About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘wrong reagents’ Category

Former Hopkins and Pitt cancer researcher notches sixth retraction

leave a comment »

GetzenbergRobert Getzenberg, a former researcher at Hopkins and Pitt, has retracted a sixth paper, this one in Cancer Research.

Here’s the notice for “Mechanistic Analysis of the Role of BLCA-4 in Bladder Cancer Pathobiology:” Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Written by ivanoransky

February 4, 2014 at 11:43 am

Rats! Neuroscientist notches third retraction, this one for using the wrong RNAs

with 15 comments

biol psychAmine Bahi, a neuroscience researcher in the United Arab Emirates, has had a third paper retracted.

Here’s the notice for “Blockade of Protein Phosphatase 2B Activity in the Amygdala Increases Anxiety- and Depression-Like Behaviors in Mice,” which was posted on November 19: Read the rest of this entry »

Pamela Ronald does the right thing again, retracting a Science paper

with 26 comments

Pamela Ronald, via UC Davis

Pamela Ronald, via UC Davis

About a month ago, we reported on a retraction by Pamela Ronald, of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues. We noted then that this was a case of scientists doing the right thing. Ronald contacted us after that post ran, and let us know that there would be another retraction shortly. That retraction notice has now appeared, in Science: Read the rest of this entry »

Cancer cell line mixup leads to retraction

with 2 comments

ccr 9-15At team of researchers at MD Anderson Cancer Center has retracted a paper after realizing that the cell lines they were using weren’t what they thought they were.

Here’s the detailed notice: Read the rest of this entry »

Doing the right thing: Researchers retract quorum sensing paper after public process

with 7 comments

Pamela Ronald, via UC Davis

Pamela Ronald, via UC Davis

We’ll say it again: We like being able to point out when researchers stand up and do the right thing, even at personal cost.

In December 2011, Pamela C. Ronald, of the University of California, Davis, and colleagues published a paper in PLOS ONE,”Small Protein-Mediated Quorum Sensing in a Gram-Negative Bacterium.” Such quorum sensing research is a “hot topic” right now, so not surprisingly the paper caught the attention of other scientists, and the media, including the Western Farm Press. The study has been cited eight times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

One of those scientists who took notice was Ronald’s UC Davis colleague Jonathan Eisen, who posted about the paper on his blog. That was on January 9, 2012. But if you go to that post today, you’ll see that Eisen struck through most of it, and added this comment: Read the rest of this entry »

Paper retracted because images “were, in fact, electron microscopy results of totally different catalysts”

leave a comment »

catcommA group of chemical engineers in China has retracted their article on photocatalysts after alerting the journal that images in the paper did not show what they’d reported.

The article, which appeared in Catalysis Communications earlier this year, was titled “Synthesis and characterization of novel Cu2O/PANI composite photocatalysts with enhanced photocatalytic activity and stability,” and was written by Xiufang Wang, Guangmei Chen and Jun Zhang of the School of Materials and Chemical Engineering at Anhui University of Architecture, in Hefei.

Here’s the retraction notice: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

August 16, 2013 at 11:00 am

Cell line mixup causes retraction of paper on blood vessel damage

with 2 comments

britjournnutWe’ve written before about retractions for cell lines that turn out not to be what researchers thought they were. In a few cases, that has involved contamination by HeLa cells, named for Henrietta Lacks. Today, we note the retraction of a paper whose authors, from Taiwan, thought they were using human muscle cells that line blood vessels when they were actually studying such cells from rat embryos.

Here’s the notice in the British Journal of Nutrition for “Molecular mechanism of green microalgae, Dunaliella salina, involved in attenuating balloon injury-induced neointimal formation”: Read the rest of this entry »

Quorum sensing paper retracted when new study suggests compounds weren’t what they seemed

with 2 comments

plos oneThe authors of a paper on quorum sensing — in simple terms, how bacteria “talk” to one another — have retracted it after another group’s findings led them to discover that the mixture they used weren’t what they thought.

The refreshingly detailed retraction notice in PLOS ONE explains: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by ivanoransky

May 28, 2013 at 11:00 am

Mislabeled sample leads to a chain reaction of physics retractions

leave a comment »

physrevbTwo different teams of physicists have retracted papers from Physical Review B after realizing that a sample used in the paper published first — and which formed the basis of the second paper — was mislabeled.

Here’s the notice for the first paper, “s-wave superconductivity in barium-doped phenanthrene as revealed by specific-heat measurements,” by Jianjun Ying of the University of Science and Technology of China, Hefei, and colleagues: Read the rest of this entry »

A model retraction in the Journal of Neurochemistry for “unexpected effect” of a filter

with 5 comments

jneurochemThey say that a poor workman blames his tools. If you’re a scientist and you discover your tools don’t do exactly what you thought they did, however, the right thing to do is let other scientists relying on your work know.

That’s what the University of Auckland’s Nigel Birch and colleagues did recently, after a 2012 study they published in the Journal of Neurochemistry didn’t hold up. Here’s the notice, which we’d consider a model for retractions everywhere: Read the rest of this entry »


Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 31,076 other followers