原文标题：The Global Experimentation on NgAgo
原文链接：https://medium.com/@GenomicsEagles/the-global-experimentation-on-ngago-4f0e282c2190#.wp8ko1kws
全文发不了 就只节选那篇文章部分内容发了
一、关于全球试验成功率：
More frustrations have been reported as an Addgene blog posted results from a Google Survey (3).
As of August 1st 2016, out of 165 survey responses, 88 tested NgAgo, only 1 said “Yes” to successful replication of NgAgo for genome editing.
As of September 19th, 105 out of 211 responses failed to replicate NgAgo in genome editing, while 10 said “Yes”.
In a curious incidence between the two data collection dates, someone voted “yes” multiple times all within a 15 minutes time frame.
Adding to the complexity, most of the “yes” votes, including the initial one, were claimed to be just “a test” on the survey itself rather than from real replication efforts.
So, unfortunately, these “positive” responses from the survey have to be disqualified and classified as “false positives”.
大概意思是根据谷歌调查，在8月1号时165个回应，有88个测试了NgAgo,只有一个回复成功重复
9月19号211回应中有105个声称失败，有10个说成功
奇妙的是，数据收集中发现有人在15分钟内多次刷票选择重复成功
而且大多数回应成功重复，包括最早的一个，声称只是测试一下调查而不是真正重复了试验本身
所以不幸的是，这些重复成功的回应都只能被当做不可信的舍弃掉了。
楼主渣翻 你们尽量看原文
原文链接：https://medium.com/@GenomicsEagles/the-global-experimentation-on-ngago-4f0e282c2190#.wp8ko1kws
全文发不了 就只节选那篇文章部分内容发了
一、关于全球试验成功率：
More frustrations have been reported as an Addgene blog posted results from a Google Survey (3).
As of August 1st 2016, out of 165 survey responses, 88 tested NgAgo, only 1 said “Yes” to successful replication of NgAgo for genome editing.
As of September 19th, 105 out of 211 responses failed to replicate NgAgo in genome editing, while 10 said “Yes”.
In a curious incidence between the two data collection dates, someone voted “yes” multiple times all within a 15 minutes time frame.
Adding to the complexity, most of the “yes” votes, including the initial one, were claimed to be just “a test” on the survey itself rather than from real replication efforts.
So, unfortunately, these “positive” responses from the survey have to be disqualified and classified as “false positives”.
大概意思是根据谷歌调查，在8月1号时165个回应，有88个测试了NgAgo,只有一个回复成功重复
9月19号211回应中有105个声称失败，有10个说成功
奇妙的是，数据收集中发现有人在15分钟内多次刷票选择重复成功
而且大多数回应成功重复，包括最早的一个，声称只是测试一下调查而不是真正重复了试验本身
所以不幸的是，这些重复成功的回应都只能被当做不可信的舍弃掉了。
楼主渣翻 你们尽量看原文
