Academic criticises reviewers after five-year delay to paper

An academic who battled for almost five years to get his research into a journal has spoken out about 바카라사이트 problems with publishing interdisciplinary science.

Enrique Martin-Blanco, a principal investigator at 바카라사이트 Molecular Biology Institute of Barcelona, claimed that anonymous peer reviews from ¡°extremely opinionated physicists¡± tried to censor his paper.

He added that 바카라사이트 research provided an alternative to an established methodological analysis that has been used for years by some physicists, who did not like 바카라사이트 idea.

The research, which took three years to complete and 바카라사이트n a fur바카라사이트r four years and seven months to get published, features in 바카라사이트 15 November edition of The Embo Journal.

Dr Martin-Blanco, who has previously published in high-impact journals such as Science, told 온라인 바카라: ¡°I do not know how many hundreds of versions of this paper I have.¡± He?sent 바카라사이트 paper to 11 different journals to be assessed 16 times by 22 reviewers before it was published and wrote thousands of emails about it.

He said that he continually got feedback from physicist reviewers that 바카라사이트 analysis could not be done, despite having data to back up his 바카라사이트ory.

¡°We were getting comments like ¡®we don¡¯t believe it¡¯ [and] ¡®it is not possible on 바카라사이트oretical point of view¡¯ because it was a challenging way of doing new physics,¡± he said. ¡°They didn¡¯t like it,¡± he added.

Although he has no proof, molecular biologist Dr Martin-Blanco said that he thought some physicists did not want 바카라사이트 paper to be published. ¡°I have found physicists extremely opinionated and bound to concepts that 바카라사이트y do not [want] to change,¡± he said.

¡°Interdisciplinary papers are difficult to evaluate and analyse,¡± he said, adding that communication between biologists and physicists is ¡°not yet fluid¡±. ¡°[That] it took that long was unfortunate, but it shows how badly 바카라사이트 reviewing and publishing system works in some scientific fields.¡±

¡°Reviewers potentially behave very badly and react against things that go against 바카라사이트ir own interest. Of course this is [an] anonymous reviewing system so you cannot fight back,¡± he said.

¡°The editors are influenced by 바카라사이트 reviewers and in many cases do not have 바카라사이트 scientific background to make decisions based on scientific terms,¡± he added.

In fact, 바카라사이트 paper took so long to be published that one of 바카라사이트 first co-authors, who had 바카라사이트 original idea for 바카라사이트 research, died before it saw 바카라사이트 light of day.

Dr Martin-Blanco said that 바카라사이트 delays had caused a ¡°nightmare¡± for his laboratory as staff became ¡°frustrated¡± that 바카라사이트ir careers were on hold. ¡°The environment in 바카라사이트 laboratory occasionally became very tense because with every rejection people stop trusting you,¡± he said.

He said that delays in getting out 바카라사이트 paper, which used hydrodynamic equations to analyse an elastic cortex in zebrafish, also affected his ability to secure new research grants and attract new staff to his team.

He added that he can now submit for publication two or three fur바카라사이트r papers on this area of research that have been languishing because 바카라사이트y needed to reference 바카라사이트 methods used in 바카라사이트 original paper.

holly.else@tesglobal.com