About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Retraction appears for Harvard scientist who had two mega-corrections last year

with 117 comments

molecular cellSam Lee, a Harvard biologist who had two mega-corrections published last year, has retracted a paper in Molecular Cell because some of the figures were “inappropriately assembled.”

Here’s the notice for “GAMT, a p53-Inducible Modulator of Apoptosis, Is Critical for the Adaptive Response to Nutrient Stress:”

This article has been retracted: please see Elsevier Policy on Article Withdrawal (http://www.elsevier.com/locate/withdrawalpolicy).

We were made aware that Western blot data in some of the figures for the above referenced paper were inappropriately assembled resulting in duplications of bands. Because we believe that the presentation issues are beyond the limits of acceptable scientific standards, we wish to retract this paper and regret any inconvenience to the scientific community this may have caused.

We asked Lee for more details, and he responded:

It was brought to our attention that Western blot panels in the above mentioned paper were duplicated. Further analysis of the published Findings as well as the raw data corresponding to the refereed experiments indicated that mistakes were made during Figures assembly. These issues prompted the retraction of the paper.

The retraction comes two years after one scientist brought the issues in the paper to Molecular Cell‘s attention in August 2011. Whether that was the first scientist to raise a red flag, we don’t know.

The paper has been cited 40 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

Lee’s previous corrections were in Nature and Current Biology.

About these ads

Written by ivanoransky

August 23, 2013 at 8:30 am

117 Responses

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. “Presentation issues beyond the limits of acceptable academic standards…” What a relief, I though it was fraud.

    Bill

    August 23, 2013 at 9:15 am

    • Just look at the mice in the Nature megacorrection, Just look at them. This is acceptable for Nature and for Harvard.

      michaelhbriggs

      August 23, 2013 at 9:57 am

    • One of the most vexing issues in dealing with “irregularities” in the scientific literature is separating fraudulent activities from cases of oversight or sloppiness. This is a distinction that cannot be made flippantly. We all make mistakes, and the ramifications of simply being accused of breeching ethical standards can be tremendous. And any one of us who runs a lab has the potential to be “scammed” by the rare unscrupulous postdoctoral fellow or graduate student hellbent on data manipulation. So how do we really know what’s going on?

      I use two criteria to determine whether a scientist, particularly a lab head, is up to no good. First is repetition. It is unlikely that somebody who has gotten away with inappropriate data manipulation once, and sees it as a short cut to publication, will stop. And if the lab head is somehow involved—either directly, by fostering a poor lab environment, or by turning a blind eye—data manipulation will appear in multiple publications with multiple different author sets (excluding the senior author). The second is intent. Do the actions increase the apparent impact and strength of the story, or are they neutral (or even negative)? True oversights will be randomly distributed between those that help the authors, and those that don’t. But if there is a consistent positive trend, such as error bars being too small, the number of mice being exaggerated, or persuasive western blots being reused throughout the paper, or even in different papers, then it’s pretty clear (to me at least) what is going on.

      Given that we don’t want to make accusations lightly, we should also be prepared to deal swiftly and effectively with cases that leave little room for doubt. I wonder what Harvard will do?

      Peer007

      August 23, 2013 at 10:54 am

      • “I wonder what Harvard will do?”
        Why should they do anything? They are Harvard, it is only the medium or lower ranked institutions that get worried by such things.
        If you insist Harvard do something then all that will happen is they will pick out some scape-goat from departed lab members, so it is better not to push the issue.

        Can I just add something to your carefully thought out schema – how does the lab head react when the issue is raised? Does he/she sends the matter off to the university ethics committee and tries to rectify the mistake/oversight or does he/she try to stonewall.
        If the latter, then they are at very least an accessory after the fact.

        littlegreyrabbit

        August 23, 2013 at 11:34 am

        • Excellent points. If Harvard is unlikely to act, then we may well also ask what the NIH plans to do? Dr. Lee currently holds three R01 grants from the NIH, with direct costs totaling $986,957 annually. What is quite striking is that each of these three R01 grants can be directly related to one of the three papers that form the center of this issue. RO1 CA127247 “Role of an unusual GTPase in DNA damage response and carcinogenesis” focuses on RhoE, which was the subject of the Current Biology paper that had duplicated images and required substantial figure replacement. R01 CA142805 “Targeting ROS by a p53-activating agent for selective killing of cancer cells” is directly related to the corrected Nature paper (2011) that contained misleadingly small error bars, exaggeration of mouse numbers, and what appears to be the same mouse posing as four different mice. And R01 CA149477 “p53-GAMT pathway in cancer cell metabolism and DNA damage-induced carcinogenesis” is the topic of the just-retracted Molecular Cell paper. The NIH must investigate on behalf of the scientific community and the taxpayers who’s money they are stewarding. Like you, I do have concerns about any investigation scapegoating a poor-departed lab member, but hopefully one fact will help avoid this issue: only one person is an author of all three papers.

          Peer007

          August 23, 2013 at 2:07 pm

          • It has been reported to the ORI; but then so was Michael Karin.
            Another too big to fail?

            michaelhbriggs

            September 30, 2013 at 8:04 am

  2. Google reveals he’s been quite busy building a reputation….

    http://www.samwlee.org
    http://www.samwlee.net
    http://www.samwlee.com
    samleeharvard.wordpress.com

    These are not the types of website typically required by Harvard faculty who have a scientific reputation that speaks for itself.

    I would bet good money that Harvard is not aware of these sites, and does not approve of their name and imagery being used in this manner.

    Regardless, retraction watch FTW! Still the #2 Google hit for Sam W Lee.

    sTORySci

    August 23, 2013 at 7:26 pm

    • yes, i bumped on to this – some statements are really strange. it says he is a research assistant…

      Ressci Integrity

      August 23, 2013 at 7:34 pm

      • His main webpage (which hasn’t been updated in a while) also lists a paper as “Accepted” in Nature Cell Biology, but in fact it seems to have surfaced in JBC. You’d think that someone who wishes to have a significant web presence promoting their science would also be interested getting the facts right. Unless incorrect “facts” paint a better picture…

        Peer007

        August 26, 2013 at 8:46 am

        • Reply to Peer007 August 29, 2013 at 6:33 pm

          “smacks of some kind of forced public relations campaign”.

          4 of the authors of the retracted paper Mol Cell. 2009 Nov 13;36(3):379-92 have written their own review on the topic of p53 and GAMT.

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20404548

          Cell Cycle. 2010 May;9(9):1706-10. Epub 2010 May 10.
          GAMT joins the p53 network: branching into metabolism.
          Ide T, Chu K, Aaronson SA, Lee SW.
          Source

          Cutaneous Biology Research Center, Massachusetts General Hospital and Harvard Medical School, Charlestown, MA, USA.

          Surely ” Identification of guanidinoacetate methyltransferase (GAMT) as a new p53 target connects p53 to creatine metabolism critical in the regulation of ATP homeostasis.”
          is now defunct and the review needs to be removed from the literature?

          fernando pessoa

          August 31, 2013 at 9:15 am

    • Dr. Lee’s web presence is indeed unusual and smacks of some kind of forced public relations campaign. Google “Sam Lee of Harvard” and see what you get… that phrase in particular sticks out as his official moniker.

      Peer007

      August 29, 2013 at 6:33 pm

    • Then he is in rare company. Reputation enhancing websites were pioneered in the biological sciences by Anil Potti.

      http://www.anilpotti.net/

      A quote: “To date, Dr. Anil Potti has more than 120 publications, received many prestigious awards, and has been an invited speaker at many national and international scientific meetings.”

      Interestingly, Potti also has a wikipedia page devoted to his life experience that he is probably not allowed to edit the way he would like it.

      http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anil_Potti

      The 10 retractions are documented in detail. So perhaps he only has a smidgeon more than 110 publications now?

      CAUTION: Curious but unwary readers are strongly advised to avoid http://www.anilpotti.com/ under any circumstances.

      For here be dragons as, according to Google, “This site may harm your computer.”

      Unanticipated consequences of reputational enhancement: Who knew?

      Scrutineer

      September 3, 2013 at 2:35 pm

  3. I do wonder why Mol Cell has not retracted the review which deals with Mol Cell. 2009 Nov 13;36(3):379-92.
    It is in the same issue of the journal. Don’t the editors have “joined-up thinking”?

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19917243

    Mol Cell. 2009 Nov 13;36(3):351-2. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2009.10.026.
    p53 and Metabolism: The GAMT Connection.
    Zhu Y, Prives C.

    Source

    Department of Biological Sciences, Columbia University, New York, NY 10027, USA.

    Abstract

    In this issue of Molecular Cell, Ide et al. (2009) have identified the enzyme guanidinoacetate methyltransferase (GAMT) that regulates creatine metabolism as a p53 target involved in apoptosis, reactive oxygen species (ROS), and fatty acid metabolism.

    david hardman

    August 26, 2013 at 2:39 am

    • Yes, good point david hardman. To correct the literature, this review should also be retracted, so I hope the editors inform the authors. It also would be worthwhile letting the reviewers of the original paper know as well, to help them be on the look out for duplications in other papers they might review.

      michaelhbriggs

      August 26, 2013 at 6:36 am

      • Duplications seem to follow SW Lee. For example, in J. Biol. Chem. 2004, 279:19643-19648. The dot plots in Figure 5B are all duplicated: a) BRCA1 (-/-) + LacZ, BRCA1 (-/-) + WT and BRCA1 (+/+)+S308N are exactly the same; b) BRCA1(-/-) + S308N and BRCA(-/-) + LacZ+IR are the same; c) BRCA1(-/-)+S308N+IR and BRCA1(-/-)+WT+IR are the same. This can’t be sloppy work because a few dots are deleted to suggest they are different dot plots (and artificially change the percentage of cells in the M phase), but 90% of the dots coincide in the duplications. In my experience with mammalian cell flow cytometry, this can’t be a real experimental result.
        Editors and reviewers should be trained to look out for duplications, as suggested. Is Figure 5B ( a key figure in the paper) fraudulent?

