English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Global: Zendy Plus annual

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Insights

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Global: Zendy Plus monthly

Global: Zendy Tools annual

Global: Zendy Tools monthly

Global: Zendy Free Plan

This manuscript was originally submitted to Nature for consideration as a"Brief Communication" in response to a "Corrigendum" that appeared in 2006 (1)to an earlier paper in Nature. That corrigendum was the subject of a Natureeditorial (2) stating that "key data were misrepresented by the authors, bothduring the review process and in the final published version of the paper" andit claimed to provide an explanation for alterations in their data that had theeffect of changing their priority claim from a result no better than previouswork by Isaacson and Scheinfein that was 1 Angstrom shy of atomic resolution towhat appeared to be atomic resolution. In this manuscript we show that thisexplanation is physically inconsistent with the evolution of their data. Whenoriginally submitted to Nature, the manuscript was peer-reviewed, deemed"carefully and properly argued" and recommended for publication withappropriate responses from the corrigendum authors. Subsequent exchanges withthose authors did not reach a satisfactory state and publication did not occur.We now have learnt that an article is likely to appear in Nature concerning thecircumstances surrounding the concerns expressed in this initial document andwe consider it important and relevant that this document and the supplementarymaterial be made available in the public domain. As to the question of properattribution of priority, we would suggest instead citing the concurrent work ofBatson (3).  1. Browning, N.D., Chisholm, M.F., and Pennycook, S.J.Corrigendum:Atomic-resolution chemical analysis using a scanning transmissionelectron microscope, Nature 444, 235 (2006). 2. Editorial. Correction orretraction? Nature 444, 123-124 (2006). 3. Batson, P.E. (1993). SimultaneousSTEM imaging and electron energy-loss spectroscopy with atomic-columnsensitivity. Nature 366, 727-728.

Brief Communication Arising from a Corrigendum to "Atomic-resolution chemical analysis using a scanning transmission electron microscope"