Saw this tweet:
So I went and found the paper.
Wu D, Jospin G, Eisen JA (2013) Systematic Identification of Gene Families for Use as “Markers” for Phylogenetic and Phylogeny-Driven Ecological Studies of Bacteria and Archaea and Their Major Subgroups. PLoS ONE 8(10): e77033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077033
And discovered what he was pointing to
Then I looked at the Pubmed Central version of the paper and it was the same. So I wnet and found the arXiv version of the paper and it looked correct.
So apparently, PLOS One somehow replaced "nonmember" with
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjktXLmdxnVy5phGs65k1QIcOiy4DYlcSAx9HNS9cKk8lrH3SwrpV1OlrCsd5XwwkhELGCtwFUTb1AcVST4Ahc0mEbZ7rcsvvXYbVcRPQYMYRERalRj99Lmmoxa7mmUItCaFUrp-yn2Rw/s1600/Screen+Shot+2015-03-30+at+11.30.45+AM.png)
Brutal. And even worse, this may have been there all along and I missed it. So I responded:
@phylogenomics Funny/interesting typesetting trainwreck in equation 4 of PLOS PhyEco paper. English letters were replaced by Greek!
— Michael Hall (@mikehall_dal) March 30, 2015
So I went and found the paper.
Wu D, Jospin G, Eisen JA (2013) Systematic Identification of Gene Families for Use as “Markers” for Phylogenetic and Phylogeny-Driven Ecological Studies of Bacteria and Archaea and Their Major Subgroups. PLoS ONE 8(10): e77033. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0077033
And discovered what he was pointing to
Then I looked at the Pubmed Central version of the paper and it was the same. So I wnet and found the arXiv version of the paper and it looked correct.
So apparently, PLOS One somehow replaced "nonmember" with
![](https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEjktXLmdxnVy5phGs65k1QIcOiy4DYlcSAx9HNS9cKk8lrH3SwrpV1OlrCsd5XwwkhELGCtwFUTb1AcVST4Ahc0mEbZ7rcsvvXYbVcRPQYMYRERalRj99Lmmoxa7mmUItCaFUrp-yn2Rw/s1600/Screen+Shot+2015-03-30+at+11.30.45+AM.png)
Brutal. And even worse, this may have been there all along and I missed it. So I responded:
@mikehall_dal OMG OMG OMG how could I not notice that? (maybe this changed somehow) OMG
— Jonathan Eisen (@phylogenomics) March 30, 2015
And then Michael Hall pointed out another mistake. @phylogenomics And while I'm on the topic, is the base for equation 3 supposed to be e and not epsilon?
— Michael Hall (@mikehall_dal) March 30, 2015
@mikehall_dal oh #FFS - yes - I have no idea what happened there - thanks for finding this
— Jonathan Eisen (@phylogenomics) March 30, 2015
@mikehall_dal note - note in the arxiv version http://t.co/Q8gnIrgU4X
— Jonathan Eisen (@phylogenomics) March 30, 2015
@phylogenomics Ahh, that's much better. Looks like every equation has a wee bit of Greek-ification (n to nu in 1 and 2). Fun! :)
— Michael Hall (@mikehall_dal) March 30, 2015
Aaargh. And funny too. So now the question I guess is - should I fix it? And if so, how do I do that?