Here’s an odd good news/bad news tale from the pages of Industrial Crops and Products. The journal is reinstating a 2011 paper it mistakenly retracted. But, it’s retracting another article from the same author, who tried to grow two peas in the same pod (or something like that).
According to the retraction notice:
Please note that at the request of the author the following journal article has been retracted:
Periodic variation in kernel oil content and fatty acid profiles of Calophyllum inophyllum L.: A medicinal plant in northern Australia, Volume 33, Issue 3, May 2011, Pages 775–778
Due to an error by the publisher the following article was inadvertently retracted:
Variation in oil content and fatty acid profile of Calophyllum inophyllum L. with fruit maturity and its implications on resultant biodiesel quality, Volume 33, Issue 3, May 2011, Pages 629–632
The retraction of this article has now been rescinded.
That’s certainly confusing. But the retraction notice for the first paper clears things up a bit (we think):
This article has been retracted at the request of the Author.
Due to ethical reasons this paper has been withdrawn. The author has used the data derived from the same experiment to describe two different aspects (medicinal and biodiesel properties) of the periodic variation in fatty acid profiles in C. inophyllum. However, the author failed to alter the text as much as should have been done for this manuscript. In order to avoid any complications, the author has therefore withdrawn this article.
We apologise to the author for this error on our behalf and for any inconvenience caused.
The notice suggests that there was too much overlap between the Industrial Crops and Products paper and this one in the journal Biomass and Bioenergy by the same author, Subhash Hathurusingha, of CQ University in Australia.
Periodic variation in kernel oil content and fatty acid profiles of Calophyllum inophyllum L.: A medicinal plant in northern Australia, Volume 33, Issue 3, May 2011, Pages 775–778
Variation in oil content and fatty acid profile of Calophyllum inophyllum L. with fruit maturity and its implications on resultant biodiesel quality, Volume 33, Issue 3, May 2011, Pages 629–632
Periodic variation in kernel oil content and fatty acid profiles of Calophyllum innophyllm L.: A potential biodiesel feedstock in Australia, Biomass and Bioenergy, Volume 35, Issue 8, August 2011, Pages 3448–3452
Judging by the titles and the size of these manuscripts, they could have been published back-to-back in The Very Thin Duplicated Salami Slice Science Journal. After all, it is not the quality of publications that really counts but their number.
Quite right, chirality. It takes an administrator much less time to count publications than to read them and evaluate them for quality. We want the pay-for-performance system to work as “efficiently” as possible. 🙂
If the system works this way you cannot blame the people who play by its rules, I think. You can resist the system and do it your way, but then you should not complain that the system is being unfair to you. It was your choice.
I don’t get it
I and many others have used the same data in different ways
Was there actually repeated paragraphs?
“Was there actually repeated paragraphs?”. I do not have access to the full texts but the abstracts seem very similar.
Periodic variation in kernel oil content and fatty acid profiles of Calophyllum inophyllum L. : a medicinal plant in northern Australia
Abstract
Variation in oil contents and fatty acid profiles of a native Australian medicinal species Calophyllum inophyllum were studied in two different fruiting periods (winter 2008 and autumn 2009) and in three different northern Queensland provenances (Cardwell, Townsville, Yeppoon). Kernel oil was extracted by standard n-hexane double extraction and fatty acid profiles were determined by ISO 5508 and 5509 methods using gas chromatography. C. inophyllum provenances have demonstrated a significant (P < 0.05) periodic variation in oil contents and fatty acid profiles, and as a result may alter wound healing properties of Calophyllum oil.
Periodic variation in kernel oil content and fatty acid profiles of Calophyllum innophyllm L.: A potential biodiesel feedstock in Australia
Abstract
Variation in oil content and fatty acid profiles of a native Australian biodiesel feedstock species Calophyllum inophyllum were studied in two different fruiting periods (winter 2008 and autumn 2009) and in three different northern Queensland provenances (Cardwell, Townsville, Yeppoon). Oils were extracted by standard n-hexane double extraction and fatty acid profiles were determined by ISO 5508 and 5509 methods using gas chromatography. C. inophyllum provenances have demonstrated a significant periodic variation in oil content and fatty acid profile, and as a result alter the quality of fatty acid methyl esters (biodiesel). FAP of majority of kernel oil sources were found to vary significantly (P < 0.05) with seasonal variation in temperature and longterm average rainfall.