        Cardinal

        August 26, 2013 at 8:17 pm

  4. In reply to michaelhbriggs August 26, 2013 at 6:36 am

    “It also would be worthwhile letting the reviewers of the original paper know as well, to help them be on the look out for duplications in other papers they might review.”

    What about papers they write?

    When I take a look at Mol Cell Biol. 2003 Nov;23(22):8161-71, where C Prives is one of the 3 authors

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/14585975

    I get the impression that in figure 2 I am seeing double.

    http://mcb.asm.org/content/23/22/8161/F2.large.jpg

    Please take a look at the lower left panel in figure 2A and the lower right panel in figure 2B.

    Figure 3 leaves me with the same impression.

    http://mcb.asm.org/content/23/22/8161/F3.large.jpg

    For example in the top panel in figure 3A several bands strike me as very similar.

    In figure 3D the bands in the Wb alphaChk1 panels look like the have been shunted over one lane.

    david hardman

    August 26, 2013 at 12:56 pm

  5. This is an old conundrum, but how to explain images from Oncogene (1998) 16, 1391-97 and Mol Cell Biol (2000) 20,1723-32 reappearing in Cancer Res (2001) 61, 1386-91 as something else?

    http://retractionwatch.files.wordpress.com/2013/02/cancer-res-2001-yellow-arrow-1.ppt

    http://pubpeer.com/publications/11245439

    fernando pessoa

    August 27, 2013 at 1:25 am

  6. How to explain images from Cancer Res 1998;58;4439-44 PMID9766676 reappearing in
    Mol Cell Biol 2000;20;1723–1732; PMID10669749 as different things?

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130415035452/http://www.science-fraud.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/SWLee16.jpg

    fernando pessoa

    August 27, 2013 at 8:00 am

  7. How to explain the similarities between 2 beta-actin blots?

    J. Biol. Chem. 2011;286;17672-17681; PMID21398698

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130415034155/http://www.science-fraud.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/SWLee12.jpg

    fernando pessoa

    August 27, 2013 at 8:05 am

    • All of this discussion is really making me miss “Science-Fraud”. Pubpeer should be an adequate replacement, but that site deals with too many things at once—from minor issues with interpretation and lack of appropriate referencing, all the way through to the sort of stuff that we’ve seen with Dr. Lee. Also, the lack of a singular (albeit anonymous) voice makes it difficult to weigh the validity of the comments. I know Brookes talked about coming back with something new and improved, but there has been no update on his site for a while. Has anyone heard anything?

      Peer007

      August 27, 2013 at 9:33 am

  8. In reply to Peer007 August 27, 2013 at 9:33

    Understand your sentiments. RW is quite good at allowing discussion and presentation of things that don’t quite fit.

    How to explain image reuse in Cell 2007;130;624-637; PMID17719541 ?

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130415034155/http://www.science-fraud.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/SWLee10.jpg

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130415034155/http://www.science-fraud.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/SWLee11.jpg

    fernando pessoa

    August 27, 2013 at 9:46 am

  9. In reply to Peer007 August 27, 2013 at 9:33 am

    RE: discussion.

    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Sep 2;94(18):9648-53.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9275177

    Figure 6.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC23243/figure/F6/

    From the numerous examples of image reuse above the Bayesian landscape has shifted.
    In figure 6 the lower p53 bands and the WAF1/p21 bands are quite similar.
    The images do have differences, but also similarities.

    Figure 6 Legend.
    “The same Northern blot was hybridized successively with 32P-labeled probes for p53, p21, mdm2, cdc2, cyclin A, cyclin B, and 36B4 (loading control).”

    My first thought was that the membrane had not be sufficiently stripped, but the upper p53 bands do disappear in the WAF1/p21 section.

    fernando pessoa

    August 28, 2013 at 4:46 am

  10. Reiterating david hardman’s August 26, 2013 at 12:56 pm reply to michaelhbriggs
    August 26, 2013 at 6:36 am

    “It also would be worthwhile letting the reviewers of the original paper know as well, to help them be on the look out for duplications in other papers they might review.”

    What about papers they write?

    This applies to the editor of Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Sep 2;94(18):9648-53.

    Please see

    Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2007 Oct 16;104(42):16633-8.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17921246

    Figure 3.
    http://www.pnas.org/content/104/42/16633/F3.large.jpg

    Figure 3A. Female actin panel. Please compare bands in lanes 2 and 3 with bands in lanes and 10 and 11.
    Female p53 panel. Please compare bands in lanes 4 and 6.

    Male p53 panel. Vertical change in background between lanes 6 and 7.
    Actin panel. No vertical changes in background.

    Figure 4.
    http://www.pnas.org/content/104/42/16633/F4.large.jpg

    Figure 4A. C57BL/6 male actin panel. Please compare bands in lanes 3 and 4 with bands in lanes 11 and 12.

    Please compare band lane 6 right actin panel figure 4B (C57BL/6 male) with vertically stretched vertical mirror image of band lane 9 C57BL/6 female actin panel figure 4D.

    fernando pessoa

    August 29, 2013 at 3:10 am

    • The editor of Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Sep 2;94(18):9648-53.
      is also an author of the publication below.

      Cancer Res. 1999 Aug 1;59(15):3663-70.
      DNA damage increases sensitivity to vinca alkaloids and decreases sensitivity to taxanes through p53-dependent repression of microtubule-associated protein 4.
      Zhang CC, Yang JM, Bash-Babula J, White E, Murphy M, Levine AJ, Hait WN.
      Source

      Department of Medicine, University of Medicine and Dentistry of New Jersey-Robert Wood Johnson Medical School, Piscataway 08854, USA.

      PMID: 10446979

      Figure 4.

      http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/59/15/3663/F4.large.jpg

      p53 panel. Please compare bands lanes 1 and 5.
      Please compare band lane 4 with horizontal mirror image band lane 1.
      Please compare bands lanes 2, 3 and 6.

      MAP4 panel. Please compare bands lanes 1 and 2 with bands lanes 5 and 6 respectively.
      Please compare bands lanes 3 and 4 with horizontal mirror images of bands lanes 1 and 2.

      david hardman

      October 1, 2013 at 9:14 am

  11. So that things are all gathered under one roof.

    How to explain how to explain the similarities and differences between images in:-

    1. Figure 1A Mol Cell Biol 2000;20;7450-9; PMID11003642
    2. Figure 1A EMBO J 2003;22;1289-301; PMID12628922 ?

    http://web.archive.org/web/20130415035452/http://www.science-fraud.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/SWLee17.jpg

    The Bayesian landscape shifts some more.

    Previous discussion.

    http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/2013/07/24/paper-by-canada-research-chair-retracted-from-journal-he-edits-for-blots-from-unrelated-samples/#comment-60911

    fernando pessoa

    August 31, 2013 at 2:50 am

    • Ah, Fernando – so many MCB papers and so little time :-(

      I hope the observations below have not been reported elsewhere. For sure, it is a little hard to keep track of all discussion concerning the prolific output of this scion of the house of Harvard. Therefore, my apologies if I am reporting what is already known.

      In that very same MCB 2000/20/7450-Fig.1A-p21 slice (so intimately connected to the once and future EMBO J paper as you have reminded us), lanes 6 and 7 are identical. Their band shapes and the shared dot lower right, plus the visible vertical splice lines, leave no room for doubt. Interestingly, if a tad less thrillingly, lane 1 is also spliced onto the gel, with a rather unusual zig-zag splice edge.

      To see these, enlarge figure 1 from this link

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC86298/figure/F1/

      Moving on to Fig. 2A, there is a horizontal edge under the bands in the p21 slice of MCF7, indicating that two bands were spliced into lanes 2 and 3.

      In Fig. 2B, lanes 1 and 3 of PC3 in the top BRCA1 slice are identical. Gel resets itself to zero at 24 hours? Groundhog day?

      To see these, enlarge figure 2 from this link

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC86298/figure/F2/

      There are plenty of sharp splices between lanes elsewhere in the figures of this article. However, it is so much more decisive if one can find lane duplications that I won’t list them now.

      Scrutineer

      September 2, 2013 at 4:51 pm

  12. In reply to Cardinal August 26, 2013 at 8:17

    On the topic of duplications.

    Also by T Ouchi the senior author of J. Biol. Chem. 2004.

    Mol Cancer Ther. 2008 Aug;7(8):2509-16.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18723495

    Figure 1.
    http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/7/8/2509/F1.large.jpg

    Figure 1C. PTEN panel. Please compare the bands in lanes 2 and 5.

    Figure 2.
    http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/7/8/2509/F2.large.jpg

    Figure 2B. Actin panel. Please compare the bands in lanes 5 and 8.

    Figure 3.
    http://mct.aacrjournals.org/content/7/8/2509/F3.large.jpg

    Figure 3B. CK-II alpha panel. Please compare bands lanes 5 and 6.

    david hardman

    September 20, 2013 at 3:27 pm

    • In reply to david hardman September 20, 2013:
      In Mol Cancer Ther. 2008 Aug;7(8):2509-16. Fig. 1C PTEN panel bands in lanes 1 and 4 are very similar, as are bands in Chk1 panel lanes 1,2 and 4,5, and 11,12 and 14,15.

      michaelhbriggs

      September 20, 2013 at 11:44 pm

    • Erratum appears.

