“Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?” New study tries to answer

plos oneThe title of this post is the title of a new study in PLOS ONE by three researchers whose names Retraction Watch readers may find familiar: Grant Steen, Arturo Casadevall, and Ferric Fang. Together and separately, they’ve examined retraction trends in a number of papers we’ve covered.

Their new paper tries to answer a question we’re almost always asked as a follow-up to data showing the number of retractions grew ten-fold over the first decade in the 21st century. As the authors write: Continue reading “Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?” New study tries to answer

Pesticide paper pulled for plagiarizing prior publication

intjnrpestmgmtThe International Journal of Pest Management has retracted a 2007 article on spinosad pesticides by researcher who stole much of the material from the thesis of a Kansas State University masters student.

But the retraction comes more than five years after a correction indicating that plagiarism had occurred — an odd interposition that we can’t quite figure out.

The article, “Insecticidal effect of spinosad dust against four stored product insect species in different grain commodities,” was written by Amin Nikpay, who, according to this website, is now with Arak Islamic Azad University, in Iran. It was published in the spring of 2007, but a few months later the journal issued the following notice: Continue reading Pesticide paper pulled for plagiarizing prior publication

Ants in the past: Journal pulls insect-global warming paper after questions arise over results

insectscicoverA group of ecologists in Germany who published a paper on the potential impact of global warming on ants in the Harz Mountains — northern Germany’s highest range — have retracted the paper after becoming, well, a bit antsy about the validity of their findings.

The article, “Diversity of ants across an altitudinal gradient in and outside a spruce forest in the Harz Mountains, Germany,” appeared in August 2012 in the journal Insect Science, a publication of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. The last author of the paper was Christoph Scherber, of the University of Göttingen.

We found the abstract of the paper on this site: Continue reading Ants in the past: Journal pulls insect-global warming paper after questions arise over results

“Serious irregularities” in Western blots lead to retraction of brain chemistry paper

jneuroscijuly13The Journal of Neuroscience has retracted a 2009 article by a group from Mount Sinai (now the Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai) for suspicious Western blots.

The paper, “Requirement for Protein Synthesis at Developing Synapses,” came from the lab of Deanna Benson, a Parkinson’s expert. According to the abstract, which is still available on the journal’s website:

Continue reading “Serious irregularities” in Western blots lead to retraction of brain chemistry paper

Researchers get a mulligan: JBC paper withdrawn sans explanation

jbc july 2013A group of authors has withdrawn a paper from the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC), but readers won’t know why.

The paper, “Static High-Gradient Magnetic Fields Activate Transient Receptor Potential Vanilloid 4 (TRPV4) Ion Channels Enabling Remote Control of Cell Function,” whose corresponding author is Thomas Simmet of Ulm University, appeared online on June 11. Since June 24, the PDF of the paper has been stamped: Continue reading Researchers get a mulligan: JBC paper withdrawn sans explanation

“Clear case of plagiarism” forces retraction of chemistry paper

jrnlchemscieThe Journal of Chemical Sciences,  the journal of the Indian Academy of Sciences, has retracted a 2012 paper by a group of researchers in India and South Korea who stole material (and a lot of it) from a 2009 article for their reactant.

The retraction notice (it’s a pdf) speaks quite well for itself:

Continue reading “Clear case of plagiarism” forces retraction of chemistry paper

Time for a scientific journal Reproducibility Index

labtimes july 2013Retraction Watch readers are by now more than likely familiar with the growing concerns over reproducibility in science. In response to issues in fields from cancer research to psychology, scientists have come up with programs such as the Reproducibility Initiative and the Open Science Framework.

These sorts of efforts are important experiments in ensuring that findings are robust. We think there’s another potential way to encourage reproducibility: Giving journals an incentive to publish results that hold up.

As we write in our latest LabTimes column, we have already called for a Transparency Index Continue reading Time for a scientific journal Reproducibility Index

Our bad! Researchers take colleagues’ data, lose paper

aamick_v005i012.inddA pair of chemists from China who published their colleagues’ data without knowledge or permission have lost the article to retraction. They also have another retraction on a similar topic, which we covered before.

The article, which appeared in ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces in 2012,  was titled “Nanoporous PtCo Surface Alloy Architecture with Enhanced Properties for Methanol Electrooxidation.” The authors, Huajun Qiu and Feixue Zou, are listed as being with the School of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering at Shandong University, in Jinan, China.

As the retraction notice states: Continue reading Our bad! Researchers take colleagues’ data, lose paper

Retraction of 19-year-old Nature paper reveals hidden cameras, lab break-in, evidence tampering

nature bezouskaWe’ve often found that when some authors refuse to sign retraction notices, there’s a much bigger story than terse notices let on. And a retraction in this week’s Nature of a 19-year-old paper is a shining example of that.

Here’s the brief notice for “Oligosaccharide ligands for NKR-P1 protein activate NK cells and cytotoxicity,” a 1994 paper by researchers from the UK and the Czech Republic that had already been subject to a 1996 correction: Continue reading Retraction of 19-year-old Nature paper reveals hidden cameras, lab break-in, evidence tampering

Gravity paper yanked for plagiarism by another name

jtapcoverThe Journal of Theoretical and Applied Physics has retracted a 2012 paper by a pair of Iranian cosmologists who failed to adequately cite one of the critical references on which they based their work.

We think that falls under the broader category of plagiarism — after all, as Heisenberg famously postulated, the same text cannot simultaneously appear in two published articles under different authorship. Or something like that.

The paper in question, “Torsion of space-time in f (R) gravity,” deals with, as this Wikipedia entry states: Continue reading Gravity paper yanked for plagiarism by another name