[Vp-integration-subgroup] [Vp-reproduce-subgroup] White paper revision

Gilberto Gonzalez-Parra gilberto.gonzalezparra at nmt.edu
Wed Sep 15 10:22:31 PDT 2021 

Hello all,

I received this article that is related to the manuscript that we are
dealing with,

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-021-02486-7

Best,
***************************************************************************
Gilberto C. Gonzalez-Parra, Ph.D in Applied Mathematics.
Faculty of the Mathematics Department
New Mexico Tech, NM, USA.
****************************************************************************


On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 6:58 AM Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com> wrote:

> Well Tomas,
>
> There are plenty of venues with different editors with different opinions.
> Also,  there are plenty of opinions among the group.
>
> Tomas,  there is no real major problem in the manuscript core. The core
> information we accumulated as a group is well organized in one table. Only
> this alone is worth publication,  and any delay by any party is counter
> effective and delays can actually be held against us as a group.
>
> If there is a real need for revision,  this can be accommodated and we
> agreed there will be revisions,  yet we need to move forward.
>
> At this point not moving forward is worse than trying and resubmit.
>
> As for the original submission. The editor pointed out things like self
> citation that caused the rejection. No version we have fixes it,  so there
> was no way of satisfying that editor with this type of multi author paper
> anyway. Also, the editor did not do proper work of seeking opinions of
> reviewers as they should. So in this case we must switch. Unfortunately
> there is no other reasonable action.
>
> Might as well know what other editors and reviewers really think to focus
> revisions.
>
> And getting feedback should be a reasonably fast process. So I ask that
> instead of discussing about which version has more chance,  we move forward
> and actually take actions towards publication.
>
> Hopefully Marcella can help us move forward quickly.
>
>          Jacob
>
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 07:20 Tomas Helikar <thelikar2 at unl.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jacob,
>>
>> I think the point the group is making is that there was feedback on the
>> manuscript from the previous journal, which required substantially revising
>> the manuscript; that's what the group has been trying to do (though the
>> effort has slowed down a bit).
>>
>> The previous journal editor raised some valid concerns about the
>> manuscript state, and many members of the group agreed that a revision is
>> indeed needed before moving to the next venue. Submitting the same version
>> of the manuscript to another journal will, I'm afraid, result in the same
>> outcome of rejection. If the rejection in the suggested journal is hard
>> (i.e., no invitation to resubmit a revised version), then we lose a venue
>> for possible publication of the manuscript.
>>
>> Best,
>>
>> T.
>> Tomas Helikar, Ph.D.
>> Susan J Rosowski Associate Professor
>> Department of Biochemistry | University of Nebraska-Lincoln
>> m: 402-547-8904 <callto:402-547-8904> | o: 402-472-3530
>> <callto:402-472-3530>
>> www.helikarlab.org <http://helikarlab.org> | https://cellcollective.org
>> twitter: @helikarlab <http://twitter.com/helikarlab>, @biocollective
>> <http://twitter.com/biocollective>
>> ***The University of Nebraska E-Mail Confidentiality Disclaimer***
>> The information in this e-mail may be privileged and confidential,
>> intended only for the use of the addressee(s) above.
>> Any unauthorized use or disclosure of this information is prohibited. If
>> you have received this email by mistake,
>> please delete and immediately contact the sender.
>> On 8/17/21 2:13 PM, Jacob Barhak wrote:
>>
>> Non-NU Email
>> ------------------------------
>> Well James,
>>
>> Its a bit more complicated that what you describe its not just editing
>> work.
>>
>> Any version we submit must be approved for submission by all those
>> listed.
>>
>> We have not reached this point for any other version other than the one
>> we submitted before. So there is much more work than just references and
>> polishing.
>>
>> The only version we can legally submit is this one:
>>
>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IMEgmdNkx-EsnOjGuegpenSIMmKIkK00Lc8Gred3QxM/edit?usp=sharing
>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IMEgmdNkx-EsnOjGuegpenSIMmKIkK00Lc8Gred3QxM/edit?usp=sharing__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBMdg_AMv$>
>>
>>
>> We actually have 5 other versions and may eventually get more versions
>> after review and we can mention this. Yet to move the process forward we
>> need to get feedback from the publishing venue.
>>
>> Marcella pointed out a new venue and so far there was only support,  so I
>> hope she can continue the process and ask for feedback on the version we
>> agreed upon to submit before.
>>
>> The sooner the better.