      Shionome Y, Lin WH, Shiao HY, Hsieh HP, Hsu JTA, Ouchi T. A Novel Aurora-A Inhibitor, BPR1K0609S1, Sensitizes Colorectal Tumor cells to 5-Fluorofracil (5-FU) Treatment. Int J Biol Sci 2013; 9(9):947. doi:10.7150/ijbs.9.947.

      Available from http://www.ijbs.com/v09p0947.htm

      “In our above article of Int J Biol Sci 2013; 9(4): 403-411, we would like to clarify that control data using HCT116 and its derivative cells are shared with our PloS ONE paper [1]. Both papers are about the chemosensitivity of cells to several different Aurora-A inhibitors. We are sorry for the confusion.”

      david hardman

      November 7, 2013 at 1:49 pm

  13. J Biol Chem. 2003 Jan 17;278(3):2015-20. Epub 2002 Nov 8.
    Cell cycle differences in DNA damage-induced BRCA1 phosphorylation affect its subcellular localization.
    Okada S, Ouchi T.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/12427729

    Figure 2.
    http://www.jbc.org/content/278/3/2015/F2.large.jpg

    Figure 2B. S1524 panel. Band lane 17 (rightmost lane) is on own rectangle of grainy background, whereas the general background is monotonous.

    Figure 3.
    http://www.jbc.org/content/278/3/2015/F3.large.jpg

    Figure 3B. S988 panel. Please compare bands lanes 9 and 10.
    Band lane 17 (rightmost) lane is on its own rectangle of lighter than general background.

    david hardman

    September 21, 2013 at 4:11 pm

  14. Cancer Res. 2005 Dec 1;65(23):10657-62. BRCA1 phosphorylation regulates caspase-3 activation in UV-induced apoptosis. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16322207
    Martin SA, Ouchi T.

    Figure 1.
    http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/23/10657/F1.large.jpg

    Figure 1A. Procaspase-3 panel. Vertical, straight change in background between lanes 4 and 5.
    No vertical changes in background in the cleaved caspase-3, BRCA1 C20, or tubulin panels.

    Figure 2.
    http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/23/10657/F2.large.jpg

    Figure 2A. Procaspase-9 panel. Please compare lanes 2 and 4.

    Figure 4.
    http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/23/10657/F4.large.jpg

    Figure 4. Propaspase-3 panel. Please compare lanes 1 and 2 procaspase-3 panel figure 4
    with lanes 1 and 2 procaspase-3 panel figure 1B.
    The bands in the accompanying procaspase-3 and tubulin panels are different.
    Note: in lane 3 procaspase-3 panel figure 1B band lane 3 has truncated left end.

    david hardman

    September 22, 2013 at 7:08 am

    • From webpage: http://www.bci.qmul.ac.uk/index.php/staff/item/sarah-martin.html

      “postdoctoral position in the Mount Sinai School of Medicine in New York to join Dr. Toru Ouchi’s group, where I investigated the role of BRCA1 and its functional binding partners, specifically investigating the regulation of caspase-3 activation by BRCA1 phosphorylation.”

      “n 2006, I joined Prof. Alan Ashworth’s group in the Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre in the Institute of Cancer Research, London. Here, I carried out high-throughput RNAi and compound screens to indentify synthetic lethal interactions with deficiency in the DNA mismatch repair pathway.”

      I believe that it the same person.

      Cancer Res. 2011 Mar 1;71(5):1836-48. doi: 10.1158/0008-5472.CAN-10-2836. Epub 2011 Jan 17.
      Parallel high-throughput RNA interference screens identify PINK1 as a potential therapeutic target for the treatment of DNA mismatch repair-deficient cancers.
      Martin SA, Hewish M, Sims D, Lord CJ, Ashworth A.
      Source

      Cancer Research UK Gene Function and Regulation Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/21242281

      Figure 4. Cancer Res. 2011 Mar 1;71(5):1836-48. http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/71/5/1836/F4.large.jpg

      Please compare bands 1 to 6 beta-tubulin panel figure 4E Cancer Res. 2011 Mar 1;71(5):1836-48

      with beta tubulin panel figure figure 1A EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22.

      I believe the recorded genotypes of the cells are different and the recorded treatments are different.

      Figure 1. EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3378149/figure/fig01/

      Please compare bands lanes 2,3 and 4 beta-tubulin panel figure 4D Cancer Res. 2011 Mar 1;71(5):1836-48
      with horizontal mirror image bands HEC59 (MSH2-ve) beta-tubulin panel figure 1E Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48.
      I believe that the recorded treatments are different.

      Figure 1. Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2845806/figure/fig1/

      Please compare bands lanes 1 and 2 beta-tubulin panel figure 4D Cancer Res. 2011 Mar 1;71(5):1836-48

      with horizontal mirror image of bands lanes 1 and 2 PTEN panel figure 1A EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22.

      Figure 1. EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3378149/figure/fig01/

      For reference.
      EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22. doi: 10.1002/emmm.200900041.
      Synthetic lethal targeting of PTEN mutant cells with PARP inhibitors.
      Mendes-Pereira AM, Martin SA, Brough R, McCarthy A, Taylor JR, Kim JS, Waldman T, Lord CJ, Ashworth A.
      Source

      The Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20049735
      Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.12.046.
      DNA polymerases as potential therapeutic targets for cancers deficient in the DNA mismatch repair proteins MSH2 or MLH1.
      Martin SA, McCabe N, Mullarkey M, Cummins R, Burgess DJ, Nakabeppu Y, Oka S, Kay E, Lord CJ, Ashworth A.
      Source

      Cancer Research UK Gene Function and Regulation Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, UK.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20227038

      david hardman

      September 25, 2013 at 4:41 am

      • Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.12.046. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20227038
        DNA polymerases as potential therapeutic targets for cancers deficient in the DNA mismatch repair proteins MSH2 or MLH1.
        Martin SA, McCabe N, Mullarkey M, Cummins R, Burgess DJ, Nakabeppu Y, Oka S, Kay E, Lord CJ, Ashworth A.
        Source

        Cancer Research UK Gene Function and Regulation Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, UK.

        Figure 1. Please compare the HEC59 beta-tubulin panel figure 1E with a vertically stretched version of the HCT116 beta-tubulin panel figure 1F.

        Please pay attention to the grey plumes below the right ends of the bands in lanes 2 and the grey plumnes above the right (head end) of the bands in lanes 3.

        Figure 1F. HCT116 + Chr 3 panels. Please compare band lane 1 POLG panel with band lane 2 beta-tubulin panel, and with horizontal mirror image band lane 3 HCT116 tubulin panel (also figure 1F).

        Figure 3 (page 240). The way it is laid out is confusing. Figure legends on different pages from figures. Time honoured tradition.

        Figure 3G. HCT116 (MLH1) non-specific control panel

        Please compare bands lanes 1,2 and 3 (nuclear) HCT116 (MLH1) non-specific control panel figure 3G

        with bands beta-tublin HCT116 panel figure 1F.

        Figure 1F legend.” (F) HCT116 cells were transfected with siRNA, and cell lysates were analyzed by western blotting 72 hr later. POLG and b-tubulin antibodies were used as shown.”

        Please compare bands lanes 4, 5 and 6 HCT116 (MLH1) non-specific control panel figure 3G

        with bands HCT116 + Chr3 beta-tubulin panel figure 1F.

        Please compare bands lanes 3 and 4 HCT116 +Chr3 non-specific control panel figure 3G with

        bands beta-tubulin panel figure 2D (page 238).

        Figure 6.

        Figure 6D. Please compare bands lanes 2 and 3 (HeLa cells according to figure 6D legend) beta-tubulin panel figure 6D

        with bands bands beta-tubulin panel figure 2D (page 238) (HCT116 and HCT116 +Chr3 cells according to what in written under the lanes in figure 2D and in the figure legend 2D).

        Figure 6D. Please compare bands lanes 2 and 3 (HeLa cells according to figure 6D legend) beta-tubulin panel figure 6D

        with bands lanes 2,3,4 and 5 HCT116 +Chr3 nonspecific panel figure 3G.

        http://download.cell.com/cancer-cell/mmcs/journals/1535-6108/PIIS1535610810000371.mmc1.pdf
        Figure S4. Please compare: HEC59 +Chr2 panel figure S4A with lanes 3,4 and 5 HCT116 +Chr3 (MLH1+ve) panel figure 3G.

        david hardman

        September 25, 2013 at 7:48 am

        • Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48. doi: 10.1016/j.ccr.2009.12.046.
          DNA polymerases as potential therapeutic targets for cancers deficient in the DNA mismatch repair proteins MSH2 or MLH1.
          Martin SA, McCabe N, Mullarkey M, Cummins R, Burgess DJ, Nakabeppu Y, Oka S, Kay E, Lord CJ, Ashworth A.
          Source
          Cancer Research UK Gene Function and Regulation Group, The Institute of Cancer Research, London SW3 6JB, UK.

          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/20227038

          Figure 1. Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48 http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2845806/figure/fig1/

          Please compare: POLB panel figure 1E Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48
          with lanes 4,5 and 6 RAD51 panel figure 1A EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22.
          Figure 1 EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3378149/figure/fig01/

          Please compare: HEC59+Chr2 (MSH2+ve) beta-tubulin panel figure 1E Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48
          with lanes 1,2 and 3 beta-tubulin panel figure 1 EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22, where the HCT116 cells have various genotypes.

