Rockefeller University Press

Data sharing is important in the biological sciences to prevent duplication of effort, to promote scientific integrity, and to facilitate and disseminate scientific discovery. Sharing requires centralized repositories, and submission to and utility of these resources require common data formats. This is particularly challenging for multidimensional microscopy image data, which are acquired from a variety of platforms with a myriad of proprietary file formats (PFFs). In this paper, we describe an open standard format that we have developed for microscopy image data. We call on the community to use open image data standards and to insist that all imaging platforms support these file formats. This will build the foundation for an open image data repository.

![Graphic][1] ©cartoonbank.com. All Rights Reserved. The integrity of data, and transparency about their acquisition, are vital to science. The impact factor data that are gathered and sold by Thomson Scientific (formerly the Institute of Scientific Information, or ISI) have a strong

In a substantial fraction of prostate cancer (PCa) patients, bone metastasis appears after years or even decades of latency. Canonical Wnt/β-catenin signaling has been proposed to be implicated in dormancy of cancer cells. However, how these tumor cells are kept dormant and recur under control of Wnt/β-catenin signaling derived from bone microenvironment remains unknown. Here, we report that Wnt5a from osteoblastic niche induces dormancy of PCa cells in a reversible manner in vitro and in vivo via inducing Siah E3 Ubiquitin Protein Ligase 2 (SIAH2) expression, which represses Wnt/β-catenin signaling. Furthermore, this effect of Wnt5a-induced dormancy of PCa cells depends on receptor tyrosine kinase-like orphan receptor 2 (ROR2), and a negative correlation of ROR2 expression with bone metastasis-free survival is observed in PCa patients. Therefore, these results demonstrate that Wnt5a/ROR2/SIAH2 signaling axis plays a crucial role in inducing and maintaining PCa cells dormancy in bone, suggesting a potential therapeutic utility of Wnt5a via inducing dormancy of PCa cells in bone.

The time is right for biologists to post their research findings onto preprint servers

![Graphic][1] ©cartoonbank.com. All Rights Reserved. Thomson Scientific has posted a response ( [1][2]) to our editorial on the reliability of their impact factor data ([2][3]). In it, they claim that our interpretation of the communication between our office and their Research

Some journals are using ineffective software to screen images for manipulation. In doing so, they are creating a false sense of security in the research community about the integrity of the image data they publish.

electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodology now known or hereafter developed is forbidden.

![Graphic][1] ©The New Yorker Collection from cartoonbank.com. The Editors of the JCB are pleased to announce that we will now be requesting that authors submit their color image files in RGB format, and we will post these files in this original format on our web site. Color images

Free access to information is a powerful and alluring concept. Under the “Public Access to Science Act,” recently introduced into the U.S. House of Representatives by Representative Martin O. Sabo (Democrat, Minnesota), papers describing scientific research substantially funded by the U.S.

Some journals are using ineffective software to screen images for manipulation. In doing so, they are creating a false sense of security in the research community about the integrity of the image data they publish.

Ralph Steinman, an editor at the Journal of Experimental Medicine since 1978, shared the 2011 Nobel Prize in Physiology or Medicine for his discovery of dendritic cells (DCs) and their role in immunity. Ralph never knew. He died of pancreatic cancer on September 30, 3 days before the Nobel announcement. Unaware of his death at the time of their announcement, the Nobel Committee made the unprecedented decision that his award would stand. Ralph was the consummate physician-scientist to the end. After his diagnosis, he actively participated in his 4.5 years of treatments, creating experimental therapies using his own DCs in conjunction with the therapies devised by his physicians, all the while traveling, lecturing, and most of all pursuing new investigations in his laboratory. For 38 years—from his discovery of DCs to his Nobel Prize—Ralph pioneered the criteria and methods used to identify, isolate, grow, and study DCs. He and his colleagues demonstrated that DCs are initiators of immunity and regulators of tolerance. In his most recent studies, Ralph was harnessing the specialized features of DCs to design improved vaccines. The following synopsis describes some of his seminal discoveries.

Through a comment on PubPeer, the authors became aware that the Western blot in Fig. This mistake resulted in inadvertent duplication of the lanes showing Rtn1 in DTT-treated cells and mislabeling of the lanes showing Pgk1. The corrected figure panel is shown here. The interpretation of the data remains unchanged; that is, neither DTT treatment nor increased Ino2 activity affect Rtn1 abundance.