>>
>>
>>            Jacob
>>
>>
>>
>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021, 02:22 James Osborne <jmosborne at unimelb.edu.au>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Just to clarify the versions were talking about...
>>>
>>> Here is the original submitted version that was rejected by the editor
>>> without review.
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IMEgmdNkx-EsnOjGuegpenSIMmKIkK00Lc8Gred3QxM/edit
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IMEgmdNkx-EsnOjGuegpenSIMmKIkK00Lc8Gred3QxM/edit__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBPvBUk-K$>
>>>
>>> Here's the version we've been working on
>>>
>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VvyP3YZQdQYjj8DFKOpQ4pn_0pdDGgiT/edit?amp%3Bpli=1
>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VvyP3YZQdQYjj8DFKOpQ4pn_0pdDGgiT/edit?amp*3Bpli=1__;JQ!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBMkV18u-$>
>>>
>>> Even in this state, I think it stands a better chance than the
>>> previously submitted one as if you remove all the comments and highlighting
>>> it's a cleaner story. This was a big issue with the original version and I
>>> don't think it's appropriate to resubmit anywhere without looking at this.
>>>
>>> The issue is that it will take a concerted effort to polish this updated
>>> version. Even sorting the references is non trivial.
>>> I think the only way of this happening is for a "First Author" to step
>>> forward and take the lead.  They push work on the changes and chase people
>>> as needed but in return they get first/senior/corresponding authorship as
>>> appropriate.
>>>
>>> James
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Aug 17, 2021 at 2:33 PM Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Thanks James,
>>>>
>>>> This will for sure not be the final version of the paper. We will have
>>>> revisions and already had discussions.
>>>>
>>>> The attempt here is to get the ball rolling and to we need to start
>>>> somewhere,  so the proper entry point is the last agreement.
>>>>
>>>> If the editor will be positive, I believe we can reach a nice revised
>>>> version that everyone will be gappy with with augmented list of authors.
>>>>
>>>> For now I just wanted to verify that Marcella is willing to do the
>>>> initial communications with the editor.
>>>>
>>>> Hopefully its ok with her.
>>>>
>>>>         Jacob
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2021, 11:04 James A Glazier <jaglazier at gmail.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Dear Jacob:
>>>>>
>>>>> I see a lot of progress but the text is still fragmentary. I think you
>>>>> will have a hard time having it reviewed before you clean it up some more.
>>>>>
>>>>> Frontiers is a reasonable place for it, and it does give you the
>>>>> opportunity to do multiple rounds of review.
>>>>>
>>>>> JAG
>>>>> On 8/16/2021 11:59 AM, Jacob Barhak wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Hi Marcella,
>>>>>
>>>>> So far there were no objections and support in your suggested venue
>>>>> was provided by  9 out of the 17 original authors + support by many that
>>>>> joined later.
>>>>>
>>>>> I have seen no objection to the venue by anyone. - meaning that we can
>>>>> probably move on to the new venue and start the process.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest you move on and contact the editor and follow the proper
>>>>> process for the venue and ask for feedback.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please indicate that we are seeking review to guide further revisions
>>>>> that we have already begun, yet not completed, so there may be changes in
>>>>> title, authors, and text, yet the core paper has been approved by 17
>>>>> authors and major arguments will most probably stay.
>>>>>
>>>>> The version we can currently legally  submit is this one that we
>>>>> approved:
>>>>>
>>>>> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IMEgmdNkx-EsnOjGuegpenSIMmKIkK00Lc8Gred3QxM/edit?usp=sharing
>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://docs.google.com/document/d/1IMEgmdNkx-EsnOjGuegpenSIMmKIkK00Lc8Gred3QxM/edit?usp=sharing__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBMdg_AMv$>
>>>>>
>>>>> I locked that version for changes until the review process is
>>>>> complete.
>>>>>
>>>>> For the many who wanted revisions - we will have them still - yet
>>>>> since we have not reached agreement on a revised version, it will have to
>>>>> wait until after review. is provided and we can incorporate reviewers
>>>>> comments in the revisions.
>>>>>
>>>>> Marcella, please let us know if you will handle submission and
>>>>> communications with the publication venue. - Frontiers in Systems Biology
>>>>>
>>>>> Regarding submission, I suggest starting with doing things that do not
>>>>> take effort - like communicating with the editor about this paper and
>>>>> declaring intention to see the response we get.
