Category: immunology retractions

Fifth Alirio Melendez retraction offers clues about University of Glasgow misconduct findings

A new retraction — his fifth — in the Journal of Immunology for Alirio Melendez, formerly of the National University of Singapore, the University of Glasgow, and the University of Liverpool, sheds some light on the results of an investigation by one of the universities.

Last month, a Glasgow spokesperson told Nature that the university’s investigation had been completed in October 2011, but that it did not comment on individual cases. A spokesperson, according to the Times Higher Education:

…would say only that there was “no evidence that our current staff contributed, falsified or duplicated data to any publications co-authored with (Professor) Melendez”. He also confirmed that relevant journals would be contacted where retractions or corrections were deemed necessary.

The notice for one such necessary retraction, in the September 15 issue of the Journal of Immunology, gives a few details: Continue reading Fifth Alirio Melendez retraction offers clues about University of Glasgow misconduct findings

20 more retractions for scientist who made up email addresses so he could review his own papers

Hyung-In Moon, the South Korean plant compound researcher who came up with fake email addresses so that he could do his own peer review, has retracted twenty more papers, all in Immunopharmacology and Immunotoxicology, an Informa Healthcare title.

Here are the papers: Continue reading 20 more retractions for scientist who made up email addresses so he could review his own papers

Retraction number four appears in PNAS for work of Alirio Melendez, who has resigned post at U Liverpool

Alirio Melendez, who has had three of his papers retracted amidst suspicions about 70, has had another one retracted, this one in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). And he has also resigned from his post at the University of Liverpool, we have just learned.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Retraction number four appears in PNAS for work of Alirio Melendez, who has resigned post at U Liverpool

An Immunity retraction for Luk van Parijs, three years after the ORI found evidence of fabrication in the paper

Earlier this month, we reported on a correction by Luk van Parijs, the biologist the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT) fired in 2005 after he admitted to making up data.

Immunity has now run a retraction involving van Parijs, dated May 25, 2012, for 2003’s “Autoimmunity as the Consequence of a Spontaneous Mutation in Rasgrp1”: Continue reading An Immunity retraction for Luk van Parijs, three years after the ORI found evidence of fabrication in the paper

Third retraction arrives for Alirio Melendez, this one in the Journal of Cellular Physiology

Alirio Melendez, the former National University of Singapore researcher who has already retracted two papers in the midst of an investigation into about 70 of his publications, has had a third retracted a third.

Here’s the notice from the Journal of Cellular Physiology: Continue reading Third retraction arrives for Alirio Melendez, this one in the Journal of Cellular Physiology

University of Perugia researcher faces trial for embezzlement, fraud following 13 retractions and Expressions of Concern

Stefano Fiorucci, a gastroenterology researcher at the University of Perugia in Italy, has been indicted for fraud and embezzlement, after a university investigation found that he had manipulated images in papers that he used to win about 2 million Euros in grant funding.

The case, which has so far resulted in four retractions and nine Expressions of Concern, has dragged on for several years. The trial is scheduled for July. It’s the first time that embezzlement charges have been brought against a scientist found to have committed fraud, according to reports in Umbria 24 and the Umbria Journal.

Fiorucci’s attorney, Stefano Bagianti, told Umbria 24 that there was Continue reading University of Perugia researcher faces trial for embezzlement, fraud following 13 retractions and Expressions of Concern

Cardiff University misconduct investigation leads to Journal of Immunology retraction

The senior author of a Journal of Immunology paper has retracted it after a university investigation found that he had inappropriately manipulated images, Retraction Watch has learned.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Cardiff University misconduct investigation leads to Journal of Immunology retraction

Bulfone-Paus retraction count grows to 13 with one in Transplantation

Silvia Bulfone-Paus, the Borstel Institute researcher who was forced to step down as institute director and has already retracted 12 papers, has retracted another, this one in Transplantation. Here’s the text of the notice: Continue reading Bulfone-Paus retraction count grows to 13 with one in Transplantation

Retraction comes as death of PI leads to lost records

The Journal of Experimental Medicine has retracted a 2011 article after the principal investigator’s home institution suggested that the PI might have manipulated his data. Complicating matters, the PI in this case died two weeks after the paper appeared and his notes have gone missing — making an affirmative declaration of fraud or honest error difficult.

Here’s the notice: Continue reading Retraction comes as death of PI leads to lost records

Retraction (in all but name) of flu paper raises eyebrows

When is a retraction not a retraction? Why, when it’s a correction, of course — like the one the journal Emerging Infectious Diseases issued this month:

In the article Reassortment of Ancient Neuraminidase and Recent Hemagglutinin in Pandemic (H1N1) 2009 Virus (P. Bhoumik, A.L. Hughes), errors were made in selection of the hemagglutinin (HA) and neuraminidase (NA) sequences for the initial and subsequent data sets. As a result, the authors incorrectly concluded that the NA gene of the pandemic (H1N1) 2009 virus is of a more ancient lineage than the HA. Other researchers (and the authors) have not been able to reproduce the findings when using HA and NA matched pairs from viruses chosen on the basis of geography and time and correctly have pointed out errors in the data set that make the original conclusions invalid.

In other words, 1) the article was based largely on an error and 2) the central point could not be reproduced, two flaws that, at least in our book, usually constitute grounds for retraction.

The paper was written by Priyasma Bhoumik and Austin Hughes. Bhoumik, now a post-doc at Harvard, at the time was a PhD student at the University of South Carolina, where Hughes is a senior faculty member. Funding for the work came to Hughes from the National Institutes of Health, according to the original article.

We spoke with Hughes, who said that in this case, correction versus retraction is a distinction without a difference: Continue reading Retraction (in all but name) of flu paper raises eyebrows