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. --

※ 发信站: 批踢踢实业坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 69.227.164.126