Meet Bo Liu, international man or woman of scientific mystery

An Elsevier journal is wearing an omelet on its face after accepting a paper by a group of authors who have completely disavowed the work. 

Oh, and no one seems to know who one of the authors is, which makes the second time inside of a month that we’ve reported on a case like this.

The article’s title also misspelled “neuroprogenitor.” But we digress.

The article, “PP2ACα deficiency impairs early cortical development through inducing DNA damage in neuroprojenitor [sic] cells,” appeared last April in the International Journal of Chemistry & Cell Biology. The paper was purportedly written by a team of researchers from institutions in the United States and abroad, including both the Chinese Academy of Sciences and the U.S. National Institutes of Health. 

Leading that impressive pack as first and corresponding author was one Bo Liu, who’s listed as being affiliated with the Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery at the University of Maryland School of Medicine, in Baltimore, and the University of Macau. 

But as the retraction notice states, Liu wasn’t who he said he was — and that was just the beginning:  

This article has been retracted at the request [sic] the Editor in Chief due to objections raised by persons identified as co-authors of corresponding author Bo Liu. The University of Macau states that Bo Liu is not affiliated with the University of Macau. The purported co-authors who are only affiliated with University of Macau report their names have been misappropriated for use on this paper without notice or prior permission. These co-authors deny any involvement in the study, preparation or submission of the manuscript, or review of any supporting data. The purported co-authors who are affiliated with the University of Maryland, Baltimore report their names and credentials have been misappropriated for use on this paper without notice or permission. These co-authors deny any involvement in the study, preparation or submission of the manuscript, or review of any supporting data. The National Institute of Health also states that none of the co-authors are affiliated with the institution. The University of Maryland, Baltimore states that Bo Liu is not affiliated with the university. Bo Liu has been non-responsive to approaches from the Publisher. Rui Li and Ting-Ting Dong were not reachable by the Publisher. Lin Lin confirmed the affiliation with The University of California Riverside; Chu-Xia Deng confirmed the affiliation with the University of Macau; Wei-Min Tong confirmed the affiliation with the Chinese Academy of Medical Sciences.

According to the author information, Liu and the second author, Lin Lin, contributed equally to the article. We couldn’t find a Lin Lin at UC Riverside, however, and that school isn’t among the list of affiliations. Neither could we find a Lin Lin at the University of Macau. 

We emailed Liu (at least, the email the journal provided for a person of that name), but did not receive a reply. Same for Deng, a prominent scientist who is the dean of the Faculty of Health Sciences at the University of Macau.

We also emailed the editor in chief of the journal, Maddy Parsons, to find out how the bogus authors slipped through undetected. She referred us to Elsevier. Andrew Davis, a spokesman for the publisher, told us: 

We first became aware of an issue when several of the co-authors contacted the journal to  say they did not become aware of the paper until after publication.

What appeared to be valid institutional email addresses were provided for all co-authors. Confirmation of the submission was sent to all co-author email addresses, as per the journal’s usual procedures.

We asked if the journal requires individual author attestations? Davis said: 

The previous editorial system could inform co-authors and give them the chance to flag concerns but didn’t support active confirmation from co-authors. All Elsevier journals are now migrating to the Editorial Manager system, where co-author confirmation functionality is present.

Editorial Manager belongs to Aries, which Elsevier acquired in 2018.

Has Elsevier changed its policies to prevent such problems in the future? Per Davis: 

A policy change wasn’t considered necessary since co-author confirmations will soon be better supported in Editorial Manager.

Sounds like a proposition that will be easy to prove … or disprove. Meanwhile, Zubair Ahmed, the head of the Laboratory of Neurogenetics and Translational Research in the Department of Otorhinolaryngology Head & Neck Surgery at UMD-Baltimore — and whose name appears erroneously as “Ahmed Zubair” on the roster of authors — told us he first complained about the article in August 2019, nearly 10 months ago: 

I absolutely do not know Bo Liu and never worked [with] or collaborated with him. In fact, I never met him. I do not know any of the co-authors listed on it. Surprisingly, the journal never contacted us before publication. In fact, I contacted them several times after this publication and requested to delete this paper as none of the authors, except Bo Liu were aware of this work.

In fact, we’re aware of at least one other paper in which “Bo Liu” appears to have fabricated authorship. Last year, Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology, a Springer journal, issued an expression of concern about a 2019 article led by Liu whose other authors claimed to have no knowledge of the submission.

According to the notice: 

The Editor-in-Chief would like to alert readers that the authorship of the article “Mammalian Target of Rapamycin 2 (MTOR2) and C-MYC Modulate Glucosamine-6-Phosphate Synthesis in Glioblastoma (GBM) Cells Through Glutamine: Fructose-6-Phosphate Aminotransferase 1 (GFAT1)” (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10571-019-00659-7) published in the journal “Cellular and Molecular Neurobiology” on 15 February 2019 has been questioned.

The authors See, Chen X., Chen Z. and Huang state that they have not contributed to the study and were not aware of the publication. Authors Liu and Yao have not responded to correspondence from the editor/publisher about this expression of concern. The journal is currently conducting an investigation in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines, and editorial action will be taken at the conclusion of the investigation. Consequently, readers are advised to interpret the details of this article with caution and the erratum (https://doi.org/10.1007/s10571-019-00726-z) is published to correct the author list.

The EoC followed an earlier correction which stated: 

The original version of this article unfortunately contained an error in author group. The authors Yi-Xiang See, Xin Chen, Zi-Kai Chen and Ze-Bin Huang were inadvertently included in the article.

The correct author group is presented with this erratum.

If only.

Juan Saavadera, the editor of the journal, told us: 

The authors are banned from further contributions to CEMN.

Like Retraction Watch? You can make a tax-deductible contribution to support our work, follow us on Twitter, like us on Facebook, add us to your RSS reader, or subscribe to our daily digest. If you find a retraction that’s not in our database, you can let us know here. For comments or feedback, email us at [email protected].