Archive for the ‘image manipulation’ Category
A researcher at Tufts University has retracted a paper in Cell, a year after retracting a study on a similar subject from the Journal of Biological Chemistry.
Here’s the notice for “SIRT1 Suppresses β-Amyloid Production by Activating the α-Secretase Gene ADAM10,” a 2010 paper by Tufts’ Gizem Donmez, MIT’s Leonard Guarante — of longevity research fame — and colleagues: Read the rest of this entry »
Another retraction has appeared up for frequent fliers Jun Li, Kailun Zhang and Jiahong Xia at Huazhong Science and Technology University in Wuhan, China.
We’ve covered them twice before, for a variety of retractions, corrections, and expressions of concern.
The retraction, in Clinical and Experimental Immunology, upgrades an expression of concern published earlier this year, and is the team’s fourth.
A 2011 paper in PLOS ONE has been retracted due to “inappropriately assembled” images. The issues, which were highlighted in a correction in TK, are attributed to the corresponding author, Paola Palozza, who has since passed away.
Here’s the notice for “Lycopene Inhibits NF-kB-Mediated IL-8 Expression and Changes Redox and PPARγ Signalling in Cigarette Smoke–Stimulated Macrophages,” which has been cited 33 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge: Read the rest of this entry »
A University of Calgary diabetes researcher, Cory Toth, who told us earlier this year that he would cease publishing in the scientific literature, has two more retractions, making seven.
Biochemical Journal has pulled a 2006 paper for an undisclosed “background subtraction box” in an image - which, if you take a not-particularly-close look at the figure to the right, means somebody added a black rectangle over the control lane.
The South African Journal of Botany has retracted a 2012 paper that claimed a variety of herbal extracts have antioxidant and anti-fungal properties, due to errors in “at least” one figure.
Here’s the notice for “Contribution of herbal principles towards cytoprotective, antioxidant and anti-Rhizopus activities:”
STAP stem cell papers officially retracted as Nature argues peer review couldn’t have detected fatal problems
A significant chapter of the nearly six-month saga of the STAP stem cell controversy has come to an end, with Nature running retraction notices for the two papers involved. The journal has also published an editorial about the case that’s worth a read.
The retractions for “Bidirectional developmental potential in reprogrammed cells with acquired pluripotency” and “Stimulus-triggered fate conversion of somatic cells into pluripotency” both read: Read the rest of this entry »
In September, we wrote about the retraction of a physics paper for “a pattern that was unphysical.”
The team, whose first author, R.K. Singhal refused to sign the notice, has had another paper retracted, this one in the Journal of Applied Physics. Here’s the notice for “Study of electronic structure and magnetization correlations in hydrogenated and vacuum annealed Ni doped ZnO:” Read the rest of this entry »