Duplication in physics journal questions key tenet of quantum mechanics

cmpHere’s a physics question: How is it possible to be in two places at the same time?

Answer: Submit the same manuscript twice and hope the editors forget to feed Schrödinger’s cat.

The journal Condensed Matter Physics is retracting a 2013 paper by a Ukrainian scientist who’d published essentially the same paper seven years earlier.The article was titled “On the origin of power-law distributions in systems with constrained phase space,” and was written by an E.V. Vakarin, of the Institute for Condensed Matter Physics, in Lviv UMR 7575 LECA ENSCP-UPMC-CNRS.

According to the abstract: Continue reading Duplication in physics journal questions key tenet of quantum mechanics

Regenerative medicine, regenerative publishing

devbioDevelopmental Biology has retracted a 2009 paper by an group of regenerative medicine specialists who, it seems, were regenerating more than just cells.

The article, titled “The human placenta is a hematopoietic organ during the embryonic and fetal periods of development,” was led by Susan Fisher, of the Institute for Regenerative Medicine at the University of California, San Francisco. It has been cited 32 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

According to the abstract: Continue reading Regenerative medicine, regenerative publishing

Bogus Western blots lead to retraction of cancer paper

ejpharmA group of Italian researchers has retracted their 2013 paper on colorectal cancer because one of the authors, they, say, was tinkering with the data.

The article, “PBOX-15 induces apoptosis and improves the efficacy of oxaliplatin in human colorectal cancer cell lines,” appeared in the European Journal of Pharmacology in August. The first author was Giuseppina Gangemi, of the University of Salerno.

The paper purported to find that:

Continue reading Bogus Western blots lead to retraction of cancer paper

Neurosurgery journal retracts spine paper for lack of attribution

bjneurosurgA neurosurgeon in the UK has lost his 2013 paper on spinal surgery in the British Journal of Neurosurgery for doing what appears to have been an end-run around the folks that did the work.

The article, “The management of spinal dural fistulas: a 13-year retrospective analysis,” was written by Denosshan Sri, of Addenbrooke’s Hospital, in Cambridge.

Here’s the abstract:

Continue reading Neurosurgery journal retracts spine paper for lack of attribution

“Unable to dispel the doubts,” authors lose protein structure paper

ebjA suggestion: If you’re going to use the words “overestimated accuracy” in the title of your paper, you’d better make sure you aren’t guilty of the same yourself.

A group of authors in China has lost their June 2013 paper in the European Biophysics Journal because they appear to have misinterpreted their data.  The paper, “Overestimated accuracy of circular dichroism in determining protein secondary structure,” came from chemists at Fudan University in Shanghai, and purported to find that:

Continue reading “Unable to dispel the doubts,” authors lose protein structure paper

Scholar in Sweden appears to face inquiry for plagiarism retraction

njmrThe Nordic Journal of Migration Research has retracted a 2012 paper by a Swedish researcher who lifted text from another author.

The article, “Swedish Employers and Trade Unions, Varieties of Capitalism and Labour Migration Policies,” was written by Jesper Johansson, of Linnaeus University in Växjö. It’s available as a PDF here, but not on the website of the publisher, De Gruyter — nor is it listed on Johnansson’s own site.

We chose a sentence a random from the abstract:

Continue reading Scholar in Sweden appears to face inquiry for plagiarism retraction

A matter of degree: M. Theol loses a paper

jreghealthEvidently the editors of the Journal of Religion and Health were a tad distracted when they published a paper earlier this year by Australian theologian Joseph Lee and his “colleague,” M. Theol.

M. Theol, of course, is a degree, not a person — as a correction notice explains:

Continue reading A matter of degree: M. Theol loses a paper

Pro tip: Don’t use “facts and fiction” in your title if you plan to plagiarize

ijpedsHere’s a suggestion: If you’re going to plagiarize someone else’s work, don’t draw attention to it by including “fiction” in your title.

That lesson was brought home to us by a recent retraction in the Italian Journal of Pediatrics for “Infantile colic, facts and fiction:”

Continue reading Pro tip: Don’t use “facts and fiction” in your title if you plan to plagiarize

Oh, the irony: Paper on “Ethics and Integrity of the Publishing Process” retracted for duplication

manage org reviewIn a case whose irony is not lost on those involved, an article about publishing ethics has been retracted because one of the authors re-used material he’d written for an earlier piece. But the authors and the journal’s editors have turned the episode into a learning opportunity.

Here’s the notice for “Ethics and Integrity of the Publishing Process: Myths, Facts, and a Roadmap,” published in 2011 by Marshall Schminke and Maureen L. Ambrose: Continue reading Oh, the irony: Paper on “Ethics and Integrity of the Publishing Process” retracted for duplication

Sexism charge hits proteomics journal — and you’ll see why

j proteomicsWe guess that if you are the fox in charge of the chicken coop, you might be tempted to try to get away with the kind of thing we describe in this post. But here’s an example of why such a  cozy relationship can lead to, well, nutty developments.

Coconuts, that is.

The Journal of Proteomics will be taking down two blatantly sexist images illustrating papers by Italian researcher, Pier Giorgio Righetti – who also happens to be the one of several executive editors of the journal in question. Lab and Field and Tree of Life have the story, which, for obvious reasons, has the Twittersphere twitillated.

Righetti’s article, “Harry Belafonte and the secret proteome of coconut milk,” used the following picture as a “graphical abstract:” Continue reading Sexism charge hits proteomics journal — and you’ll see why