Retraction Watch

Tracking retractions as a window into the scientific process

Archive for the ‘corrections’ Category

PubPeer Selections: correction for Cell paper on stem cells; why omit controls; peer review report surfaces

with 3 comments

pubpeerHere’s another installment of PubPeer Selections: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Ivan Oransky

June 26th, 2015 at 9:30 am

Undisclosed industry funding prompts correction of fracking paper

with one comment

152 page minimum spine. Editor: Matt Hotze, JEM: Esther RTP:  Diane Murphy

Environmental Science & Technology has issued a correction for a March 2015 paper on methane contamination from gas wells after learning that the authors failed to disclose funding from Chesapeake Energy Corp., a major U.S. energy producer.

The paper, “Methane Concentrations in Water Wells Unrelated to Proximity to Existing Oil and Gas Wells in Northeastern Pennsylvania,” came from a group led by Donald Siegel, of Syracuse University. In the correction, Siegel acknowledges having received “funding privately” from Chesapeake for the study, which found: Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

May 8th, 2015 at 2:34 pm

Biology team with two retractions now correcting references to nixed papers

without comments

Screen Shot 2015-04-14 at 5.59.20 PMA team of biologists that retracted two papers after being “unable to replicate some of the results obtained by the first author of the paper” has now issued a correction to fix references to the two sunk publications.

The corrected paper is a review in the Journal of Virology — known there as a Gem — which discusses how viruses use the membranes of endoplasmic reticulum (ER) to replicate.

The two retractions were not signed by their first author, Riccardo Bernasconi, who won the STSBC-Roche Diagnostics award for one of the papers in 2012. The correction carries all three authors’ names, including Bernasconi’s (as second author).

Here’s more from the correction for “How Viruses Hijack the ERAD Tuning Machinery”: Read the rest of this entry »

PLoS ONE mega-correction, but no retraction, for researcher who sued diabetes journal

with 19 comments

Mario Saad, via unicamp.br

Mario Saad, via unicamp.br

PLoS ONE has just issued a 12-figure correction on a paper by Mario A. Saad, who sued the American Diabetes Association unsuccessfully in an attempt to prevent it from retracting four papers in its flagship journal Diabetes.

The corrections include taking out Western blots copied from another Saad paper, as well as several figures where the bands were “misplaced.”

PubPeer commenters suggest this may not be enough, calling seven additional figures into question. Read the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

March 4th, 2015 at 9:30 am

Several chem journals neutralize papers from Brazil group over figure fraud

with 2 comments

quimica novaSeveral journals have retracted or corrected papers from a group at State University of Maringá in Brazil over what one chemistry journal calls “fraudulent use” of figures previously published by the authors.

Química Nova, which is retracting a 2013 paper, issued a notice that taps an additional eight articles with Angelica Lazarin as the corresponding author that reused figures. Specifically, the papers included images “where same trace on the figure was assigned to different conditions and/or compounds.”

A number of the papers mentioned in the Química Nova notice were co-authored by Claudio Airoldi, whose group retracted 11 papers in 2011 following concerns over fraudulent nuclear magnetic resonance images.

Read the rest of this entry »

Bad image prompts correction of Harvard-Brigham stem cell paper by Anversa

with 11 comments

circresA group of Harvard stem cell researchers who already have one retraction and an expression of concern now have a correction. This one’s in Circulation Research, and it involves an image that previously had been flagged as suspicious in our comments.

The group is led by Piero Anversa, who as we reported last year is one of two researchers suing Harvard because the institution’s investigation into their work

has cost them millions in a forfeited sale of their company, and job offers.

Read the rest of this entry »

New favorite plagiarism euphemism: “Inadvertently copied text”

with 18 comments

biodata miningPlagiarism earned genomics researchers an erratum, not a retraction, in BioMed Central journal BioData Mining.

We keep a list of best euphemisms for plagiarism, and this one is right up there.

Here’s the notice for “An iteration normalization and test method for differential expression analysis of RNA-seq data”: Read the rest of this entry »

Authors get away with throwing quotation marks around plagiarized passages. Again.

with 26 comments

PNAS jan15Back in November 2013, we wrote about a correction in PNAS about a May 2012 paper by a group from Toronto and Mount Sinai in New York who, as we said at the time

had been rather too liberal in their use of text from a previously published paper by another researcher — what we might call plagiarism, in a less charitable mood.

Read the rest of this entry »

Written by amarcus41

January 21st, 2015 at 11:30 am

Stem cell researcher Jacob Hanna responds to criticism

with 25 comments

Jacob Hanna

Jacob Hanna

Over the past few months, there has been a great deal of criticism of the work of stem cell researcher Jacob Hanna, especially on PubPeer.

Now, Hanna has responded in the comments of the PubPeer entries for a number of papers. He has also posted a number of PDFs, including his PhD thesis, and correspondence with scientists who have been critical of his work.

He also wrote a response to a criticism published on bioRxIV, a non-peer reviewed repository of biology pre-prints.

One of Hanna’s comments on PubPeer is a summary of the issues with his Blood paper on PubPeer, blaming the figure errors on “medical trainees” who did the word while he was away at Mount Sinai. Here’s his explanationRead the rest of this entry »

Written by Cat Ferguson

January 21st, 2015 at 9:30 am

Prominent geneticist nets retraction, two corrections, and a lot of questions

with 16 comments

David Latchman, Birkbeck

David Latchman

A team led by David Latchman, a geneticist and administrator at University College London, has notched a mysterious retraction in the Journal of Biological Chemistry, and has had 25 more papers questioned on PubPeer.

The JBC notice for “Antiapoptotic activity of the free caspase recruitment domain of procaspase-9: A novel endogenous rescue pathway in cell death” is as useless as they come, a regular occurrence for the journal: Read the rest of this entry »