Hi Tuuli, others
We definitely succeeded in bringing more focus in the paper. I like the rare regulatory variant a lot, but I had to read it many times
to be able to understand (most of) it. Perhaps others have also ideas on writing this down more clearly.
Other comments in the text of the rebuttal and the paper
Best wishes
Peter
From:
geuvadis_rnaseq-bounces@lists.crg.es [mailto:geuvadis_rnaseq-bounces@lists.crg.es]
On Behalf Of Tuuli Lappalainen
Sent: 01 March 2013 10:26
To: geuvadis_rna_analysis@lists.crg.es; geuvadis_rnaseq@lists.crg.es
Subject: [Geuvadis_rnaseq] Geuvadis RNA-seq paper revision
Dear all,
We have revised the Geuvadis RNA-seq paper for Nature; please find the paper and the response letter enclosed. If you have any comments, please send them
by Saturday - apologies for the tight schedule, we are planning to submit this on Monday. Thanks to all of you who helped me with the revisions.
As many of you know, the editor adviced us to make the paper more focused on the key messages, and as a consequence we had to drop some of the analyses - fusion transcripts, soft splicing and RNA editing. I hope that those results can be published in some other
context later on. To strengthen the analysis of regulatory variants, I did some additional analysis on regulatory variants underlying allele-specific expression signals, but otherwise the changes in the paper are relatively small. I think that we were able
to respond to all the comments really well, and hopefully the editor and reviewers agree.
best regards,
Tuuli
--
Tuuli Lappalainen, PhD
Department of Genetics, Stanford University School
Department of Genetic Medicine and Development, University of Geneva
Email: tuuli.e.lappalainen@gmail.com / tlappala@stanford.edu
Tel: +1 415 351 9713
Bustamante lab
Department of Genetics