Suppose someone is working on molecular characterization of particular fungus using ITS region. He obtained the DNA and amplified using specific primer pairs and went for sequencing. However, without submitting the sequence to GenBank or any other related databases, is it possible to publish in journal or PhD thesis. How authentic/ scientific is such type of work?
Anticipating a positive response.
Thanking you.
Most journals (and funding sources) require you to make sequence data publicly available when you publish in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Part of the collaborative nature of science, adding to the known data collection, etc. It's unprofessional to not make your data available.
A thesis isn't technically a peer-reviewed publication so you don't have to publish your sequences. But you can't cite your unpublished thesis.
That's what's normal for my field of research. Other fields might have different conventions.
Most journals (and funding sources) require you to make sequence data publicly available when you publish in a peer-reviewed scientific journal. Part of the collaborative nature of science, adding to the known data collection, etc. It's unprofessional to not make your data available.
A thesis isn't technically a peer-reviewed publication so you don't have to publish your sequences. But you can't cite your unpublished thesis.
That's what's normal for my field of research. Other fields might have different conventions.
Failure to submit the sequence to the GenBank is equivalent to fixing a car engine and not testing it. The 2 are the same and do not make any logical sense
Submission of data is a validity and authenticity for you to claim that you have done it, it is also like a publication of your sequence in the public forum.
You can submit thesis, without submitting the sequence to NCBI, but still, if the reviewer escalates a query about this sequence, then you have no other go , Its better to submit the sequence with raw data, which is more essential thesedays.
Hope, all the best
The answer is clear. The sequence must be made public in order to publish in any reputable journal.
Thank you peers for your valued reply. I am also of the same opinion that submission of the sequence is mandatory to prove the authenticity of the work done by oneself.
The reason behind putting this question before you all is that I happened to attend a PhD pre submission on molecular characterization of mushroom using ITS region sequencing where the research scholar didn't submit his/her sequence to GenBank. When I raised the question regarding non submission of the sequence, the supervisor told that he was not willing to submit the sequence with a fear of erroneous identification of the claimed species of mushroom due to other fungal contamination.
What a scientific endeavour?
@Ido Hatam.. they already claimed to publish the result in a peer reviewed journal without any query from the journal.
Well, if they published already, then it must be a very low-tier journal if they didn't make their data publicly available during the publication process.
It would be advised to first submit the sequence to NCBI if you plan to publish a paper related to the sequence!
The online submission tool is fast and easy to use and you can get an accession number that you can quote in your PhD thesis or publication!
The submitted sequences become authentic data when deposited/ submitted to some GenBank. Otherwise, you will always find one or other journal to publish the your Ph.D. work may be as a monograph.
I think credibility requires present original data and there is logic in hiding essential authentic data both in thesis and peer reviewed journals.
Best regards.
I think credibility requires presenting original data and there is no logic of hiding authentic and essential data.
Your paper to be professional you, you should subbmit your sequence to NCBI before publishing
No it is not possible because 1st we have to take sequence and basic info of gene from genbank
The submission of data is very crucial especially as we are in the era of personalized therapy and care. These sequences will add to the wealth of information needed to identify, compare and design tailored therapies according to the differences in the genetic makeup of different populations.
There are ways of publishing sequence-based ITS results that are reproducible without uploading to GenBank, but only if you have 100% matches to other GenBank accessions and report these results explicitly. If you have an ITS sequence that is novel by even a single base pair, then your results are not reproducible without the GenBank accession (which is why reporting results in common formats like "99% homology at the ITS locus" is almost completely useless. Considering how incredibly easy it is to submit rDNA sequences through the submission portal (https://submit.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/subs/genbank/), it is a red flag to someone like myself if ITS sequences are not submitted. It sounds from your description that the work described was very dubious, and ought not to have been published!
What makes you NOT publishing the sequence? Are you not sure if it is correct? Do you want to keep it away from commercial use? Are you afraid that once the sequence is know to everybody others might be faster in using it for further research?
It might also play a role who gave the money for your research - if it was a public institution the sequence should be public property. If a commercial company paid you it might be their proprietary interest and they have to allow you to publish it anyway.
You might probably write a PhD thesis without publishing the sequence, that depends on the PhD regulations of your university. But for a paper you will most likely have to publish the sequence itself.
well uploading your sequences on Genbank/NCBI will always help you.
It will surely increase your research impacts as and when people retrieve your sequences.
But also for any reviewer PhD/ scientific journal it improves their trust in your research work.
ISI index journals and well reputed journals always demand of availability of your specific sequence in the database during your paper review. So better is this for you to submit your seq to GenBank and then plan for the RA. In this way your data will be more authentic.
While I believe that sequences should be submitted to Genbank, there are in fact a number of journals that do not require the authors to do so. I know because as a reviewer I tried to insist that authors deposit a sequence, but they refused to do so and the editor supported them.
Ideally the new sequence must be deposited in GenBank as it becomes easy for reference and to work homology with newer sequences.
It's always better to deposit protein and nucleic acid sequences in authentic repositories of national or international repute.
Hi
I think you can, after that send to gen bank especially you are not finish the PhD thesis.
Hi Kumar,
As other have said here, it is a matter of feasibility, reliability, trust, and also repeatability. When you want to publish your results either as a paper or thesis, how can I as a reviewer of your paper or an opponent of your thesis make sure that your results are true. Or how can I as a researcher repeat your results.
Fortunately, ncbi databases such as GEO has the choice of making your sequencing data available to reviewers only while selecting who can see your data and when you want your data to appears publicly available. In the case of data subjected to patent, you have the choice of making your data permanently available for reviewers only. hope this can help.
Good luck with your work
It is an interesting question. I believe, it is always better to deposit DNA, RNA or protein sequences before thesis or manuscript submission.
Do you have a specific reason not to submit your sequence to GenBank?
Very sincerely, the answer is straight forward ''Emphatic Yes'' but submission to Genbank only affirm the credibility of your data
I think most of the journals will ask in advance to submit the sequences to the relevant database.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Biological Science
- Molecular Cell Biology