>>>>>
>>>>> While we wait for responses, we can continue discussion and give a
>>>>> last chance for objections to Frontiers in Systems Biology to arrive from
>>>>> the original 17 contributors. If any objection to the venue appears before
>>>>> we get a response, we will have to stop the process.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hopefully the large support in the new venue will persist.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suggest we start a new email thread regarding submission and that we
>>>>> all get updated on the process to keep things transparent.
>>>>>
>>>>>                  Jacob
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, Aug 11, 2021 at 1:08 AM Gilberto Gonzalez-Parra <
>>>>> gilberto.gonzalezparra at nmt.edu> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi all,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think the new version is better, even though it is not ready.  The
>>>>>> main points are there, which include the importance of reproducibility and
>>>>>> integration in modeling biology systems.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Probably, one or two co-authors need to take the lead to polish the
>>>>>> article and references.  I suggest that these authors take some of the
>>>>>> top positions in the list of authors (in some places author position is
>>>>>> taken into account).
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Venue seems fine.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ***************************************************************************
>>>>>> Gilberto C. Gonzalez-Parra, Ph.D in Applied Mathematics.
>>>>>> Faculty of the Mathematics Department
>>>>>> New Mexico Tech, NM, USA.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ****************************************************************************
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 1:24 PM Rahuman Sheriff <sheriff at ebi.ac.uk>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I also agree with the venue and the suggestion to tidy up the
>>>>>>> manuscript with a strict deadline.
>>>>>>> Sheriff
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10 Aug 2021, at 10:43, James Osborne <jmosborne at unimelb.edu.au>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm fine with Frontiers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> My 2 cents is that the revised version would be more likely to get
>>>>>>> published. I think we should find time to tidy up what we need.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> James
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 10, 2021 at 5:11 PM Tomas Helikar <thelikar2 at unl.edu>
>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm also fine with this journal. But we need to finalize the
>>>>>>>> revised version -- lots of work was done on it already.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Perhaps we can recirculate the last version of the google doc
>>>>>>>> version of it and set a deadline for finishing it? I don't believe it would
>>>>>>>> take more than a couple of weeks to finalize.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Best wishes,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> T.
>>>>>>>> Tomas Helikar, Ph.D.
>>>>>>>> Susan J Rosowski Associate Professor
>>>>>>>> Department of Biochemistry | University of Nebraska-Lincoln
>>>>>>>> m: 402-547-8904 <callto:402-547-8904> | o: 402-472-3530
>>>>>>>> <callto:402-472-3530>
>>>>>>>> www.helikarlab.org
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://helikarlab.org/__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBNn_4S2A$>
>>>>>>>>  | www.thecellcollective.org
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://cellcollective.org/__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBH6vpppI$>
>>>>>>>> twitter: @helikarlab
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://twitter.com/helikarlab__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBPteMcOA$>
>>>>>>>> , @biocollective
>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__http://twitter.com/biocollective__;!!PvXuogZ4sRB2p-tU!XQgHtF8amUyDkO2BuwhFFjU3o8r5NAnbMvGk-yuQH46H9g16qJU5-M0UBHJTEYCd$>
>>>>>>>> ***The University of Nebraska E-Mail Confidentiality Disclaimer***
>>>>>>>> The information in this e-mail may be privileged and confidential,
>>>>>>>> intended only for the use of the addressee(s) above.
>>>>>>>> Any unauthorized use or disclosure of this information is
>>>>>>>> prohibited. If you have received this email by mistake,
>>>>>>>> please delete and immediately contact the sender.
>>>>>>>> On 8/9/21 5:06 PM, John Gennari wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Non-NU Email
>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I agree with Jon Karr. The venue is fine, but we need at least a
>>>>>>>> quick review for readability before submission.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> -John G.
