Emory University is looking into why the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) has retracted three papers published by Emory faculty from 2005 to 2007, Retraction Watch has learned. The papers were: Continue reading Emory looking into circumstances of three new retractions in the JBC
Category: cell biology
Authors retract Nature Medicine cystic fibrosis paper after some results don’t hold up
The authors of a Nature Medicine study published online in September about the behavior of white blood cells in cystic fibrosis have retracted the paper, saying that further experiments suggested the original results were unreliable. According to the notice: Continue reading Authors retract Nature Medicine cystic fibrosis paper after some results don’t hold up
“Representative” image in liver paper leads to retraction
The journal International Immunology has retracted a 2007 article, “Amelioration of hepatic fibrosis via beta-glucosylceramide-mediated immune modulation is associated with altered CD8 and NKT lymphocyte distribution,” by a group of Israeli liver researchers whose manuscript included a composite image that didn’t quite call itself such.
The study, by scientists at Hadassah Medical Center in Jerusalem, purported to show that a soy-derived compound could reduce liver disease in mice. It has been cited 17 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. The journal is published by Oxford and the Japanese Society for Immunology.
From the notice: Continue reading “Representative” image in liver paper leads to retraction
Second retraction by Harvard group studying cannabinoids, this one in JBC
Last week, we reported that a group of Harvard researchers had retracted a paper in Blood for “multiple instances of duplicate (redundant) publication of data, text, and images that are nonessential to the paper.” The retraction notice referred to a paper in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC):
The redundancies are between the above-cited Blood article and the following 12 November 2010 article, published in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC): Jiang S, Zagozdzon R, Jorda MA, et al. Endocannabinoids are expressed in bone marrow stromal niches and play a role in interactions of hematopoietic stem and progenitor cells with the bone marrow microenvironment. J Biol Chem. 2010;285(46):35471-35478.
Today, we learned that the JBC paper has also been retracted. The notice, as we’ve come to expect from the JBC, is unhelpful: Continue reading Second retraction by Harvard group studying cannabinoids, this one in JBC
“Nonessential” duplication leads to retraction of Blood cannabinoid paper
The journal Blood has retracted a paper from a group of prestigious Harvard researchers after the article, which appeared in January 2011, was found to have multiple instances of material — text, data and other elements — that had appeared in a previous publication from several of the authors.
The article was titled “Cannabinoid receptor 2 and its agonists mediate hematopoiesis and hematopoietic stem and progenitor cell mobilization.” Its authors included Hava Avraham, a noted cancer researcher, and Jerome Groopman, known for his New Yorker articles about medicine and, scientifically, for his work on cannabinoids and cancer, among other areas.
According to the retraction notice: Continue reading “Nonessential” duplication leads to retraction of Blood cannabinoid paper
Penkowa Journal of Physiology Expression of Concern turns into a retraction
We’ve been trying to follow the complicated case of Milena Penkowa, who resigned her post at the University of Copenhagen in December amidst allegations that she had committed scientific misconduct and misused grant money. Today, we learned that one of the three papers that Penkowa had coauthored and were subject to Expressions of Concern has been retracted. Here’s the notice: Continue reading Penkowa Journal of Physiology Expression of Concern turns into a retraction
The way science should work: A swift, clearly worded retraction in G&D, after legitimate questions by another group
A retraction appeared online last week in Genes & Development (G&D) that neatly brings together a few recent Retraction Watch threads: Whether retraction is appropriate for a failure to replicate, and whether retraction notices should give enough detail for readers to know what actually happened.
The retraction notice, for “Alternative splicing produces high levels of noncoding isoforms of bHLH transcription factors during development,” by Rahul N. Kanadia and Constance L. Cepko, reads: Continue reading The way science should work: A swift, clearly worded retraction in G&D, after legitimate questions by another group
The new math: How to up your citations (hint: duplication). Plus a correction for Naoki Mori
Here’s a good way to increase the number of times your work is cited: Publish studies three times.
On second (or third) thought, maybe not: The Journal of Steroid Biochemistry & Molecular Biology has retracted a pair of articles by three Japanese researchers who apparently liked their own work so much they decided to submit it, and submit it—and submit it again.
Here’s the notice for the first paper, a 2004 publication titled “Vitamin D receptor (VDR) promoter targeting through a novel chromatin remodeling complex,” by Shigeaki Kato, Ryoji Fujiki and Hirochika Kitagawa, fairly well-known molecular endocrinologists at the University of Tokyo: Continue reading The new math: How to up your citations (hint: duplication). Plus a correction for Naoki Mori
On second thought: PNAS retracts two papers after results fail replication
The Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) ran two retractions this week.
One of those papers was “Properdin homeostasis requires turnover of the alternative complement pathway,” which first appeared online in October of last year. The researchers were looking at the interaction between complement — a sort of primitive immune system — and a protein called properdin.
From the notice: Continue reading On second thought: PNAS retracts two papers after results fail replication
No confidence vote on sepsis paper data leads to Blood retraction
The journal Blood has retracted an article after the authors determined that they could not longer trust in the validity of the data.
The paper has been cited 22 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. From the retraction notice:
Niessen F, Furlan-Freguia C, Fernández JA, Mosnier LO, Castellino FJ, Weiler H, Rosen H, Griffin JH, Ruf W. Endogenous EPCR/aPC-PAR1 signaling prevents inflammation-induced vascular leakage and lethality.
Blood. 2009;113(12):2859-2866.
The authors retract the 19 March 2009, paper cited above. Recently, the authors discovered that some primary data presented in this paper could not be independently reproduced. All coauthors concur with the retraction of the paper and apologize to the readers, reviewers, and editors of Blood for publishing these invalid data.
The nature of the data problem isn’t clear from that passage. But Blood editor Cynthia Dunbar told us that her journal Continue reading No confidence vote on sepsis paper data leads to Blood retraction