Simon Anders* and Wolfgang Huber
Corresponding author: Simon Anders firstname.lastname@example.org
Genome Biology 2010, 11:R106 doi:10.1186/gb-2010-11-10-r106
(2011-01-17 14:00) CNRS
As an old timer, contributing to the field of computational biology since 1975 (the
previous century! :-), I am amazed by the lack of proper reference to previous works
by the current generation of bioinformaticians/biostatiticians. Most of them seem
to believe that nothing existed before the Internet (1990), or even later. Take the
example of this article: the authors apparently ignore that before the "RNA-Seq" era
(a word that appeared in the context of the NGS approaches), we were sequencing "Expressed
Sequences Tags" (ESTs) exactly for the same purpose, and with similar results. Of
course, theoreticians developped the proper methods to analyze these data, methods
that still apply today.
It is thus amazing that NONE of those widely used approaches are cited in this "modern
And this is not by lack of visibility. For instance, the approach that I developed
with my colleague Stephane Audic in 1997 (The significance of digital gene expression
profiles. Genome Res 1997 7:986-95. - PMID:9331369) has been cited 500 times and is
still averaging more than 40 citations per year. But this is just one example, and
many highly used methods are similarly ignored. I believe it is also the responsability
of the reviewers, and of the editors, to ensure that what was considered an ethical
behavior not so long ago, continues to be enforced in this booming field.
None declared (except that I am citing one of my
own article, for the sake of demonstration).
BioMed Central Ltd unless otherwise stated. Part of Springer Science+Business Media.