Back

Reproducibility of Scientific Claims in Drosophila Immunity: A Retrospective Analysis of 400 Publications

Westlake, H.; David, F.; Tian, Y.; Krakovic, K.; Dolgikh, A.; Juravlev, L.; Esmangart de Bournonville, T.; Carboni, A.; Melcarne, C.; Shan, T.; Wang, Y.; Mu, Y.; Kotwal, A.; Pirko, N.; Boquete, J. P.; Schupfer, F.; Rommelaere, S.; Poidevin, M.; Liu, Z.; Kondo, S.; Ratnaparkhi, G. S.; Chakrabarti, S.; Liu, G.; Masson, F.; Li, X.; Hanson, M. A.; Jiang, H.; Di Cara, F.; Kurant, E.; Lemaitre, B.

2025-07-09 genetics
10.1101/2025.07.07.663442 bioRxiv
Show abstract

Drosophila immunity has been the focus of intense study and has impacted other research fields including innate immunity and agriculturally or epidemiologically relevant investigations of insect pests and vectors. Unsurprisingly for such a large body of work, some published results were later found to be irreproducible. Although some results have been contradicted in the literature, many have no published follow-up, either due to a lack of research or low motivation to publish negative or contradictory results. We have addressed this by performing a reproducibility project that analyses the verifiability of claims from articles published on Drosophila immunity before 2011. To assess reproducibility, we extracted claims from 400 articles on the Drosophila immune response to bacteria and fungi and performed preliminary verification by comparing these claims to other published literature in the field. Using alternative approaches, we also experimentally tested some unchallenged claims, which had no published follow-up. The intent of this analysis was to centralize evidence on insights and findings to improve clarity for scientists that may base research programs on these data. All our data are published on a publicly available website associated with this article (https://ReproSci.epfl.ch/) that encourages community participation. This article provides a short summary of claims that were found to have contradictory evidence, which may help the community to assess past findings on Drosophila immunity and improve clarity going forward.

Matching journals

The top 9 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
BMC Biology
248 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
14.6%
2
Insects
36 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
7.3%
3
Frontiers in Genetics
197 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
6.5%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 31%
4.9%
5
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 27%
4.4%
6
PLOS Biology
408 papers in training set
Top 2%
4.0%
7
G3 Genes|Genomes|Genetics
351 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
3.1%
8
Insect Molecular Biology
19 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
3.1%
9
eLife
5422 papers in training set
Top 29%
3.1%
50% of probability mass above
10
Genetics
225 papers in training set
Top 2%
2.4%
11
iScience
1063 papers in training set
Top 9%
2.4%
12
Frontiers in Immunology
586 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
13
Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 0.7%
1.7%
14
Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology
88 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
Nucleic Acids Research
1128 papers in training set
Top 11%
1.7%
16
Peer Community Journal
254 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.5%
17
Frontiers in Medicine
113 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.4%
18
PLOS Pathogens
721 papers in training set
Top 7%
1.2%
19
Parasites & Vectors
57 papers in training set
Top 0.9%
1.1%
20
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 12%
1.0%
21
Ecology and Evolution
232 papers in training set
Top 3%
1.0%
22
PLOS Neglected Tropical Diseases
378 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.0%
23
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 22%
0.9%
24
PeerJ
261 papers in training set
Top 12%
0.9%
25
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences
2130 papers in training set
Top 40%
0.9%
26
Developmental Biology
134 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
27
Archives of Clinical and Biomedical Research
28 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.9%
28
Nature Communications
4913 papers in training set
Top 59%
0.9%
29
Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences
341 papers in training set
Top 6%
0.8%
30
Scientific Data
174 papers in training set
Top 2%
0.8%