Authors of papers published in Rockefeller University Press journals (The Journal of Cell Biology, The Journal of Experimental Medicine, or The Journal of General Physiology) now retain copyright to their published work. This permits authors to reuse their own work in any way, as long as they attribute it to the original publication. Third parties may use our published materials under a Creative Commons license, six months after publication. Publisher Note: The content in this editorial reflects policies in place in 2008. Please note that the policies of Rockefeller University Press have evolved. For the most current and accurate information regarding our policies, please see https://rupress.org/pages/terms102024/.

![Graphic][1] ©cartoonbank.com. All Rights Reserved. The peer review system is not broken. But journal editors should do something beyond normal peer review to ensure the integrity of the data they publish. But they only have to do so for the papers that might make the journal look

We are starting the New Year with an updated look and new content. The JEM has never been fashion conscious, and its distinctive format has changed very little over 109 years. It is an advantage to be instantly recognizable amidst the sea of PDF printouts found on most scientists' desks, so we have preserved the essential look of the Articles and Brief Definitive Reports. The new design is, however, tidier and thus easier to read. Figure 1 More important than the change in style and the splash of color on the contents pages is the new content we are adding. “In This Issue” stories will highlight papers of special interest, explaining why we are excited about the advance. We hope that these short, accessible stories will attract you to read interesting papers outside of your immediate areas of expertise. Commentaries, which have an updated, more colorful look, will continue to give a more personal perspective on recent advances published in the JEM and elsewhere, providing the nonspecialist reader with insight into rapidly developing fields. We are also initiating a new series of articles highlighting the many landmark papers that have been published in the pages of the JEM over the years. JEM Editors and Advisory Editors, past and present, have been helping us to identify groundbreaking papers that have shaped current biomedical research. If there is a particular JEM paper that you are still regularly citing more than a decade later, or if you uncover a gem in the archive, we'd be delighted to hear from you. Our News Editor Heather Van Epps kicks off this greatest hits series by discussing the papers that triggered immunologists' fascination with lymphocyte subsets. These stories will provide another excuse to delve into the online archive—an extraordinary collection of 109 years of science at its best. The complete collection of JEM papers, starting from the 1896 publication of Volume 1, Issue 1, is available free online in PDF format. You can browse issue by issue or search the full text. Given the JEM's long and illustrious history, we don't expect to run out of papers to write about any time soon.

Authors of papers published in Rockefeller University Press journals (The Journal of Cell Biology, The Journal of Experimental Medicine, or The Journal of General Physiology) now retain copyright to their published work. This permits authors to reuse their own work in any way, as long as they attribute it to the original publication. Third parties may use our published materials under a Creative Commons license, six months after publication.

Summary Journals and research institutions have common interests regarding the trustworthiness of research publications but their specific roles and responsibilities differ. These draft recommendations aim to address issues surrounding cooperation and liaison between journals and institutions about possible and actual problems with reported research. The proposals will be discussed at various meetings including the World Conference on Research Integrity in May 2017. We will also consider comments and suggestions posted on this preprint. The main recommendations are that: National registers of individuals or departments responsible for research integrity at institutions should be created. Institutions should develop mechanisms for assessing the validity of research reports that are independent from processes to determine whether individual researchers have committed misconduct. Essential research data and peer review records should be retained for at least 10 years. While journals should normally raise concerns with authors in the first instance, they also need criteria to determine when to contact the institution before, or at the same time as, alerting the authors in cases of suspected data fabrication or falsification to prevent the destruction of evidence. Anonymous or pseudonymous allegations made to journals or institutions should be judged on their merit and not dismissed automatically. Institutions should release relevant sections of reports of research trustworthiness or misconduct investigations to all journals that have published research that was the subject of the investigation.

Nearly six years ago Ira Mellman, then Editor-in-Chief of the JCB, published an editorial entitled "Providing realistic access" (1). It described the Journal's efforts to reconcile its subscription-based business model with the goal of providing public access to scholarly journal content. Since then, developments in the public-access movement are bringing us closer to the ideal of universal public access. But will there still be a place for selective journals like the JCB when we achieve that objective?

HHMI will bestow monetary rewards on a commercial publisher in return for the type of public access already provided by many nonprofit publishers.

This article presents one scientist's perspective on the transition from life at the bench to an editorial career.