Laboratory Soap Opera

I found out today that my name has been removed from research that I worked on at my old lab while working for the Evil Queen of the Amazon. When I worked at the lab I was a primary author on manuscript for this work. Upon my termination there was no discussion or mention of me being removed as an author. Today I found out (I wont say who from until Judy Miller reveals her source) that I was removed as an author from that work. So I emailed the Evil Queen of the Amazon.

Evil Queen of The Amazon,

I realize that you were very upset about my departure from the lab in
August. However, I thought that the work that I did for you in the
lab would be sacrosanct from all other issues.

It has come to my attention that you have removed my name from the
work regarding SSEA4 and the isolation of mesenchymal stem cells from
murine bone marrow. I think that omitting my name is not in keeping
with the collegial spirit of scientific research and breaches the
boundaries of ethical behavior. Additionally you expressed to me
several times that I would have authorship on this work and we never
discussed anything to the contrary. Therefore, I ask that you put my
name back on the paper as an author. I performed a large portion of
the research for this work and was involved in developing the sorting
strategy, culturing the cells, differentiation experiments, real-time
PCR and RT PCR analysis of the cells that the research focuses on.
This is fully documented in my lab books and corroborated by the fact
that I gave a talk on the subject to the Center for Developmental
Biology on February 4, 2005.

I hope that you and I can resolve this together in a civil manner. I
simply ask that you give credit where credit is due.

Sincerely,
Adam

I waited and then got this in reply:

Dear Adam,

I hope that you are doing well in your new position, and let me first say that you are truly mistaken if you believe that I am upset that you left. I wish you all the success in your new position.

Regarding the SSEA4 manuscript, it is at my discretion to decide whether people who did technical work should be listed as co-authors, and I have decided not to. You performed the experiments that I asked you to perform, and were paid for this work. Since you had no conceptual or intellectual input into the research, I am not listing you as a co-author on the manuscript. However if you would like to be acknowledged for your technical contribution, I would consider listing you under the acknowledgements section of the manuscript.

EQotA

Note how she says that she was "mistaken" that she was upset when I left the lab. Let me direct you to these blog posts: Thick Animosity and Emancipation. I did some research and she does have the power to remove me but I couldn't just leave it at that. So I wrote this:

Evil Queen of the Amazon,

I realize that it is at your discretion to put technicians on manuscripts that come from your lab. The fact remains that my name was on the manuscript when I worked in the lab and even when you sent the manuscript to Via Cell for review. Additionally you asked me to present the work that I had done regarding the SSEA4 manuscript to the Center for Developmental biology. I find your use of discretion quite spurious.

The facts are that when I was working for you my name was on the paper and you thought that I contributed enough to justify authorship. It is now the case that I am not an author without any kind of good explanation except that authorship is at your discretion. I find it difficult to believe the matter is so trite.

Lets be frank with each other. You took my name off the manuscript because you were angry that I left your lab, in your own words "betrayed." That is unprofessional and unethical.

Sincerely,
Adam

I want to clear up that ViaCell is a company that she was legally obliged to send the manuscript to for review because she did some of the work there. I have also referred to this person as Dr. P in one of my podcasts. She is the wife of Dr. K, the man who wanted to deport Gagan upon learning that she took a new job.

I'm not that bummed about the paper. The experiments were shit and very flawed and she tried getting it into Nature and Science. They flat out rejected in less than a week after she sent it. Thats pretty pathetic actually. It will probably be published in some sixth tier journal. When it comes out I will read it very carefully to see if the flaws suddenly fixed themselves.

Its a smaller world than you think and you should be nice to people.