          Please compare bands HCT11+Chr3 (MLH1+ve) beta-tubulin panel figure 1F Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48
          with bands lanes 2,3 and 4 PTEN panel figure 1A EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22.

          Please compare band lane 3 HEC59(MSH2-ve) beta-tubulin panel figure 1E Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48
          and band lane 3 HCT116 (MLH1-ve) beta-tubulin panel figure 1F Cancer Cell. 2010 Mar 16;17(3):235-48
          with band lane 2 PTEN panel figure 1A EMBO Mol Med. 2009 Sep;1(6-7):315-22

          david hardman

          September 25, 2013 at 10:02 am

          • PLoS One. 2009;4(4):e5120. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0005120. Epub 2009 Apr 9.
            Integrated functional, gene expression and genomic analysis for the identification of cancer targets.
            Iorns E, Lord CJ, Grigoriadis A, McDonald S, Fenwick K, Mackay A, Mein CA, Natrajan R, Savage K, Tamber N, Reis-Filho JS, Turner NC, Ashworth A.
            Source

            The Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, United Kingdom.

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19357772

            Figure 4.
            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2663812/figure/pone-0005120-g004/

            Please compare the beta-tubulin panel figure 4B with the first 2 lanes of the beta-Tubulin panel figure 4A.

            Please compare the beta-tubulin panel figure 4E with the beta-tubulin panel figure 4A.

            david hardman

            September 25, 2013 at 2:20 pm

          • how did i miss this yesterday! too much to digest David.

            Ressci Integrity

            September 26, 2013 at 9:41 am

  15. Oncogene. 2013 Jan 21. doi: 10.1038/onc.2012.625. [Epub ahead of print]
    Integrative molecular and functional profiling of ERBB2-amplified breast cancers identifies new genetic dependencies.
    Shiu KK, Wetterskog D, Mackay A, Natrajan R, Lambros M, Sims D, Bajrami I, Brough R, Frankum J, Sharpe R, Marchio C, Horlings H, Reyal F, van der Vijver M, Turner N, Reis-Filho JS, Lord CJ, Ashworth A.

    Source
    The Breakthrough Breast Cancer Research Centre, The Institute of Cancer Research, London, UK.

    http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/vaop/ncurrent/pdf/onc2012625a.pdf

    Pubpeer comment.

    http://pubpeer.com/publications/23334330

    david hardman

    September 25, 2013 at 4:05 pm

  16. oh no! another high profile group!

    Ressci Integrity

    September 26, 2013 at 9:37 am

    • In reply to Ressci Integrity September 26, 2013 at 9:37 am

      On the tpoic of high profile groups here is one from another high profile British group.

      J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6. Epub 2002 Jan 28.
      Fibroblast growth factor-2 induces translational regulation of Bcl-XL and Bcl-2 via a MEK-dependent pathway: correlation with resistance to etoposide-induced apoptosis.
      Pardo OE, Arcaro A, Salerno G, Raguz S, Downward J, Seckl MJ.
      Source

      Cancer Research United Kingdom Lung Cancer Biology Group and the Medical Research Council Clinical Sciences Centre, Hammersmith Campus of Imperial College, Ducane Road, London W12 0NN, United Kingdom.

      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11815602

      Figure 2. J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6.

      Please compare figure 2B J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6 with figure 6A Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67.

      For reference: Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67 http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v20/n52/pdf/1204994a.pdf

      Please compare figure 2C J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6 with figure 6B Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67.

      Please compare Lamin B panel figure 3A J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6 with

      Lamin B panel figure 3B Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67.

      Please note the shapes of the bands and the grey dot over the right end of the bands in lanes 7.

      The treatments are different.

      Please compare upper Lamin B panel figure 4A J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6

      with H69 Lamin B panel figure 3A Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67.

      Please compare upper P-Erk1/P-Erk2 panel figure 4A J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6

      with H69 P-ERK1/P-ERK2 panel figure 3A Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67.

      Please compare lower Lamin B panel figure 4A J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6

      with H69 lower Lamin B panel figure 3A Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67.

      Please note: the lower P-Erk1/P-Erk2 panel figure 4A J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6

      and lower P-ERK1/P-ERK2 panel figure 3A Oncogene. 2001 Nov 15;20(52):7658-67

      are different.

      david hardman

      September 28, 2013 at 7:52 am

      • Continuation from david hardman September 28, 2013 at 7:52 am

        J Biol Chem. 2002 Apr 5;277(14):12040-6 has found a home on Pubpeer.

        http://pubpeer.com/publications/11815602

        david hardman

        September 29, 2013 at 2:16 am

      • Ouch! (Pun intended.)

        A transatlantic network is revealed, centred on New York with threads reaching out to Boston and London. Gives a whole new meaning to Scott’s

        Oh, what a tangled web we weave
        When first we practise to deceive!

        And now it has got to Shakespeare’s London

        This sceptred isle,
        This other Eden, demi-paradise,
        This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

        Surely it can’t be true? We should have heeded Robert Browning’s warning that Western’s would cause us trouble

        BLOT out his name, then, record one lost soul more,
        One task more declined, one more footpath untrod,
        
One more devils’ triumph and sorrow for angels,

        One wrong more to man, one more insult to God!
        
Life’s night begins: let him never come back to us!
        
There would be doubt, hesitation, and pain,
        
Forced praise on our part—the glimmer of twilight,
        Never glad confident morning again!

        Scrutineer

        September 29, 2013 at 12:14 pm

        • In reply to Scrutineer September 29, 2013 at 12:14 pm

          This sceptred isle,
          This other Eden, demi-paradise,
          This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

          An Oxford blooper. Image quality is quite good.

          Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Sep;19(9):6427-40.
          Functional analysis of H-Ryk, an atypical member of the receptor tyrosine kinase family.
          Katso RM, Russell RB, Ganesan TS.
          Source

          Molecular Oncology Laboratories, Imperial Cancer Research Fund, Institute of Molecular Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford OX3 9DS, United Kingdom.
          PMID: 10454588

          Figure 2B.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F2/graphic-3.large.jpg

          Please compare bands lanes 5 and 8.

          Figure 3A.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F3/graphic-4.large.jpg

          Horizontal, straight change in background above top band in lane 2 and
          vertical changes in background on either side of the bands in lane 2.

          Figure 3B.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F3/graphic-4.large.jpg

          Horizontal straight changes in background above and below bands.

          Figure 4A.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F4/graphic-6.large.jpg

          Suspect a composite. The bands zero and 5 minute lanes lighter than band in later lanes. The change is abrupt. It is supposed to be a time series.

          Figure 4C.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F4/graphic-7.large.jpg

          Figure 4C. Top panel.
          Bands in lanes 6,7, and 8 have flat straight tops. The right 2/3rds top band lane 5 is flat and straight.
          Please compare band lane 5 and band lane 8. Band lane 8 is right up against the right edge of the panel.

          The left edge of band lane 8 is vertical, and straight. The little plume above the left top edge of band lane 5 has likely been cut off in band lane 8.

          Figure 6A.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F6/graphic-13.large.jpg

          Figure 6A. Top panel.
          Please compare TrkA:Ryk bands 15 and 25 minute lanes.
          Please compare TrkA:Ryk bands 20 and 30 minute lanes.
          Please compare pp75 bands zero and 60 minute lanes.
          Please compare pp75 bands 5 and 15 minute lanes.

          Figure 6C. Top panel.
          Please compare pp75 bands zero and 10 minute lanes.

          Figure 7.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F7/graphic-16.large.jpg

          Figure 7B. Please compare 30 minute pp75 band with horizontal mirror image 15 munite pp75 band.
          Please compare 60 minute pp75 band with horizontal mirror image 10 munite pp75 band.

          Figure 8.
          http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F8/graphic-19.large.jpg

          Figure 8A. Top panel. Please compare the zero, 10 and 15 minute pp75 bands.
          Please compare the 25 and 60 minute pp75 bands.

          david hardman

          September 29, 2013 at 2:07 pm

          • Dear David

            Yes, lanes 5 and 8 are identical

            http://mcb.asm.org/content/19/9/6427/F2/graphic-3.large.jpg

            Stewart

            September 29, 2013 at 3:51 pm

          • Additional information: david hardman September 29, 2013 at 2:07 pm

            Re: Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Sep;19(9):6427-40.

            http://www.aimshospital.org/research/institute_of_molecular_medicine/inst_mole/cancerbiology/cancerbiology_trividi.html

            “He then went on to become a faculty at the Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine and Churchill Hospital (1990-2005) at Oxford until his return to India to take up the current position of Chairman of the Institute of Molecular Medicine and the Cancer institute at AIMS.”

            Under publications:

            “Madhusudan, S., Tamir, A., Bates, N., Flanagan, E., Gore, M. E., Barton, D. P., Harper, P., Seckl, M., Thomas, H., Lemoine, N. R., Charnock, M., Habib, N. A., Lechler, R., Nicholls, J., Pignatelli, M., and Ganesan, T. S. A multicenter Phase I gene therapy clinical trial involving intraperitoneal administration of E1A-lipid complex in patients with recurrent epithelial ovarian cancer overexpressing HER-2/neu oncogene. Clin Cancer Res, 10: 2986-2996, 2004.”

            http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15131034

            Figure 4.
            http://clincancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/10/9/2986/F1.large.jpg

            Figure 4A. RT-PCR for beta-actin panel.
            Day 8 Course 1 lane. Left edge of signal is vertical and straight.
            There is a vertical, dark streak between the Day 8 Course 1 lane (lane 3) and the Day 1 Course 2 lane (lane 4).

