Category: basic life sciences retractions

PLoS ONE issues expression of concern when company won’t share bacterial strain

plosoneThe editors of PLoS ONE have issued an expression of concern for a 2014 article on a form of nitrogen-fixing bacteria called Bacillus pumilus.

The reason: The company that provided the strain of microbe used in the research won’t let other researchers look at the organism.

The article is titled “Bacillus pumilus Reveals a Remarkably High Resistance to Hydrogen Peroxide Provoked Oxidative Stress,” and it came from a group led by Stefan Handtke, of the University of Greifswald, in Germany.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading PLoS ONE issues expression of concern when company won’t share bacterial strain

Three PLOS ONE papers retracted for totally made-up data

This one comes to us from Twitter, where Willem van Schaik went to express his frustration that a PLOS ONE paper he’d edited had been retracted for fake data.

Two other papers from the same group at the Institute of Microbial Technology, Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR), Chandigarh, India, were retracted simultaneously.

We sent van Schaik an email to get a clearer picture of the situation. He responded: Continue reading Three PLOS ONE papers retracted for totally made-up data

Author steps in to clarify vague tuberculosis retraction

You’ve got to love when an author is willing to detail the specifics of an unhelpful retraction notice.

This May, a paper came out in Journal of Thoracic Diseases about drug-resistant tuberculosis. It was retracted in June, for “some misconduct in the manuscript.”

Here’s the notice:

The article “Application status of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry in the identification and drug resistance of Mycobacterium tuberculosis” (doi: 10.3978/j.issn.2072-1439.2014.02.19) that appeared on page 512-516 of the May 2014 issue of the Journal of Thoracic Disease needs to be withdrawn due to some misconduct in the manuscript. We are sorry for the inconvenience caused.

Since that’s pretty vague and unhelpful, we reached out to corresponding author Jiayun Liu, who gave us a thorough rundown:

Continue reading Author steps in to clarify vague tuberculosis retraction

If only more retractions could be like this: Authors of cardiac stem cell paper show the way

Researchers at Qingdao University have fully retracted a paper originally published in Molecular Medicine Reports with a clear, detailed outline of what went wrong and how they discovered the error.

Here’s the notice for “Generation of induced pluripotent stem cells using skin fibroblasts from patients with myocardial infarction under feeder-free conditions:”

Continue reading If only more retractions could be like this: Authors of cardiac stem cell paper show the way

Mystery box sinks immunology paper

Screen Shot 2014-06-30 at 12.30.32 PMBiochemical Journal has pulled a 2006 paper for an undisclosed “background subtraction box” in an image – which, if you take a not-particularly-close look at the figure to the right, means somebody added a black rectangle over the control lane.

Here’s the notice: for “Phosphorylation of Ser158 regulates inflammatory redox-dependent hepatocyte nuclear factor-4a transcriptional activity”: Continue reading Mystery box sinks immunology paper

Geneticist retracting four papers for “significant problems”

jbc 620Benjamin Barré, a genetics researcher who recently set up his own group at the University of Angers, is retracting four papers he worked on as a graduate student and postdoc.

Neil Perkins, in whose lab Barré was a postdoc, and Olivier Coqueret, in whose lab he did his PhD, tell Retraction Watch: Continue reading Geneticist retracting four papers for “significant problems”

Cancer genetics group retracts three papers for “inappropriate presentation of data”

jbc 620A group of cancer genetics researchers in Italy and the U.S. has retracted three papers in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) after it became aware they had duplicated some bands in their figures.

Here are the three papers: Continue reading Cancer genetics group retracts three papers for “inappropriate presentation of data”

Research technician faked NIH-funded research: ORI

pallansch-cokonis
Melanie Pallansch-Cokonis (via LinkedIn)

Melanie Pallansch-Cokonis, a former research technician at Southern Research Institute, faked data in work funded by NIH contracts and grants, according to the Office of Research Integrity (ORI).

According to the ORI’s case summary, available today in the Federal Register: Continue reading Research technician faked NIH-funded research: ORI

Journal retracts stem cell study despite objections of most authors

Gerold Feuer in 2008, via Upstate
Gerold Feuer in 2008, via Upstate

The journal Blood has retracted a 2010 paper over the objections of most of its authors, two of whom were found by their university to have used “fraudulent methods” to obtain the data.

We first reported on the case of Gerold Feuer last fall. The State University of New York (SUNY) Upstate Medical Center in Syracuse fired Feuer in 2010 after determining that he had misused state funds to enrich a company he had founded, HuMurine. A court agreed with many of the university’s claims, but ordered his reinstatement in 2012.

Meanwhile, as we noted last fall: Continue reading Journal retracts stem cell study despite objections of most authors

Authors retract Current Biology study following criticism on PubPeer and university investigation

current biologyThe authors of a Current Biology paper published online in February of this year have retracted it after voluminous criticism on post-publication review site PubPeer and a university committee found evidence of figure manipulation.

The paper, “Agonist-Induced GPCR Shedding from the Ciliary Surface Is Dependent on ESCRT-III and VPS4,” was co-authored by Hua Jin and Livana Soetedjo, a graduate student in Jin’s lab. Soetedjo was first author, and Jin was corresponding author.

The comments at PubPeer began on March 24: Continue reading Authors retract Current Biology study following criticism on PubPeer and university investigation