I have analyzed my samples by a service company.Actually they did almost the whole workflow from sample preparation till the measurement.In this case, should i acknowledge them or mention that in the methodology if i have paid them.
Firas Majid
I think acknowledging them will be most beneficial to you even if you paid for it. It will give more credence to the result and put you in a better position to defend the results tomorrow.
Firas Majid
I think acknowledging them will be most beneficial to you even if you paid for it. It will give more credence to the result and put you in a better position to defend the results tomorrow.
It would absolutely need to be mentioned in the methods, and would be normal to acknowledge. If they have had to do substantial optimization for your samples or provided assistance with the experimental design/non-trivial analysis it is common to offer co-authorship. If the work is straightforward then this is typically not done. It would depend on if you were doing something largely automated (e.g. Sanger sequencing) or if you were doing something that requires some genuine intellectual input. I have had core facility managers on my manuscripts previously where they have contributed.
It is custom to mention the lab were the work was done, especially if that it not yours. You should do that in methods.
If they also had a major influence on the setup of your study, including the choice of methods or adaptation of methods (so also a scientific input) than you should consider of asking one of the lab heads as co-author or at least thank him in the acknowledgement
- Badges
- Science method
- Similar topics
- Methodology