Twenty top genome researchers have written to the editorial advisers of Science protesting at the way the journal occasionally publishes genome maps without requiring the authors to place the supporting sequence data in public databases.

The letter is signed by such luminaries as Bob Waterston, head of genetics at Washington University in St Louis, Nobel laureate Aaron Klug of the MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology in Cambridge, UK, and Michael Ashburner, former head of the European Bioinformatics Institute at Hinxton near Cambridge. In it they argue that new genome sequences should be made available in public-domain databases in line with what they term “accepted norms of the field”.

“There are strong rumours in the field that Science is considering allowing the publication of papers from commercial companies on the rice and mouse genomes, without demanding the submission of the data in GenBank as a condition,” their letter says.

Boiling point: disputes about gene data have spilt over to the planned publication of a rice genome. Credit: MONSANTO

Several sources confirm that Science intends to publish a paper by the Swiss-based agricultural biotechnology company Syngenta on its draft of the rice genome. The supporting sequence data will not be deposited in GenBank, the sources say, but will be available free to academic researchers from Syngenta's website, subject to certain restrictions.

Science drew criticism last year when it agreed to publish the draft human genome assembled by Celera Genomics of Rockville, Maryland, despite the company's restrictions on access to the sequence data.

Donald Kennedy, Science's editor-in-chief, declines to comment on the pending paper. “Science is committed to full public access,” he says. “But we will consider rare exceptions if the public benefits of removing valuable data and results from trade-secret status clearly exceed the costs to the scientific community of the precedent the exception might create. This was true for the human genome sequence, and for the most important agricultural commodity in the Third World, the case is surely even stronger.”

According to several researchers, Science also plans to publish a draft sequence of Oryza sativa L. ssp. indica, the major crop rice cultivar in China, alongside the Syngenta genome. This second rice genome was completed recently by a team led by Huanming Yang, director of the Beijing Genomics Institute, and the supporting sequence data have been deposited in GenBank.

A draft sequence of the rice genome by the agricultural biotechnology company Monsanto, based in St Louis, Missouri, and one by Celera of the mouse genome, are also under preparation, but have not yet been scheduled for publication in any journal.

Syngenta currently makes its data available to a handful of academic groups through special agreements. The publication of Syngenta's rice genome in Science might result in changes to the company's policy, giving more researchers access to the sequence data. But, as the letter demonstrates, researchers remain deeply divided over the terms of such access. “This goes to the heart of what science is all about, the free exchange of ideas, data and reagents,” says Bruce Stillman, director of the Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory in New York state. Science should not compromise on making the data freely available, he says.

But Ron Cantrell, director of the International Rice Research Institute in the Philippines, is more supportive of Science's decision to publish. “You have to ask the question 'is it better not to have any access at all?',” he says, adding that, in his experience, Syngenta and Monsanto have “been very forthcoming” in collaborations with the public sector.

Chris Novak, a spokesman for Syngenta, says that the company hopes to work with the publicly funded International Rice Genome Sequencing Project (IRGSP). The project intends to produce a 'finished' high-quality sequence, as opposed to the drafts, containing many gaps, that are about to be published.

Researchers point out that Science's agreement with Syngenta is not entirely analogous to the one it reached last year with Celera on the human genome. Celera contributed no data to the public Human Genome Project, instead relying on data from the public project to complete its own sequence. In contrast, Syngenta has already contributed significant mapping data to the IRGSP, through a collaboration with Clemson University in South Carolina.

But Syngenta has so far refused to share its raw sequence data with all of the public group — unlike its rival Monsanto, whose contributions of sequence data are credited with strongly accelerating the public project.

In January, however, Syngenta began talks with the IRGSP and, according to one IRGSP official, has agreed in principle to match the Monsanto agreement. If it does, “all the Syngenta and Monsanto data will be in the public domain by the end of the year”, says the official. The likelihood of this happening might be a factor in persuading Science to accept restrictions on the rice data for the time being, observers suggest.