There is no issue with the paper. The paper does not support the claim.

The paper literally says that "...the species effectively has four sexes..." I don't know if that's true or not, but Helmuth was just reporting a claim made in a peer-reviewed journal article.

▲

anonfordays 7 months ago | parent [-]

Yes, it literally states "effectively has", and later states: "Indeed, because of disassortative mating based on both chromosomes 2 and 2m and the W and Z sex chromosomes, the species operates as though there are four sexes."

Only two sex chromosomes, and acts "as though" there are four sexes, which means there aren't four sexes.

The paper does not make the claim that there are four independent sexes. Helmuth incorrectly reported a claim that the paper does not make.

"Squirrels fly through the air as though they are birds" Squirrels are not birds and the previous statement does not support that claim.

▲

foldr 7 months ago | parent [-]

I looked up Helmuth’s original tweet and it seems like a reasonable one sentence summary of the paper to me. I think the problems here are (i) twitter being twitter (not a great venue for detail and nuance) and (ii) a paper reporting its results in an overly sensational way. If there absolutely definitely aren’t more than two sexes in a given species, don’t say that there “effectively” are.

▲

codocod 7 months ago | parent | next [-]

It's how she reacted to scientists who responded to her tweet politely challenging her assertion that this species has four sexes that is more the issue: doubling down, blocking anyone who disagreed.

An editor of a science magazine should be willing and open to discuss science with scientists. Particularly if they're trying to help correct a misconception.

	▲	foldr 7 months ago \| parent [-]
		That doesn't sound good, but I haven't managed to find the record of those interactions, as I think the original tweet has been deleted. I don't tend to trust second-hand summaries in this sort of case.

▲

anonfordays 7 months ago | parent | prev [-]

I looked up Helmuth’s original tweet and it does not seem like a reasonable one sentence summary of the paper to me. That's why numerous biologist and scientists rejected her summary.