>>>>>>>> On 8/9/2021 7:49 AM, Jonathan Karr wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Hi everyone,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think Frontiers is fine. I think the key thing is to edit the
>>>>>>>> paper (for focus and readability by a broader audience) before it is
>>>>>>>> submitted to any journal.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Regards
>>>>>>>> Jonathan
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021 at 10:31 AM Jacob Barhak <
>>>>>>>> jacob.barhak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Well Marcella,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> If there is no objection raised or an alternative resolution with
>>>>>>>>> more support appears,  then I see no reason not to proceed. So I think we
>>>>>>>>> just need to give enough time for original contributors to raise an
>>>>>>>>> objection or propose an alternatives that will gain more support. In the
>>>>>>>>> past we used a week for such processes,  I guess that if we wait until next
>>>>>>>>> weekend and no objection is raised to the venue or an alternative with more
>>>>>>>>> support appears we can proceed. We currently have 5 original contributors
>>>>>>>>> supporting your suggested venue and one contributor than joined later in
>>>>>>>>> the revisions.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Note that in submission you should use the original version we
>>>>>>>>> reached consensus for submission, yet note that that we plan to revise the
>>>>>>>>> work and add more contributors. You can point to revisions we started.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Lets wait until next week and hope no one objects so we can
>>>>>>>>> proceed quickly.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>          Jacob
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 9, 2021, 08:52 Torres, Marcella <mtorres at richmond.edu>
>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Once enough contributors agree, the process for submission is
>>>>>>>>>> that I’ll confirm interest (I just got an email requesting for this  this
>>>>>>>>>> morning), let them know that we intend to submit 1 manuscript and what the
>>>>>>>>>> proposed title of the manuscript is. Once that initial information is
>>>>>>>>>> submitted, then I will be “emailed information about next steps”. Of
>>>>>>>>>> course, at any point we can also contact the editorial office, but would it
>>>>>>>>>> be helpful to get a sense of the process first and then ask for
>>>>>>>>>> clarification as needed? At what point will we have enough responses from
>>>>>>>>>> contributors to begin?
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcella
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From: *Vp-reproduce-subgroup <
>>>>>>>>>> vp-reproduce-subgroup-bounces at lists.simtk.org> on behalf of John
>>>>>>>>>> Rice <john.rice at noboxes.org>
>>>>>>>>>> *Date: *Sunday, August 8, 2021 at 7:23 PM
>>>>>>>>>> *To: *Yaling Liu <yal310 at lehigh.edu>
>>>>>>>>>> *Cc: *vp-reproduce-subgroup at lists.simtk.org <
>>>>>>>>>> vp-reproduce-subgroup at lists.simtk.org>,
>>>>>>>>>> vp-integration-subgroup at lists.simtk.org <
>>>>>>>>>> vp-integration-subgroup at lists.simtk.org>, Jonathan Karr <
>>>>>>>>>> jonrkarr at gmail.com>, John Gennari <gennari at uw.edu>, Faeder,
>>>>>>>>>> James R <faeder at pitt.edu>, Winston Garira <
>>>>>>>>>> Winston.Garira at univen.ac.za>
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject: *Re: [Vp-reproduce-subgroup] [Vp-integration-subgroup]
>>>>>>>>>> White paper revision
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *External Email:* Use caution in opening links, attachments, and
>>>>>>>>>> buying gift cards.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Me too
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Typed with two thumbs on my iPhone.  (757) 318-0671
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> “Upon this gifted age, in its dark hour,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Rains from the sky a meteoric shower
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Of facts . . . they lie unquestioned, uncombined.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Wisdom enough to leech us of our ill
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Is daily spun; but there exists no loom
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> To weave it into fabric.”
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> –Edna St. Vincent Millay,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Aug 8, 2021, at 19:09, Yaling Liu <yal310 at lehigh.edu> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> 
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am fine with the suggested new venue and willing to revise
>>>>>>>>>> further.    We don't need to wait for everyone to reply here - this email
>>>>>>>>>> chain is way too long and guess a lot of people were busy and ignored them.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yaling
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sun, Aug 8, 2021 at 4:57 PM Jacob Barhak <
>>>>>>>>>> jacob.barhak at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Hana,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The revised version is far from ready to being submitted
>>>>>>>>>> anywhere. There is just too much to do there to put it in shape for
>>>>>>>>>> submission.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We do want to advance in making revisions,  yet the attempt here
>>>>>>>>>> is to accelerate the process by asking a 3rd publishing party to provide
>>>>>>>>>> proper review for what is actually needed for publication, so you may want
>>>>>>>>>> to save your efforts until after we get feedback - they will be more
>>>>>>>>>> effective then when we have feedback.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> However, we do need enough support and no objections to proceed