            For discussion:
            The resolution is low, but how different are the bands in lanes 2 and 4, and in lanes 3 and 5?

            david hardman

            September 30, 2013 at 4:56 am

          • Oh no! Not the dreaming spires of Oxford too :-(

            The lies, and truths, and pain?… oh! yet
            Stands the Church clock at ten to three?
            And is there honey still for tea?

            Oh wait, that might be the other place? Then how about

            Stop all the clocks, cut off the telephone,
            Prevent the dog from barking with a juicy bone,
            Silence the pianos and with muffled drum
            Bring out the coffin, let the mourners come.

            From your newly discovered outfit, you might like to take a gander at:

            L’hôte CG, Thomas PH, Ganesan TS.
            FASEB J. 2002 Feb;16(2):234-6. Epub 2001 Dec 28.
            PMID: 11772944

            Fig. 6. Of the 6 gel panels, 5 have had some repair work with squares taken from elsewhere pasted over offending entities, always toward the left side. To see this best, do some levels work on the image in photoshop. The upper central gel is tantamount to a patchwork quilt. Strangely the improved lanes are not labelled, so might have had tell tale markers. But why not just cut them off if they interfered with the story being told?

            Fig. 9A exhibits more repair work on unwanted gelly blemishes. One square carelessly overruns the left hand frame. Between 360 and 0 it is raining squares. Best viewed in Photoshop with a spot of darkening applied.

            Fig. 11. A swirling phantasia in halftone, placed upon a whiter shade of pale.

            Scrutineer

            September 30, 2013 at 6:08 pm

          • Another dreamy paper on RYK from the dreaming spires.

            Same senior author, trademark whiter than white canvas for blot creation. That’s handy if you need to splice in lanes that are a bit short, or later on want to use white rectangles to cover up any unwanted bits.

            RYK, a catalytically inactive receptor tyrosine kinase, associates with EphB2 and EphB3 but does not interact with AF-6.
            Trivier E, Ganesan TS.
            J Biol Chem. 2002 Jun 21;277(25):23037-43.
            PMID: 11956217

            Nice big open access images available from JBC for your enjoyment:

            http://www.jbc.org/content/277/25/23037/F5.large.jpg

            Fig. 5. Upper panel. There appear to be two white rectangles making an L-shape to lower left. See the lower left edges of lanes 2, 3 and 4. Either due to short lanes being spliced in, or rectangles added afterwards. Lane 6 also has a straight lower edge. The left edge of lane 6 also has some straight parts, hinting that it is spliced on.

            http://www.jbc.org/content/277/25/23037/F6.large.jpg

            Fig. 6. 3rd panel down. Lower right band has several straight edges toward lower left corner indicating little white rectangles were overlaid to hide something nasty.

            http://www.jbc.org/content/277/25/23037/F8.large.jpg

            Fig. 8. Wouldn’t mind some second opinions on this. Stare long and hard at lanes 2 and 3 of panel B. It looks as though the matter in lane 2 has been added to other matter in lane 3. See the vertical “pod with 3 peas” shape to the left of each lane. See the two curved bands in lane 2 and the two curved bands in lane 3 at the same level. Observe the pale curve in lane 3 that traces out the same edge shape as the lower right edge in lane 2.

            http://www.jbc.org/content/277/25/23037/F10.large.jpg

            Fig. 10. Panel A. Lanes 4 and 5 look like they share common ancestry disguised with differential use of a healing brush or spray paint effect to whiten out bits above and below the the two main bands. Would need to see the “original” exposure to be sure.

            Scrutineer

            October 6, 2013 at 6:43 am

          • Home found for Mol Cell Biol. 1999 Sep;19(9):6427-40 at Pubpeer.

            https://pubpeer.com/publications/10454588

            david hardman

            December 8, 2013 at 7:15 pm

        • Reply Scrutineer September 29, 2013 at 12:14 pm

          “With inky blots and rotten parchment bonds”.

          david hardman

          September 30, 2013 at 1:59 pm

          • ..is now bound in with shame..

            Scrutineer

            September 30, 2013 at 4:54 pm

          • Reply to Scrutineer October 6, 2013 at 6:43 am
            Re: J Biol Chem. 2002 Jun 21;277(25):23037-43.

            I agree, the majority of panels have white backgrounds and that this comes in handy as a canvas.
            A problem is that most journals will say something like “the use of monochrome panels is below best practice” and may even go as far as saying that they would not encourge such behaviour, but will ignore the physics of the blank canvas.

            david hardman

            October 6, 2013 at 8:08 am

    • Hi Ressci,

      I want to send you some details about this group. How can I contact you?

      cookpiggy

      October 1, 2013 at 9:31 pm

  17. In reply to Scrutineer September 29, 2013 at 12:14 pm

    The heart of England.

    Epigenetics. 2009 May 16;4(4):265-9. Epub 2009 May 1.
    Frequent epigenetic inactivation of the SLIT2 gene in chronic and acute lymphocytic leukemia.
    Dunwell TL, Dickinson RE, Stankovic T, Dallol A, Weston V, Austen B, Catchpoole D, Maher ER, Latif F.
    Source

    Section of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Institute of Biomedical Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.

    https://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/epigenetics/DunwellEPI4-4.pdf

    Figure 1C. GAPDH panel. Please compare band lane 1 with band lane 6.

    Please compare band lane 2 with band lane 7.

    Please compare GAPDH panel figure 1C Epigenetics. 2009 May 16;4(4):265-9

    with GAPDH panel figure 1C Oncogene. 2008 Mar 13;27(12):1805-11.

    The recorded cells in the figures are different.
    For reference Oncogene. 2008 Mar 13;27(12):1805-11. http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v27/n12/pdf/1210805a.pdf

    david hardman

    September 29, 2013 at 6:03 pm

    • These cannot have been accidental duplications. Because there are multiple authors, an investigation must be carried out by the University of Birmingham, in which they secure the primary data, and independently interview all the authors. An independent authority should also provide oversight to make sure the university does a thorough job.

      michaelhbriggs

      September 29, 2013 at 9:59 pm

      • It must be said the University of Birmingham has an excellent reputation. It would be unfortunate if this was handled inappropriately.

        I am sure it won’t be, and we all know accidents can happen and we must be patient.

        Stewart

        September 30, 2013 at 4:02 pm

    • In continuation: david hardman September 29, 2013 at 6:03 pm

      Another one from the heart of England.

      Br J Cancer. 2004 Dec 13;91(12):2071-8.
      Epigenetic inactivation of SLIT3 and SLIT1 genes in human cancers.
      Dickinson RE, Dallol A, Bieche I, Krex D, Morton D, Maher ER, Latif F.
      Source

      Section of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Division of Reproductive and Child Health, Institute of Biomedical Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.
      http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15534609

      http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v91/n12/pdf/6602222a.pdf

      Figue 5B. GAPDH control panel.
      Please compare bands lanes 4 and 9.
      Please compare bands lanes 5, 7 and 10.
      Please compare bands lanes 6 and 8.

      david hardman

      September 30, 2013 at 6:56 am

      • Also in Br J Cancer. 2004 Dec 13;91(12):2071-8.:
        The first lane of Fig 3B SLIT3 appears to be pasted on.

        michaelhbriggs

        September 30, 2013 at 8:01 am

        • Cancer Res. 2005 Apr 1;65(7):2690-7.
          Transcriptional regulation of cyclin A2 by RASSF1A through the enhanced binding of p120E4F to the cyclin A2 promoter.
          Ahmed-Choudhury J, Agathanggelou A, Fenton SL, Ricketts C, Clark GJ, Maher ER, Latif F.
          Source

          Section of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Division of Reproductive and Child Health, Institute of Biomedical Research, University of Birmingham, Birmingham, United Kingdom.
          http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/15805267

          Figure 1.
          http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/7/2690/F1.large.jpg

          Figure 1D. GAPDH panel.
          Please compare bands lanes 3 and 5.
          Please compare bands lanes 4 and 6.

          Figure 5.
          http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/7/2690/F5.large.jpg

          Figure 5B. Vertical, straight chnage in signal between lanes 2 and 3.
          Background looks tessellated.

          david hardman

          September 30, 2013 at 8:20 am

          • And yet already you have moved on to the (semi-mythical and very much post-)industrial heartland of England, with its dark satanic mills so painstakingly restored by English Heritage. It’s not easy to keep up.

            At this rate of northwards progress, you will soon be reporting to us on the many fishy blots emanating from North Rona University. But before you move on to pastures anew, do take one further look at that Brummie image, concentrating this time on the part 5A.

            http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/7/2690/F5.large.jpg

            Observe the following:

            Lanes 1-7 are assigned to cell line HB2.

            Lanes 8-9 are assigned to the most famous cell line in the whole wide world, the immortal HeLa.

            Lanes 1-7 are lower resolution that lanes 8-11.

            There is a splice between lanes 7 and 8.

            All of which points to two gels being spliced together. That’s naughty.

            However, perhaps in a spirit of economy appropriate for these straightened times, it turns out only one gel was spliced together. For lanes 8-11 are also lanes 2-5. Higher resolution to be sure, vertically stretched too, but still the same lanes. Look at the specks shared by lanes 4 and 10 and all doubt will be lost.

            HB2 != HeLa

            Scrutineer

            October 1, 2013 at 5:32 pm

        • agreed.

          Also see lanes 5, 7 and 10. Are they identical? When they are enlarged they look identical.

