Beware: some images are huge and IE or other explorers might zoom out them
automatically. For the best result, pls view at 100% size. Thank you.
The original Figure2C published on Cell with illustrations
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/c910fb371829d67b09568e6cb247292d-.jpg
Then here comes the photoshop difference blending results:
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/50d0d142ac7730621cfb559c2080c14b-.jpg
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/95ca4d2a9ca9012fc24a91e00df2fe2c-.jpg
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/f53e3344f877c27a8fab385b6b1a96e8-.jpg
Then here comes the so called repeat figure2C-1, which you could download
yourself through the link lnalna posted.
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/f13297b8b79dc41a1a42b9c57330fa3a-.jpg
then a little photoshop adjustment like this:
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/a531df68a7ec7a0a46091555b5cbda00-.jpg
here is the final result:
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/1aebae3ec7ba8b874ae6aaf935ba596b-.jpg
Some people also use Matlab Corr(2) calculation and ImageJ Frourier Transform
to analyse the original figure2C published on Cell and got the same conclusion.
I won't make any conclusion here. Judge yourself with your eyes.
btw, the methodology shown here is exactly the same method which the top
journals use, like JCB.
If you want to argue about "false positive" due to the image compression.
You'd better not. The original images are 500dpi, 8bit, grayscale TIFF.
and JPEG compression could only give you some 8*8 squares. Here is a control
from another Gel done by the other lab.
http://capa.zoto.com/img/original/98feb861409c0c300478321085f28812-.jpg
although the bands are quite similar between different lanes, the background
patterns are obviously different.
--
※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc)
◆ From: 69.227.164.126