A 2014 paper in Science by a lab in Toronto has been retracted after a December expression of concern raised “potential data integrity issues.”
The paper, “Mitosis Inhibits DNA Double-Strand Break Repair to Guard Against Telomere Fusions,” is from the lab of Daniel Durocher, a professor of molecular genetics at the University of Toronto.
The retraction notice, published today and signed by all of the original authors, reads, in part:
We have since become aware of anomalies in Fig. 1 in the main paper and in figs. S3, S7, S9, and S11 in the supplementary materials. As a result of these issues, Science posted an Editorial Expression of Concern about the Report on 5 December 2024 (2). We are working with our institution to determine the basis of the problems. However, because of the scope and seriousness of the data and image irregularities, we have decided to retract the paper.
The article has been cited 258 times, according to Clarivate’s Web of Science. As we previously reported, the two papers are among several from Durocher’s lab that have been flagged for potentially duplicated images.
Meagan Phelan, a communications director for Science, said in an email Durocher and his colleagues are still evaluating the paper in cooperation with the Sinai Health Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute. “However, because of the scope and seriousness of the data and image irregularities as they’ve already uncovered them, the authors have decided to retract the paper now, which we commend them for and agree with,” she told us.
Sholto David, who uses the name “Mycosphaerella arachidis” on PubPeer, flagged the potential image duplication in a November 2024 comment. He called the bands in the images “surprisingly similar.”
As we reported in early December, the 2014 paper was one of two in Science that received an expression of concern. A 2007 article, “Orchestration of the DNA-Damage Response by the RNF8 Ubiquitin Ligase,” had a “duplicate image in Fig. 3D,” according to the notice. That paper has been cited over 700 times, according to Web of Science.
Phelan told us the journal was “working with the authors to get the experiment reproduced” before considering retraction.
Durocher did not respond directly to our request for comment. After we reached out to him, Jovana Drinjakovic, a scientific communications officer for the Sinai Health Lunenfeld-Tanenbaum Research Institute, sent us the same email we received in December after the two papers received expressions of concern:
While the 2007 paper has a figure error that the authors are working to correct, the 2014 paper was noted to contain data irregularities. As soon as the senior author was made aware of the irregularities pertaining to the 2014 study, he promptly notified Sinai Health. This triggered an internal inquiry, in accordance with its policy on addressing research misconduct allegations.
Durocher replied on PubPeer threads for both the 2007 paper and the 2014 paper that his lab would look into the irregularities.
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].