          Is this a first ‘triple hit’ in a single gel?
          Fig 5C
          http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v91/n12/pdf/6602222a.pdf

          Stewart

          September 30, 2013 at 4:07 pm

          • In reply to Stewart September 30, 2013 at 4:07 pm

            At least it is only in a gel.

            It could be worse.

            http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-23518587

            david hardman

            September 30, 2013 at 5:28 pm

          • Reply to Scrutineer October 1, 2013 at 5:32 pm

            Cancer Res. 2005 Apr 1;65(7):2690-7. part 5A.

            http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/7/2690/F5.large.jpg

            “For lanes 8-11 are also lanes 2-5. Higher resolution to be sure, vertically stretched too, but still the same lanes. Look at the specks shared by lanes 4 and 10 and all doubt will be lost.

            HB2 != HeLa”

            How right you are! Well spotted! The spots in the upper parts of lanes 4 and 10.

            I left 5A alone as it was not so easy to what was going on. It did need the logical leap kindly provided.

            david hardman

            October 2, 2013 at 1:43 am

    • David

      Figure 1C: GAPDH lanes 1+ 2 are identical to lanes 6+7. You may also see the tell-tale sign of a sliced lane at the top of lane 2. The cut out lanes were not quite fitted closely together.
      https://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/epigenetics/DunwellEPI4-4.pdf

      To be fair, they did try very hard to fit them closely together so I give them credit. Perhaps the other gels need a closer look.

      May I ask our colleagues – where was the funding from which supported this work?

      Stewart

      September 30, 2013 at 4:00 pm

      • Endocr Relat Cancer. 2008 Sep;15(3):777-86. doi: 10.1677/ERC-08-0072. Epub 2008 May 22.
        Evaluation of a functional epigenetic approach to identify promoter region methylation in phaeochromocytoma and neuroblastoma.
        Margetts CD, Morris M, Astuti D, Gentle DC, Cascon A, McRonald FE, Catchpoole D, Robledo M, Neumann HP, Latif F, Maher ER.
        Source

        Department of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Institute of Biomedical Research Cancer Research, UK.
        http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18499731

        We thank the Cancer Research UK and the University of Birmingham for financial support.

        Figure 1.
        http://erc.endocrinology-journals.org/content/15/3/777/F1.large.jpg

        EMP3 panel.
        Please compare bands lanes 1,3 and 5.
        Please compare bands lanes 2,4 and 6.

        HSP47 (a) panel. Band lane 1 has vertical, straight right end. Band lane 3 has vertical, straight left end.

        david hardman

        September 30, 2013 at 5:10 pm

  18. Reply to Scrutineer September 30, 2013 at 6:08 pm

    L’hôte CG, Thomas PH, Ganesan TS.
    FASEB J. 2002 Feb;16(2):234-6. Epub 2001 Dec 28.
    PMID: 11772944

    http://www.fasebj.org/content/early/2002/02/02/fj.01-0414fje.long

    Figure 12B. Bottom panel. Vertical, grey streak/change in background between the 30 and 40 minute lanes.

    Figure 12D. Top panel. Vertical change in bacground between the lower halves of the NIH 3T3 and zero minute lanes.

    david hardman

    October 1, 2013 at 4:29 am

    • Oncogene. 2007 Feb 1;26(5):683-700. Epub 2006 Jul 31.RPS6KA2, a putative tumour suppressor gene at 6q27 in sporadic epithelial ovarian cancer.
      Bignone PA, Lee KY, Liu Y, Emilion G, Finch J, Soosay AE, Charnock FM, Beck S, Dunham I, Mungall AJ, Ganesan TS.
      Source
      Cancer Research UK, Molecular Oncology Laboratories, Ovarian Cancer Group, Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford, UK.
      PMID: 16878154
      http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v26/n5/pdf/1209827a.pdf

      Figure 3 page 688, the legend is on page 689.
      Figure 3c. There are steps in the levels of the bands between lanes 2 and 3, and between lanes 4 and 5.
      The right end of the band lane 4 is vertical and straight with a vertical, light streak right next to it.

      Figure 4 page 690, the legend is on page 691.
      Figure 4a panel. Vertical, straight edge to signal just to right of upper band in lane 1.

      Figure 5b. p21 panel. Step in level of bands between lanes 1 and 2. Vertical, grey streak at right end of band lane 1.

      Figure 6 page 694, legend is on page 695.
      Figure 6c. Rps6KA2c panel. Vertical, straight, dark strip between the leukocyte and -ve lanes.
      RPS6KA2a panel. Vertical, straight chnage in background between the leukocyte and -ve lanes.

      david hardman

      October 1, 2013 at 5:36 am

      • Mol Cell. 2005 Dec 9;20(5):673-85.
        Involvement of MINK, a Ste20 family kinase, in Ras oncogene-induced growth arrest in human ovarian surface epithelial cells.
        Nicke B, Bastien J, Khanna SJ, Warne PH, Cowling V, Cook SJ, Peters G, Delpuech O, Schulze A, Berns K, Mullenders J, Beijersbergen RL, Bernards R, Ganesan TS, Downward J, Hancock DC.
        Source

        Signal Transduction Laboratory, Cancer Research UK London Research Institute, 44 Lincoln’s Inn Fields, London WC2A 3PX, United Kingdom.

        PMID:16337592

        Figure 1D. Mock pan ras panel. White.
        V12 Ras P-Akt panel. The background around many parts of of the bands in the right 2 lanes looks white.

        Figure 5. Please compare the bands in the left 2 lanes of the loading panels in figures 5B and 5C.
        Please compare the bands in the left 2 lanes of the P-MKK3/6 panels in figure 5B and 5C.
        The bands in left 2 lanes of the respective P-p38 panels are different.

        Figure 5B. Vertical changes in background between lanes 2 and 3 of the P-p38, P-MKK3/6, Cylin A, and p21 panels. No vertical changes in background in the MINK, P-ERK, pan ras or loading panels.

        http://download.cell.com/molecular-cell/mmcs/journals/1097-2765/PIIS1097276505016886.mmc1.pdf

        Figure S2A. P-MKK3/6 panel. Vertical change in background between lanes 2 and 3.
        No vertical changes in background in the P-p38, cyclin A, p21 or loading panels.

        Figure S3A. Loading panel. Bands in lanes 2 and 3 are in a white lacuna, whereas the general background is grey.

        david hardman

        October 1, 2013 at 6:15 am

        • BMC Genet. 2002 Oct 15;3:20. Epub 2002 Oct 15.
          The human homologue of unc-93 maps to chromosome 6q27 – characterisation and analysis in sporadic epithelial ovarian cancer.
          Liu Y, Dodds P, Emilion G, Mungall AJ, Dunham I, Beck S, Wells RS, Charnock FM, Ganesan TS.
          Source

          Cancer Research UK Molecular Oncology Laboratories, Weatherall Institute of Molecular Medicine, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9DS, UK.

          PMID: 12381271

          Figure 4.
          http://www.biomedcentral.com/1471-2156/3/20/figure/F4?highres=y

          Figure 4A. UNC93A panel. Vertical, straight changes in signal between lanes 1,2 and 3.
          GAPDH panel. Band lane 3 has vertical, straight left edge.

          david hardman

          October 1, 2013 at 12:54 pm

          • Oncogene. 2002 Jan 17;21(3):387-99.
            Physical and transcript map of the region between D6S264 and D6S149 on chromosome 6q27, the minimal region of allele loss in sporadic epithelial ovarian cancer.
            Liu Y, Emilion G, Mungall AJ, Dunham I, Beck S, Le Meuth-Metzinger VG, Shelling AN, Charnock FM, Ganesan TS.
            Source

            ICRF Molecular Oncology Laboratories, John Radcliffe Hospital, Headington, Oxford, OX3 9DS, UK.

            PMID: 11821951

            http://www.nature.com/onc/journal/v21/n3/pdf/1205067a.pdf

            Figure 3d. GAPDH panel. Vertical, straight changes in background between lanes 1,2 and 3.
            Please compare lane 3 with right vertical third lane 1 and lane 2.

            Please compare the GPADH panel figure 3d with the GAPDH panel figure 4c.

            david hardman

            October 1, 2013 at 1:19 pm

  19. 1. J Immunol. 2007 Feb 15;178(4):2491-8. PMID: 17277157
    2. PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076. PMID: 19436703

    J Immunol. 2007 Feb 15;178(4):2491-8.

    Regulation of Th2 cytokine genes by p38 MAPK-mediated phosphorylation of GATA-3.
    Maneechotesuwan K, Xin Y, Ito K, Jazrawi E, Lee KY, Usmani OS, Barnes PJ, Adcock IM.
    Source

    Section of Airway Disease, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom.

    Figure 1.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F1.large.jpg

    Figure 4A. IL-4 INPUT panel. Suspect that the bands in the 1st two lanes are images of the same thing.

    Figure 4B. IL-4 panel. Suspect that the bands in the 2nd and 4th lanes are different exposures of the same thing.

    Upper GAPDH panel. Suspect that all the bands are different exposure so the same thing.

    Upper GAPDH panel. Suspect that all the bands are different exposure so the same thing.
    The bands in lanes 1 and 4 are the same size, the bands in lanes 2 and 3 are the same size.
    There has been re-sizing.

    Figure 2.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F2.large.jpg

    Nucl set of panels, Histone 1zero panels.
    Left panel. The bands in the 3rd and 4th lanes look like repeats. The bands in the 1st and 2nd lanes look like re-sized versions of these.
    Right panel. The bands look like horizontally elongated mirror images of the bands in the left panel.

