From the Press
working on the number of his citations:
Received: from web8.editorialmanager.com (web8.editorialmanager.com [184.108.40.206])
by exchange.bii.a-star.edu.sg (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6050C8CE30
for ; Fri, 17 May 2013 17:57:55 +0800 (SGT)
Received: from web8 ([220.127.116.11]) by web8.editorialmanager.com with Microsoft SMTPSVC(6.0.3790.4675);
Fri, 17 May 2013 05:57:50 -0400
Cube - an online tool for comparison and contrasting of protein sequences
Dear Dr. Mihalek,
Thank you for submitting your manuscript to PLOS ONE. After careful consideration, we feel that it has merit, but is not suitable for publication as it currently stands. Therefore, my decision is "Major Revision."
Before I proceed with invitation of reviewers, the authors need to address 2 of 3 criteria of PLoS One for manuscripts presenting new methods and tools: Utility and Validation. Description of the criteria can be found here: http://www.plosone.org/static/editorial#methods
Specifically, I would like the authors to compare Cube with Evolutionary Trace method, ConSurf/ConSeq and
POLYVIEW-2D/3D servers to show the advantage of using Cube and demonstrate that the presented method is an improvement over existing options.
We encourage you to submit your revision within forty-five days of the date of this decision.
If you choose not to submit a revision, please notify us.
Aleksey Porollo, PhD
[*epilogue: PLoSONE did honor our request for another editor]