Archive for the ‘india retractions’ Category
Cell update: Co-corresponding author let go from Belgian university; retraction notice language changed
We’ve learned more about the circumstances behind a Cell retraction that we covered last week.
First, one of the two corresponding authors left the institution where he most recently worked. Belgium’s VIB Ghent told us that Pankaj Dhonukshe was no longer employed there and said: Read the rest of this entry »
A group of scientists from Uttar Pradesh, India, who study forensic bioinformatics have had a paper retracted for something that can generally be detected with a specialized form of forensic software: Plagiarism.
Here’s the notice for Kumar Ajay, Singh Neetu, Gaurav S.S. “Forensic Bioinformatics: An innovative technological advancement in the field of Forensic Medicine and Diagnosis,” signed by O.A. Sofola, editor-in-chief: Read the rest of this entry »
One article, “Agrobacterium tumefaciens-mediated transformation and efficient regeneration of a timber yielding plant Dalbergia sissoo Roxb,” appeared online last June in the journal. The authors were from institutions in Orissa.
According to the retraction notice, the paper was a case of “thanks, but no thanks.” What’s worse, the researchers seem to be under the impression that they’ve done nothing wrong. Because they said so. Read the rest of this entry »
Contemporary Clinical Dentistry has yanked a 2012 article on “full-mouth rehabilitation” after learning that the article had already appeared in two other publications — making the journal, in effect, Contemporaneous Clinical Dentistry.
The article, “Full-mouth rehabilitation of a patient with severe attrition using the Hobo Twin-Stage Procedure,” came from a group at the Dr. R. Ahmed Dental College, in Kolkata, India. It described the following case: Read the rest of this entry »
Holy Chutzpah, Batman! A team of researchers in India has retracted their 2012 paper in PLoS One on botulinum toxin for plagiarism — while blaming the journal for failing to use its “soft wares” to catch the plagiarism.
The article, “Small-Molecule Quinolinol Inhibitor Identified Provides Protection against BoNT/A in Mice,” was written by a group from the Defence Research and Development Establishment, in Madhya Pradesh.
Last December, we brought you the story of a math paper that was retracted because it made “no sense mathematically.” Today, we have that retraction’s cousin: A physics paper retracted because some of the data are “unphysical.”
Here’s the notice for “Room temperature ferromagnetism in pure and Co- and Fe-doped CeO2 dilute magnetic oxide: effect of oxygen vacancies and cation valence,” which was published in April 2011 in the Journal of Physics D: Applied Physics: Read the rest of this entry »
A pair of researchers in India has lost a paper in Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries for lifting chunks of text from other sources.
The article, “Advancements in morphometric differentiation: a review on stock identification among fish populations,” appeared in last March from scientists at the National Bureau of Fish Genetic Resources in Lucknow.