    Figure 4.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F4.large.jpg

    Figure 4A. Total p38 MAPK panels.
    Left panel. Bands in lanes in 1st, 2nd,3rd, 4th and 5th lanes likely reworked repeats.
    Right panel. Bands in right-most lanes repeats.

    Figure 4B. Suspect undisclosed splicing on of the last lane in the left panels.
    Right Total p38 MAPK panel. Suspect that bandsin lanes 1, 4 and 5 are repeats.
    Sspect tht bands in lanes 2 and 3 are repeats.

    Figure 4C. Suspect undisclosed splicing between lanes 2 and 3 in both panels.
    Suspect that the dark “flattened W ” bands in lanes 3, 4 and 5 of top panel are repeats.
    Suspect that the lanes in the 1st two lanes of the lower panel are repeats.

    Figure 6.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F6.large.jpg

    Figure 6B. suspect bands in the upper GATA-3panel are reworkings of the same thing.

    Figure 7.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F7.large.jpg

    Figure 1B. SUSPECTED IMAGE/DATA REUSED in PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076..

    Figure 7B. Top panel, cytoplasm band 30 mins becomes cytoplasm band time zero top “space” figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 7B. Middle panel, nuclear band time 30mins becomes nuclear band time 30mins middle “space” figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 7B. Lower panel, Histone H1zero first two bands become Histone 1 bands lower panel figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 1 PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=2674207_pmed.1000076.g001.jpg

    Regulation of Th2 cytokine genes by p38 MAPK-mediated phosphorylation of GATA-3.
    Maneechotesuwan K, Xin Y, Ito K, Jazrawi E, Lee KY, Usmani OS, Barnes PJ, Adcock IM.
    Source

    Section of Airway Disease, National Heart and Lung Institute, Imperial College, London, United Kingdom.

    Figure 1.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F1.large.jpg

    Figure 4A. IL-4 INPUT panel. Suspect that the bands in the 1st two lanes are images of the same thing.

    Figure 4B. IL-4 panel. Suspect that the bands in the 2nd and 4th lanes are different exposures of the same thing.

    Upper GAPDH panel. Suspect that all the bands are different exposure so the same thing.

    Upper GAPDH panel. Suspect that all the bands are different exposure so the same thing.
    The bands in lanes 1 and 4 are the same size, the bands in lanes 2 and 3 are the same size.
    There has been re-sizing.

    Figure 2.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F2.large.jpg

    Nucl set of panels, Histone 1zero panels.
    Left panel. The bands in the 3rd and 4th lanes look like repeats. The bands in the 1st and 2nd lanes look like re-sized versions of these.
    Right panel. The bands look like horizontally elongated mirror images of the bands in the left panel.

    Figure 4.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F4.large.jpg

    Figure 4A. Total p38 MAPK panels.
    Left panel. Bands in lanes in 1st, 2nd,3rd, 4th and 5th lanes likely reworked repeats.
    Right panel. Bands in right-most lanes repeats.

    Figure 4B. Suspect undisclosed splicing on of the last lane in the left panels.
    Right Total p38 MAPK panel. Suspect that bandsin lanes 1, 4 and 5 are repeats.
    Sspect tht bands in lanes 2 and 3 are repeats.

    Figure 4C. Suspect undisclosed splicing between lanes 2 and 3 in both panels.
    Suspect that the dark “flattened W ” bands in lanes 3, 4 and 5 of top panel are repeats.
    Suspect that the lanes in the 1st two lanes of the lower panel are repeats.

    Figure 6.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F6.large.jpg

    Figure 6B. suspect bands in the upper GATA-3panel are reworkings of the same thing.

    Figure 7.
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F7.large.jpg

    Figure 1B. SUSPECTED IMAGE/DATA REUSED in PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076..

    Figure 7B. Top panel, cytoplasm band 30 mins becomes cytoplasm band time zero top “space” figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 7B. Middle panel, nuclear band time 30mins becomes nuclear band time 30mins middle “space” figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 7B. Lower panel, Histone H1zero first two bands become Histone 1 bands lower panel figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 1 PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=2674207_pmed.1000076.g001.jpg

    david hardman

    October 2, 2013 at 4:58 am

  20. 1. J Immunol. 2007 Feb 15;178(4):2491-8. PMID: 17277157
    2. PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076. PMID: 19436703

    Figure 7. J Immunol. 2007 Feb 15;178(4):2491-8
    http://www.jimmunol.org/content/178/4/2491/F7.large.jpg

    J Immunol. 2007 Feb 15;178(4):2491-8 figure 7B. Please compare top panel, cytoplasm band 30 mins with

    cytoplasm band time zero top “space” figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 7B. Please compare middle panel, nuclear band time 30mins withnuclear band time 30mins middle “space” figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    Figure 7B. Please compare lower panel, Histone H1zero first two bands with Histone 1 bands lower panel figure 1A PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    For reference:

    Figure 1 PLoS Med. 2009 May; 6(5): e1000076.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=2674207_pmed.1000076.g001.jpg

    david hardman

    October 2, 2013 at 7:17 am

    • 1. Int J Cancer. 2001 Dec 1;94(5):652-61. PMID: 11745459
      2. Br J Cancer. 2001 Jun 15;84(12):1656-63. PMID: 11401320

      1. Int J Cancer. 2001 Dec 1;94(5):652-61.
      FGF-1 and FGF-2 regulate the expression of E-cadherin and catenins in pancreatic adenocarcinoma.
      El-Hariry I, Pignatelli M, Lemoine NR.
      Source

      Imperial Cancer Research Fund Molecular Oncology Unit, Imperial College School of Medicine, Hammersmith Campus, London, United Kingdom.

      Please compare the upper bands figure 4B Int J Cancer. 2001 Dec 1;94(5):652-61
      http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ijc.1515/pdf

      with bands T3M4 (middle) panel figure 4A Br J Cancer. 2001 Jun 15;84(12):1656-63.
      http://www.nature.com/bjc/journal/v84/n12/pdf/6691813a.pdf

      According to the legends the treatments are different.

      For reference:

      2. Br J Cancer. 2001 Jun 15;84(12):1656-63.
      FGF-1 and FGF-2 modulate the E-cadherin/catenin system in pancreatic adenocarcinoma cell lines.
      El-Hariry I, Pignatelli M, Lemoine NR.
      Source

      Imperial Cancer Research Fund Molecular Oncology Unit, Imperial College School of Medicine, London, UK.

      david hardman

      October 2, 2013 at 7:32 am

  21. Hum Mol Genet. 2001 May 1;10(10):1029-38. PMID: 11331613
    Contrasting effects on HIF-1alpha regulation by disease-causing pVHL mutations correlate with patterns of tumourigenesis in von Hippel-Lindau disease.
    Clifford SC, Cockman ME, Smallwood AC, Mole DR, Woodward ER, Maxwell PH, Ratcliffe PJ, Maher ER.
    Source

    Section of Medical and Molecular Genetics, Department of Paediatrics and Child Health, University of Birmingham, The Medical School, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.

    http://hmg.oxfordjournals.org/content/10/10/1029.full.pdf+html

    Medical Research Council, Cancer Research Campaign (CRC), Wellcome Trust and the VHL Family Alliance for financial support

    Figure 2B.
    Please compare the 7th (SER80GLN) and 9th (LEU188Val) panels.

    david hardman

    October 6, 2013 at 3:11 am

    • Remarkably similar! (I couldn’t see any difference at all).

      michaelhbriggs

      October 6, 2013 at 4:05 am

      • Agreed, they are identical. I note this was over 10 years ago too so a good find.

        Stewart

        October 6, 2013 at 5:10 am

        • In reply to Stewart October 6, 2013 at 5:10 am

          Image quality is quite good.

          david hardman

          October 6, 2013 at 7:58 am

  22. Br J Cancer. 2008 Jan 29;98(2):496-501. doi: 10.1038/sj.bjc.6604180. Epub 2008 Jan 15.
    Functional epigenomics approach to identify methylated candidate tumour suppressor genes in renal cell carcinoma.
    Morris MR, Gentle D, Abdulrahman M, Clarke N, Brown M, Kishida T, Yao M, Teh BT, Latif F, Maher ER.
    Source

    Cancer Research UK Renal Molecular Oncology Group, University of Birmingham, Birmingham B15 2TT, UK.

    PMID: 18195710

    Figure 1. Br J Cancer. 2008 Jan 29;98(2):496-501.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=2361461_6604180f1.jpg

    Please compare GAPDH panel figure 1 Br J Cancer. 2008 Jan 29;98(2):496-501,
    with GAPDH panel figure 1 Cancer Res. 2005 Jun 1;65(11):4598-606.
    http://cancerres.aacrjournals.org/content/65/11/4598/F1.large.jpg

    The recorded samples are in a different order.

    The image quality of the figure 1 GAPDH panel Br J Cancer. 2008 Jan 29;98(2):496-501
    is not as clear as that in the figure 1 GAPDH panel Cancer Res. 2005 Jun 1;65(11):4598-606, but the comparison is still possible.

    david hardman

    October 6, 2013 at 8:35 am

  23. Hum Mol Genet. 1996 Dec;5(12):2027-32.
    Imprinting mutation in the Beckwith-Wiedemann syndrome leads to biallelic IGF2 expression through an H19-independent pathway.
    Brown KW, Villar AJ, Bickmore W, Clayton-Smith J, Catchpoole D, Maher ER, Reik W.
    Source

    Department of Pathology and Microbiology, School of Medical Sciences, Bristol, UK.

    http://hmg.oxfordjournals.org/content/5/12/2027.full.pdf+html

    Figure 2A. As well as the thin, vertical, white lines between lanes 5,6 and 7, there are veritcal changes in background.

