About these ads

Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘cell biology’ Category

Second Nature paper by researcher found to have violated academic integrity retracted

with 11 comments

dhonukshe

Pankaj Dhonukshe

A second Nature paper co-authored by Pankaj Dhonukshe, formerly of Utrecht University and VIB Ghent, has been retracted.

Here’s the notice for “Generation of cell polarity in plants links endocytosis, auxin distribution and cell fate decisions:” Read the rest of this entry »

About these ads

Written by Ivan Oransky

July 16, 2014 at 5:50 pm

PLoS ONE issues expression of concern when company won’t share bacterial strain

with 9 comments

plosoneThe editors of PLoS ONE have issued an expression of concern for a 2014 article on a form of nitrogen-fixing bacteria called Bacillus pumilus.

The reason: The company that provided the strain of microbe used in the research won’t let other researchers look at the organism.

The article is titled “Bacillus pumilus Reveals a Remarkably High Resistance to Hydrogen Peroxide Provoked Oxidative Stress,” and it came from a group led by Stefan Handtke, of the University of Greifswald, in Germany.

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

Written by amarcus41

July 16, 2014 at 9:30 am

Three PLOS ONE papers retracted for totally made-up data

with 13 comments

This one comes to us from Twitter, where Willem van Schaik went to express his frustration that a PLOS ONE paper he’d edited had been retracted for fake data.

Two other papers from the same group at the Institute of Microbial Technology, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Chandigarh, India, were retracted simultaneously.

We sent van Schaik an email to get a clearer picture of the situation. He responded: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

July 11, 2014 at 10:00 am

Author steps in to clarify vague tuberculosis retraction

with 2 comments

You’ve got to love when an author is willing to detail the specifics of an unhelpful retraction notice.

This May, a paper came out in Journal of Thoracic Diseases about drug-resistant tuberculosis. It was retracted in June, for “some misconduct in the manuscript.”

Here’s the notice:

The article “Application status of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry in the identification and drug resistance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis” (doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2014.02.19) that appeared on page 512-516 of the May 2014 issue of the Journal of Thoracic Disease needs to be withdrawn due to some misconduct in the manuscript. We are sorry for the inconvenience caused.

Since that’s pretty vague and unhelpful, we reached out to corresponding author Jiayun Liu, who gave us a thorough rundown:

Read the rest of this entry »

If only more retractions could be like this: Authors of cardiac stem cell paper show the way

with 5 comments

Researchers at Qingdao University have fully retracted a paper originally published in Molecular Medicine Reports with a clear, detailed outline of what went wrong and how they discovered the error.

Here’s the notice for “Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells using skin fibroblasts from patients with myocardial infarction under feeder-free conditions:”

Read the rest of this entry »

Geneticist retracting four papers for “significant problems”

with 18 comments

jbc 620Benjamin Barré, a genetics researcher who recently set up his own group at the University of Angers, is retracting four papers he worked on as a graduate student and postdoc.

Neil Perkins, in whose lab Barré was a postdoc, and Olivier Coqueret, in whose lab he did his PhD, tell Retraction Watch: Read the rest of this entry »

Research technician faked NIH-funded research: ORI

leave a comment »

pallansch-cokonis

Melanie Pallansch-Cokonis (via LinkedIn)

Melanie Pallansch-Cokonis, a former research technician at Southern Research Institute, faked data in work funded by NIH contracts and grants, according to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).

According to the ORI’s case summary, available today in the Federal Register: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

June 21, 2014 at 8:00 am

Journal retracts stem cell study despite objections of most authors

with one comment

Gerold Feuer in 2008, via Upstate

Gerold Feuer in 2008, via Upstate

The journal Blood has retracted a 2010 paper over the objections of most of its authors, two of whom were found by their university to have used “fraudulent methods” to obtain the data.

We first reported on the case of Gerold Feuer last fall. The State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse fired Feuer in 2010 after determining that he had misused state funds to enrich a company he had founded, HuMurine. A court agreed with many of the university’s claims, but ordered his reinstatement in 2012.

Meanwhile, as we noted last fall: Read the rest of this entry »

Authors retract Current Biology study following criticism on PubPeer and university investigation

with 12 comments

current biologyThe authors of a Current Biology paper published online in February of this year have retracted it after voluminous criticism on post-publication review site PubPeer and a university committee found evidence of figure manipulation.

The paper, “Agonist-Induced GPCR Shedding from the Ciliary Surface Is Dependent on ESCRT-III and VPS4,” was co-authored by Hua Jin and Livana Soetedjo, a graduate student in Jin’s lab. Soetedjo was first author, and Jin was corresponding author.

The comments at PubPeer began on March 24: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

June 12, 2014 at 9:30 am

“Apparently, the bureaucracy at Elsevier is the most cumbersome thing in the world:” Journal editor

with one comment

bbrcWe recently came across a paper in Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications, an Elsevier title, that had been temporarily removed without explanation. While we see a fair number of such opaque notices from Elsevier — and have written about why we think they’re a bad idea — we took interest in this one because the last author, Toren Finkel of the NIH, was the corresponding author of a Nature paper retracted earlier this year. (He also had two corrections on one Science paper, both of which are paywalled.)

What we learned suggests the withdrawal was completely unrelated to the Nature retraction, but also reveals a journal editor’s exasperation.

Read the rest of this entry »

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 33,699 other followers