According to the notice, the editors of Cytologia found evidence of “apparent figure manipulation,” and decided to retract the paper.
This marks the 10th retraction for plant biologist Dibyendu Talukdar.
Talukdar, who is first and corresponding author on the 2007 paper and listed at the University of Calcutta in West Bengal, India, received his first retraction last July, which also cited suspected figure manipulation. Earlier this year, Talukdar received eight more retractions in seven different journals, all describing concerns over potential image duplication and manipulation.
Here’s the most recent retraction notice in Cytologia:
There is an injustice in this article by Talukdar, D. and Biswas, A. K. (2007). The editorial committee decided to retract it immediately. The injustice is apparent figure manipulation; Parts of Figs. 39 and 41 were inversed and imposed in Figs. 37 and 38, respectively.
“Seven Different Primary Trisomics in Grass Pea (Lathyrus sativus L.). I. Cytogenetic Characterisation” has not yet been indexed, according to Clarivate Analytics’ Web of Science, formerly part of Thomson Reuters. This article appears to have a second part, a 2008 paper— “Seven Different Primary Trisomics In Grass Pea (Lathyrus sativus L.). II. Pattern of Transmission“—which has been cited twice.
Talukdar also has a string of papers under discussion on PubPeer.
We reached out to Talukdar; an email to his co-author Amal K. Biswas bounced back. We also contacted the editor-in-chief and publisher of the journal, but have not heard back.
Hat tip: Rolf Degen
Like Retraction Watch? Consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support our growth. You can also follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, sign up on our homepage for an email every time there’s a new post, or subscribe to our new daily digest. Click here to review our Comments Policy. For a sneak peek at what we’re working on, click here.