    Figure 2B. Vertical streak/change in background between lanes 2 and 3.

    Vertical streak between lanes 4 and 5.

    david hardman

    October 7, 2013 at 6:24 am

    • The panels are all cut up.

      david hardman

      October 7, 2013 at 7:19 am

      • Development. 1994 Oct;120(10):2933-43.
        Developmental control of allelic methylation in the imprinted mouse Igf2 and H19 genes.
        Feil R, Walter J, Allen ND, Reik W.
        Source

        Laboratory of Developmental Genetics and Imprinting, Babraham Institute, Cambridge, UK.
        http://dev.biologists.org/content/120/10/2933.long

        Figure 1B. Vertical change in background between tops of lanes 1 and 2 (includes h8 and h7).
        Horizontal change in background lanes 2 to 4 (just below level of h7).
        Vertical, grey line between lanes 4 and 5.

        david hardman

        October 7, 2013 at 7:38 am

        • Development. 2002 Apr;129(7):1657-68.
          Disruption of mesodermal enhancers for Igf2 in the minute mutant.
          Davies K, Bowden L, Smith P, Dean W, Hill D, Furuumi H, Sasaki H, Cattanach B, Reik W.
          Source

          Laboratory of Developmental Genetics and Imprinting, Developmental Genetics Programme, Babraham Institute, Cambridge CB2 4AT, UK.
          http://dev.biologists.org/content/129/7/1657.long

          Figure 3.
          http://dev.biologists.org/content/129/7/1657/F3.large.jpg

          Figure 3A. Paternal transmission. H19 and Gapdh panels. Vertical changes in background/vertical streaks between lanes 3,4,5, and between lanes 6 and 7.
          Igf2 panel. Vertical changes in background between lanes 3,4 and 5.

          Figure 4.
          http://dev.biologists.org/content/129/7/1657/F4.large.jpg

          Maternal transmission. Igf2 and Gapdh panels. Vertical changes in background/vertical streaks between lanes 3,4 and 5, and between lanes 6 and 7.
          H19 panel. Vertical changes in background between lanes 3,4 and 5.

          Differential splicing makes comparisons problematic.

          david hardman

          October 7, 2013 at 8:29 am

  24. Continuation of tour of England. An East Midlands gem.

    Blood. 2009 Jun 18;113(25):6498-9; author reply 6499-500. doi: 10.1182/blood-2009-02-203174.
    p73, miR106b, miR34a, and Itch in chronic lymphocytic leukemia.
    Rivetti di Val Cervo P, Tucci P, Majid A, Lena AM, Agostini M, Bernardini S, Candi E, Cohen G, Nicotera P, Dyer MJ, Melino G.

    Source:
    MRC-Toxicology Unit, Hodgkin Bldg, PO Box 138, University of Leicester, Lancaster Rd, Leicester, LE1 9HN United Kingdom.

    PMID: 19541840

    https://pubpeer.com/publications/19541840

    david hardman

    November 27, 2013 at 6:04 am

    • Another East Midlands gem.

      Nature. 2012 May 6;485(7399):507-11. doi: 10.1038/nature11058.
      Sustained translational repression by eIF2α-P mediates prion neurodegeneration.
      Moreno JA, Radford H, Peretti D, Steinert JR, Verity N, Martin MG, Halliday M, Morgan J, Dinsdale D, Ortori CA, Barrett DA, Tsaytler P, Bertolotti A, Willis AE, Bushell M, Mallucci GR.
      Source

      MRC Toxicology Unit, Hodgkin Building, University of Leicester, Lancaster Road, Leicester LE1 9HN, UK.

      PMID: 22622579

      https://pubpeer.com/publications/22622579

      david hardman

      November 27, 2013 at 8:02 am

  25. Yet another East Midlands gem.

    https://pubpeer.com/publications/19451221

    david hardman

    November 27, 2013 at 12:42 pm

  26. Continued progress through England.

    J Biol Chem. 2010 May 14;285(20):15286-95. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M109.071456. Epub 2010 Mar 12.
    A simple technique for the prediction of interacting proteins reveals a direct Brn-3a-androgen receptor interaction.
    Berwick DC, Diss JK, Budhram-Mahadeo VS, Latchman DS.

    Medical Molecular Biology Unit, University College London Institute of Child Health, London, UK.

    PMID: 20228055

    Figure 3.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=2865324_zbc0221016160003.jpg

    Figure 3C. GST-Brn-3bL section. Left edge signal left lane too straight and vertical.

    Vertical, light streaks either side band 2/3rds way up middle band.

    Figure 5.
    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/core/lw/2.0/html/tileshop_pmc/tileshop_pmc_inline.html?title=Click%20on%20image%20to%20zoom&p=PMC3&id=2865324_zbc0221016160005.jpg

    Figure 5B. alpha-pan Nav panel.
    Repeated background. Please compare as blocks [right half lane 1 and left half lane 2] with [right half lane 2 and left half lane 3].

    david hardman

    December 24, 2013 at 11:34 am

  27. J Biol Chem. 2004 May 14;279(20):21617-27. Epub 2004 Feb 16.
    The Brn-3b transcription factor regulates the growth, behavior, and invasiveness of human neuroblastoma cells in vitro and in vivo.
    Irshad S, Pedley RB, Anderson J, Latchman DS, Budhram-Mahadeo V.

    Medical Molecular Biology Unit, Institute of Child Health, 30 Guilford Street, London WC1N 12EH, UK.

    PMID: 14970234

    Figure 4.
    http://www.jbc.org/content/279/20/21617/F4.expansion.html

    Figure 4B. Please compare the left and right Brn-3b-2 panels.

    Please compare the right 3b-as-1 panel with the left LTR1 panel.

    david hardman

    December 24, 2013 at 11:36 am

  28. Cell Cycle. 2010 Dec 1;9(23):4638-49. Epub 2010 Dec 1.
    STAT1 interacts directly with cyclin D1/Cdk4 and mediates cell cycle arrest.
    Dimco G, Knight RA, Latchman DS, Stephanou A.

    Medical Molecular Biology Unit, Institute of Child Health, University College London, London, UK.

    PMID: 21084836

    https://www.landesbioscience.com/journals/cc/DimcoCC9-23.pdf

    Figure 3A. Please compare bands lanes 2 and 3 ST1-GST and Input pSTAT1Y701 panels,

    paying attention to dark spot above left end band in lanes 2.

    The accompanying cyclin D1 and CDK4 bands are different.

    Please compare 2fTGH GAPDH panel figure 5A with U3A-STAT1 – MG121 GAPDH panel figure 4.

    Please compare U3A GAPDH panel figure 5C with U3A-STAT1 + MG121 GAPDH panel figure 4.

    david hardman

    December 24, 2013 at 11:39 am

  29. JAKSTAT. 2013 Jul 1;2(3):e24812. doi: 10.4161/jkst.24812. Epub 2013 May 7.
    The cardioprotective effects of urocortin are mediated via activation of the Src tyrosine kinase-STAT3 pathway.
    Chen-Scarabelli C, Saravolatz Ii L, McCaukey R, Scarabelli G, Di Rezze J, Mohanty B, Barry S, Latchman D, Georgiadis V, McCormick J, Saravolatz L, Knight R, Faggian G, Narula J, Stephanou A, Scarabelli TM.

    Center for Heart and Vessel Preclinical Studies; St John Hospital and Medical Center; Wayne State University; Detroit, MI USA.

    PMID: 24069562

    Figure 1.

    http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3772114/figure/F1/

    Figure 1A. Please compare bands lanes 1,2 and 3 left ST1 panel with bands lanes 2,3 and 4 right pST3705 panel.
    Please compare bands lanes 1,2, and 3 lower ST3 panel figure 1B with bands lanes 2,3 and 4 right ST1 panel figure 1A.

    david hardman

    December 24, 2013 at 11:41 am

    • Observation#1: no doubt. Two images of 4-lane data from the same blot of 5 lanes. No need to cut and paste.

      Observation#2: tough call.

      First author: Chen-Scarabelli, second author: Scarabelli. Go figure. But this could have been a mistake during the preparation of the manuscript

      CrickDNA

      January 13, 2014 at 2:47 am

  30. Odd figure in paper by one of the authors of the retracted Mol Cell paper at the beginning of this post.

    Mol Cell. 2011 Nov 4;44(3):491-501. doi: 10.1016/j.molcel.2011.08.038.
    ROS-mediated p53 induction of Lpin1 regulates fatty acid oxidation in response to nutritional stress.
    Assaily W, Rubinger DA, Wheaton K, Lin Y, Ma W, Xuan W, Brown-Endres L, Tsuchihara K, Mak TW, Benchimol S.

    Department of Biology, York University, Toronto, ON M3J 1P3, Canada.

    Figure 1D. Please compare right Lpin1 panel with vertically stretched version upper half right p21 panel.

    david hardman

    January 12, 2014 at 4:10 am

    • Lpin1 is 22 kDa while p21 is well 21 kDa. The authors might have reprobed the same blot albeit unsuccessfully.

      CrickDNA

      January 13, 2014 at 3:00 am

      • Reply to CrickDNA January 13, 2014 at 3:00 am

        Except that reprobing does not cause stretching.

        david hardman

        January 28, 2014 at 11:18 pm


We welcome comments. Please read our comments policy at http://retractionwatch.wordpress.com/the-retraction-watch-faq/ and leave your comment below.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31,338 other followers

%d bloggers like this: