the journal soon. But according to the linkurl:__Times Higher Education__,;http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=26&storycode=408496&c=1 __PNAS__ has decided to hold up on printing the study after a flood of negative reactions from biologists about the paper and the journal's practice of allowing academy members to "communicate" manuscripts as a way to speed their publication. __PNAS__ linkurl:announced;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55970/ last month that it would be doing away with that submission process, which allowed academy members to hand pick reviewers for the papers they were bringing to the journal, starting next summer. The decision to wait on publishing the contentious paper seems to hinge on the accusation that linkurl:Lynn Margulis,;http://www.geo.umass.edu/faculty/margulis/ the University of Massachusetts, Amherst, cell biologist and academy member who "communicated" the paper, may have failed to submit some negative reviews of the manuscript to __PNAS__ editors. A recent linkurl:article;http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=national-academy-as-national-enquirer in __Scientific American__ stated that it took Margulis "'6 or 7' peer reviews before she had the '2 or 3' positive ones necessary to make a case for its publication." "Our stated policy is that academy members must submit all the reviews that were received for a paper, not merely the favorable ones," __PNAS__'s editor-in-chief Randy Schekman told the __Times Higher Education__. Schekman also told the British paper that one of the reviewers of Williamson's manuscript appeared to have collaborated with the researcher recently, a charge (which would also be against journal policy) that Margulis denied. Margulis told the __Times Higher Education__ that three other papers she co-authored and were slated for publication are being held up __PNAS__ because of the flap. "I am looking into the legality of punishing me for a finished paper they don't like by stopping publication on a second unrelated paper with my name on it," she wrote in an email seen by the __Times Higher Education__.
**__Related stories:__***linkurl:PNAS scraps special submission;http://www.the-scientist.com/blog/display/55970/
[10th September 2009]*linkurl:First Person | Lynn Margulis;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/13893/
[June 2003]
Interested in reading more?

Become a Member of

The Scientist Logo
Receive full access to more than 35 years of archives, as well as TS Digest, digital editions of The Scientist, feature stories, and much more!
Already a member? Login Here

Meet the Author

  • From 2017 to 2022, Bob Grant was Editor in Chief of The Scientist, where he started in 2007 as a Staff Writer. Before joining the team, he worked as a reporter at Audubon and earned a master’s degree in science journalism from New York University. In his previous life, he pursued a career in science, getting a bachelor’s degree in wildlife biology from Montana State University and a master’s degree in marine biology from the College of Charleston in South Carolina. Bob edited Reading Frames and other sections of the magazine.

    View Full Profile
Share
July Digest 2025
July 2025, Issue 1

What Causes an Earworm?

Memory-enhancing neural networks may also drive involuntary musical loops in the brain.

View this Issue
Screening 3D Brain Cell Cultures for Drug Discovery

Screening 3D Brain Cell Cultures for Drug Discovery

Explore synthetic DNA’s many applications in cancer research

Weaving the Fabric of Cancer Research with Synthetic DNA

Twist Bio 
Illustrated plasmids in bright fluorescent colors

Enhancing Elution of Plasmid DNA

cytiva logo
An illustration of green lentiviral particles.

Maximizing Lentivirus Recovery

cytiva logo

Products

The Scientist Placeholder Image

Sino Biological Sets New Industry Standard with ProPure Endotoxin-Free Proteins made in the USA

sartorius-logo

Introducing the iQue 5 HTS Platform: Empowering Scientists  with Unbeatable Speed and Flexibility for High Throughput Screening by Cytometry

parse_logo

Vanderbilt Selects Parse Biosciences GigaLab to Generate Atlas of Early Neutralizing Antibodies to Measles, Mumps, and Rubella

shiftbioscience

Shift Bioscience proposes improved ranking system for virtual cell models to accelerate gene target discovery