Scientific Correspondence

Scientific Correspondence allows authors to challenge the central findings of a published paper, and gives the original authors an opportunity to respond.

Latest articles

    1. Computational and Systems Biology

    Response to comment on ‘SARS-CoV-2 suppresses anticoagulant and fibrinolytic gene expression in the lung’

    Alan E Mast et al.
    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).
    1. Microbiology and Infectious Disease

    Comment on ‘SARS-CoV-2 suppresses anticoagulant and fibrinolytic gene expression in the lung’

    Ethan S FitzGerald, Amanda M Jamieson
    We are writing to comment on an article by Mast et al., 2021, about the drivers of coagulopathy in the lungs of COVID-19 patients.
    1. Plant Biology

    Response to comment on 'Lack of evidence for associative learning in pea plants'

    Kasey Markel
    I am writing to respond to the comment by Gagliano et al. on my article about associative learning in plants (Markel, 2020).
    1. Ecology
    2. Plant Biology

    Comment on 'Lack of evidence for associative learning in pea plants'

    Monica Gagliano et al.
    We are writing to comment on the article by Markel, 2020, which reports an unsuccessful attempt to replicate our finding of associative learning in plants.
    1. Evolutionary Biology
    2. Genetics and Genomics

    Comment on 'Single nucleus sequencing reveals evidence of inter-nucleus recombination in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi'

    Benjamin Auxier, Anna Bazzicalupo
    We are writing to comment on the article by Chen et al. (2018) about inter-nucleus recombination in arbuscular mycorrhizal fungi.
    1. Ecology

    Comment on 'Naked mole-rat mortality rates defy Gompertzian laws by not increasing with age'

    Philip Dammann et al.
    We are writing to comment on the article by Ruby et al., 2018 about aging in naked mole-rats.
    1. Ecology

    Response to comment on 'Naked mole-rat mortality rates defy Gompertzian laws by not increasing with age'

    J Graham Ruby et al.
    We are writing to respond to the comment by Dammann et al., 2019 on our article about aging in naked mole-rats (Ruby et al., 2018).
    1. Immunology and Inflammation

    Comment on 'AIRE-deficient patients harbor unique high-affinity disease-ameliorating autoantibodies'

    Nils Landegren et al.
    We are writing to comment on the study by Meyer et al., 2016 on disease-ameliorating autoantibodies.
    1. Immunology and Inflammation

    Response to comment on 'AIRE-deficient patients harbor unique high-affinity disease-ameliorating autoantibodies'

    Christina Hertel et al.
    We are writing to reply to the comment by Landegren et al., 2019 about our study (Meyer et al., 2016) on disease-ameliorating autoantibodies.
    1. Structural Biology and Molecular Biophysics

    Comment on 'Valid molecular dynamics simulations of human hemoglobin require a surprisingly large box size'

    Vytautas Gapsys, Bert L de Groot
    We are writing to comment on the article by El Hage et al., 2018 about molecular dynamics simulations of human hemoglobin.