HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS		QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced] Author: Keyword(s): Year:  Vol:  Page:

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Stalder, K. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Stalder, K.

Letter to the Editor

Iowa State University, 109 Kildee Hall, Ames, IA 50011

I want to thank the Journal of Animal Science for the opportunity to respond to the Letter to the Editor written by Neil DeBuse regarding National Pork Producers Council-sponsored Maternal Line Genetic Evaluation Program results, as presented in the Journal, 84:2590–2595, 2006.

First of all, I wholeheartedly agree with Neil DeBuse regarding the assertion in the third paragraph of his letter that researchers have a responsibility to accurately represent their data and to listen to concerns or complaints of inaccuracy or incorrect analysis. I too believe in the review process in place with the Journal.

Apparently, Neil DeBuse’s 6 complaints center on F₁ designation of the lines, a real nonissue in most scientists’ minds. This issue was thoroughly addressed in the manuscript in question (84:2590–2595), where the lines were described. The F₁ designation was used, and supporting peer-reviewed articles were provided for use of this designation (page 2591 of the Journal, 84:2590–2595). Additionally, the lines were described in detail, so the reader has the information regarding the genetic composition of the lines. Most importantly, the genetic composition does not change the results of the paper because the trait differences between lines are the relevant information from this journal article.

Contrary to the assertion in his Letter to the Editor, Neil DeBuse has not communicated with me as corresponding author to this manuscript. In addition, Neil DeBuse has not provided me, as the corresponding author, with data corrections or documentation that were approved by Newsham Hybrids indicating that the original information provided to the Genetics Program Committee of the National Pork Producers Council was incorrect and that would support his comments contained in his Letter to the Editor.

The information and results published represent the findings and conclusions drawn by the authors using the information and data supplied, and the results were properly analyzed. Additionally, these findings were thoroughly reviewed by the Journal of Animal Science. Unless changes of genetic definitions are officially supplied by Newsham Hybrids to the National Pork Board and accepted, the authors see no reason to alter this publication.

Finally, I hope this resolves an issue that most readers would find of limited value relative to the results of this study.

Respectfully submitted,

Received for publication August 31, 2007.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. P. Reynolds Public discourse concerning swine genetics papers J Anim Sci, May 1, 2008; 86(5): 1033 - 1034. [Full Text] [PDF]

This Article Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Stalder, K. Search for Related Content PubMed Articles by Stalder, K.