University of Glasgow professor Foo Yew “Eddy” Liew, a Fellow of the Royal Society, has retracted a paper in Cellular Immunology because it duplicated one of his earlier papers in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS). Here’s the notice for “Expression and function of Toll-like receptor on T cells:”
So how long do researchers have to keep records of experiments? We had that question while reading the retraction notice for a 2007 paper in the Journal of Clinical Investigation:
The 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 … Continue reading “Why Has the Number of Scientific Retractions Increased?” New study tries to answer
Our mothers told us that if we used the masterbatch process, we’d go blind. And what better way to gather some updates to recent posts than to include one that involves said masterbatch process? First, a retraction John Spevacek noticed when he tried clicking on the link in a Journal of Applied Polymer Science retraction we’d … Continue reading A masterbatch: More polymer retractions, gerontology journal lifts paywall, Microbiology notices appear
The journal Food and Bioproducts Processing has retracted a 2012 article on apple pomace — the remnants of a pressed fruit — by a group from India. The reason? Turns out the paper “Utility of apple pomace as a substrate for various products: A review,” fell a little to close to the tree. Here’s the … Continue reading Forbidden fruit: apple pomace paper retracted for plagiarism
We here at Retraction Watch HQ are always on the lookout for euphemisms for plagiarism (and other misconduct, of course). Among our favorites are “referencing failure” and the journal that allowed researchers to call plagiarism an “approach” to writing. Here’s a new one that’s sure to do well with voters. The journal Rejuvenation Research has … Continue reading Retraction cites “unintended excessive reuse” in commentary — of paper it was praising
The authors of a paper on quorum sensing — in simple terms, how bacteria “talk” to one another — have retracted it after another group’s findings led them to discover that the mixture they used weren’t what they thought. The refreshingly detailed retraction notice in PLOS ONE explains:
The Aging Male (the journal, not the demographic) is retracting a 2013 paper by a group of Chinese researchers who’d published the same work — more or less — in a Chinese title. The article, “Testosterone therapy improves psychological distress and health-related quality of life in Chinese men with symptomatic late-onset hypogonadism patients,” came from a … Continue reading Don’t feel so bad, The Aging Male: It happens to lots of journals
We have an update on a case we reported last week involving four papers in two different journals. The Journal of Bacteriology retracted two papers by Carlos Barreiro and colleagues, in notices that referred to the fact that …identical bands for the 16S rRNA probe controls in the Northern blots were reported to correspond to … Continue reading Update: Microbiologists face two more retractions for Northern blot problems
Bharat Aggarwal, the MD Anderson researcher who has threatened to sue us while under investigation by his institution for alleged misconduct, now has two Expressions of Concern in addition to two corrections and two unexplained withdrawals. Both of the papers were published in Blood. The Expression of Concern for “Gambogic acid, a novel ligand for … Continue reading Two Expressions of Concern in Blood for MD Anderson’s Aggarwal, who has threatened to sue Retraction Watch