>>>>>>>>>> to engage with the new venue suggested.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> We have currently 3 of the 17 of the original contributors and 1
>>>>>>>>>> who joined later that approves of a new venue. Hopefully others will follow
>>>>>>>>>> so we can proceed quickly.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thank you for the reply.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>           Jacob
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Sat, Aug 7, 2021, 23:46 Dobrovolny, Hana <h.dobrovolny at tcu.edu>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I'm fine with the suggested venue. I'll double check the sections
>>>>>>>>>> I was heading sometime this week, but I think all suggestions were
>>>>>>>>>> incorporated last time I checked.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hana
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *******************************************************
>>>>>>>>>> Dr. Hana Dobrovolny
>>>>>>>>>> Associate Professor of Biophysics
>>>>>>>>>> Texas Christian University
>>>>>>>>>> TCU Box 298840
>>>>>>>>>> Fort Worth, TX 76129
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> phone: (817) 257-6379 fax: (817) 257-7742
>>>>>>>>>> email: h.dobrovolny at tcu.edu
>>>>>>>>>> *******************************************************
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> ------------------------------
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From:* Vp-reproduce-subgroup <
>>>>>>>>>> vp-reproduce-subgroup-bounces at lists.simtk.org> on behalf of
>>>>>>>>>> Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> *Sent:* August 7, 2021 11:18 AM
>>>>>>>>>> *To:* Torres, Marcella
>>>>>>>>>> *Cc:* vp-reproduce-subgroup at lists.simtk.org;
>>>>>>>>>> vp-integration-subgroup at lists.simtk.org; Jonathan Karr; John
>>>>>>>>>> Gennari; Winston Garira; Faeder, James R
>>>>>>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [Vp-reproduce-subgroup] [Vp-integration-subgroup]
>>>>>>>>>> White paper revision
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *[EXTERNAL EMAIL WARNING]* DO NOT CLICK LINKS or open
>>>>>>>>>> attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> And to all white paper contributors,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> You are getting this message to raise it to the top of your
>>>>>>>>>> mailboxes.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hopefully enough of you will look at this during the weekend to
>>>>>>>>>> comment on the best way to move forward while considering the new offer
>>>>>>>>>> from Marcella.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The faster we move,  the better.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>           Jacob
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, Aug 3, 2021, 01:03 Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Thanks Marcella,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Your suggestion may be the solution here.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> From what I see,  this venue is a good fit. Yet we need to learn
>>>>>>>>>> the opinion of the other contributors.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> If we collect enough support and no contributor objects, we can
>>>>>>>>>> approach the editor and ask if the paper will receive proper review to
>>>>>>>>>> guide revisions.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I look forward for more responses.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>           Jacob
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, Aug 2, 2021, 11:57 Torres, Marcella <mtorres at richmond.edu>
>>>>>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Hi all and Jacob,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I’m interested in getting it circulated, and want to propose
>>>>>>>>>> Frontiers in Systems Biology as a possible venue – I just joined the
>>>>>>>>>> editorial board and received notice of a focused issue that includes
>>>>>>>>>> challenges in multiscale modeling:
>>>>>>>>>> https://www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/24484/insights-in-systems-biology-multiscale-mechanistic-modeling-2021?utm_source=F-RTM&utm_medium=CFP_E1&utm_campaign=PRD_CFP_T1_RT-TITLE#
>>>>>>>>>> <https://urldefense.com/v3/__https:/www.frontiersin.org/research-topics/24484/insights-in-systems-biology-multiscale-mechanistic-modeling-2021?utm_source=F-RTM&utm_medium=CFP_E1&utm_campaign=PRD_CFP_T1_RT-TITLE*__;Iw!!K6Z8K8YTIA!VdlFMCuGyTWxTFwAHTufvXzSxbtUQ9ckyDlofvqR1sm1Q-6-HD2vdZtc_2WFepwnGQ8$>
>>>>>>>>>>  .
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> The journal is new, and I don’t remember it being proposed
>>>>>>>>>> previously.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I am also willing to prioritize revision and submission and
>>>>>>>>>> apologize for not participating more over the summer.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Best,
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Marcella
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> *From: *Vp-reproduce-subgroup <
>>>>>>>>>> vp-reproduce-subgroup-bounces at lists.simtk.org> on behalf of
>>>>>>>>>> Jacob Barhak <jacob.barhak at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>>> *Date: *Monday, August 2, 2021 at 11:45 AM
>>>>>>>>>> *To: *Alexander Kulesza <alexander.kulesza at novadiscovery.com>
>>>>>>>>>> *Cc: *vp-reproduce-subgroup at lists.simtk.org
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> Vp-integration-subgroup mailing list
> Vp-integration-subgroup at lists.simtk.org
> https://lists.simtk.org/mailman/listinfo/vp-integration-subgroup
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.simtk.org/pipermail/vp-integration-subgroup/attachments/20210915/c3c55fb1/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the Vp-integration-subgroup mailing list