Gel Questions

As a graduate student you're expected to know certain things. What I've learned the hard way is that I definitely don't know them!
Reading and analyzing scholarly articles takes a whole new training. I'm still trying to get the hang of it, hence my stupid question for today.

In particular lets just look at figure B here.




(Xiao-Dong Yang et al, 2011)

What is this figure trying to show? Obviously you can see a band (that black elongated blob) shifted down in C delta 39 in the 1st panel. In the 2nd panel there are some solid bands along with lanes that have multiple bands in one. What does this all mean?
The fact that you don't have those multiple bands in the top lane shows that pop-1 alone is not phosphorylated. This is not due to any sort of mutation as even the wt doesn't show phosphorylation.  In the 2nd panel pop-1 in the presence of wrm-1, and lit-1 acheives phosphorylation in the wt (DUH), D8E, ExpA, ExpD, etc. suggesting that phosphorylation of pop-1 requires the presence of wrm-1 and lit-1. Though it may have been interesting to see pop-1 with wrm-1 alone and with lit-1 alone to see if perhaps both are not required (possible this is done in the supplemental). What we also see in this figure is that pop-1 even in the presence of wrm-1 and lit-1 is still not phosphorylated for T425D, ExpA T425D,  ExpD T425D, and C delta 4, suggesting the mutations present in these somehow inhibit phosphorylation of pop-1.

And there you have it! This is how you read a gel and analyze it.

But I'd also like you to pay attention to the 3rd to last column of ExpD... is that...? Why yes it is PHOTOSHOPPED in. At this point how can you trust any other information the authors provide? Why did they choose to cut and paste instead of just rerunning a blot with all the necessary components? Shady stuff, people, shady stuff!