laujhawj, this looks like not just big news but Tremendous news and capability about RNA sequenciing. I just wonder why it took Nature so many months to get the article peer reviewed and published. It seems clear it is pretty ground breaking without having to convert the RNA.
The researchers peers --- others doing the same or similar work --- need to check and cross check the work, in addition to the publication various EDITORS own detective work, before it is published.
The publication and the editors, most of whom are they themselves well known scientists, do not want to be embarrassed publishing something and then latter having to go back and say, Ooops, we din't chech the work carefully and it turned out to be a fraud!
Premier scientific publication will never publish any hting they've just received.
It normally takes a couple weeks to a couple months before they would publish it.
And even then, once in a while, they have to say Oops!
I remember reading about a seemingly world class German physicist who claimed to have discovered the heaviest element known; he wrote and others just nodded and went on and on about what a great discovery he had made,,, it wasn't until some years later that they discovered, there was no discovery!
The thing is, it is VERY DIFFICULT to check and cross check ground breaking ideas and technologies and discoveries. So whenever someone announced they've discovered something deep, it takes some time to review it, making sure what they're saying is true or valid...
Typical review time for any high impact publication takes around 3 months time. Obviously Nature recognized the significant of this research because they published right away after review. Most of the time reviews come back with suggested experiments and a high impact publication could take another 3-6 months before getting accepted.