Scientific Correspondence allows authors to challenge the central findings of a published paper, and gives the original authors an opportunity to respond.
James Taniguchi, Riccardo Melani ... Nicolas X Tritsch
We are writing to comment on the article by Mohebi et al., 2023: we show that blue light alters the fluorescent properties of a genetically-encoded dopamine sensor in a manner that may be misconstrued as phasic dopamine release.
We are writing to respond to the comment by Anderson et al., 2023 on our article about limb movements in male little torrent frogs (Zhao et al., 2022).
We are writing to respond to the comment by Sustar and Tuthill, 2023 on our article about appendage regeneration in jellyfish, fruit flies, and mice (Abrams et al., 2021).
We are writing to respond to the comment by Matthews and Larcombe, 2022 on our article about the life cycle of Trypanosoma brucei (Schuster et al., 2021).
We are writing to respond to the comment by FitzGerald and Jamieson, 2022 on our article about the drivers of coagulopathy in the lungs of COVID-19 patients (Mast et al., 2021).
