We therefore reserve the right - as we have always done - to decline submissions or rate limit authors in some instances where there are indications this the case (e.g. entirely AI-generated discussions, large numbers of hallucinated references, high volumes of cookie-cutter facile submissions) 5/n

Show Post

I'm sticking to @biorxivpreprint.bsky.social in the hope that discoverability is optimal. Perhaps for reviews, since those are not accepted by bioRxiv...

Show Post

Learning how single cells respond to perturbations In this issue of Molecular Cell, we wrote a Spotlight with @bergerlab.bsky.social on the recently published State model, where we briefly discuss open problems in AI-based perturbation response prediction. authors.elsevier.com/c/1nx~I3vVUP...

Show Post

Retracting then republishing a corrected paper recognizes the reality that errors are made but can be corrected (though blurs the line with Corrigenda). Similarly we see Withdrawals on biorxiv/medRxiv that are subsequently updated with a corrected paper. retractionwatch.com/2026/10/15/j...

Show Post

Just back from Japan. What a trip. One of the highlights was meeting Tomoko Ohta. She is one of the most important figures in the history of the life sciences, but few outside of the field of molecular evolution know of her or her work.

Show Post