Category Archives: crystallography retractions
Seven barred from research after plagiarism, duplications in eleven papers
A retired Nepali professor and six others have been barred from research after plagiarism and duplicated images were found in 11 of their papers. Parashuram Mishra, a retired crystallographer at Tribhuvan University, in Nepal, is the lead author on all the studies. Most of the papers contain image duplications; the same figures were reused across … Continue reading Seven barred from research after plagiarism, duplications in eleven papers
Posted by in crystallography retractions
Infamous case of fraud by protein crystallographer ends in 10-year funding ban
In 2009, a university announced a prominent researcher in the field of protein crystallography had likely fabricated nearly a dozen protein structures. Nine years later, the U.S. Office of Research Integrity (ORI) has upheld the results — and announced a relatively long sanction, by the agency’s standards. Today, the ORI placed a 10-year ban on … Continue reading Infamous case of fraud by protein crystallographer ends in 10-year funding ban
Posted by in crystallography retractions, faked data, ori investigations, united states
Structural biology corrections highlight best of the scientific process
If you need evidence of the value of transparency in science, check out a pair of recent corrections in the structural biology literature. This past August, researchers led by Qiu-Xing Jiang at the University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center corrected their study, first published in February 2014 in eLife, of prion-like protein aggregates called MAVS […]
The post Structural biology corrections highlight best of the scientific process appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Nature retracts paper six years after it was flagged for fraud
Nature retracted a paper on protein structures today, six years after an investigation at the University of Alabama identified several structures that were “more likely than not falsified and/or fabricated” by one of the authors. The paper came under scrutiny soon after it was published in 2006. A letter published in Nature that same year pointed […]
The post Nature retracts paper six years after it was flagged for fraud appeared first on Retraction Watch.
“Unethical behavior” breaks crystallography paper
A 2011 paper about the crystal structure of a transcription regulator has been pulled by Molecules and Cells for “unethical behavior by the authors.” Unfortunately, we can’t say much more than that, because the notice doesn’t, either: This article has been retracted due to unethical behavior by the authors. We got a little bit more […]
The post “Unethical behavior” breaks crystallography paper appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Two crystallography papers break apart for “trivial errors,” says author
Biophysicists in India have retracted two crystallography papers describing protein binding sites following “concerns,” according to one retraction note. The last author on both papers, however, told us he believed the retractions were the result of “trivial errors.” Although one journal praised him in its retraction note for his “positive engagement,” he said the process left him feeling […]
The post Two crystallography papers break apart for “trivial errors,” says author appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Crystal confusion leads to retractions for optics researchers
A mistaken molecular structure has led to a retraction and a withdrawal for group in India studying optical crystals. Here’s the notice for “Crystal growth and spectroscopic characterization of Aloevera amino acid added lithium sulfate monohydrate: A non-linear optical crystal” in Spectrochimica Acta Part A: This article has been retracted at the request of authors. According […]
A partial retraction appears for former Salzburg crystallographer who admitted misconduct
A paper by a crystallographer fired from his university for misconduct has been partially retracted.
Last year, we covered the case of Robert Schwarzenbacher, formerly of Salzburg University. Schwarzenbacher had provided the crystallographic data for a paper in the Journal of Immunology, but those results raised questions with another crystallographer and prompted an investigation by the university. Schwarzenbacher admitted he’d committed misconduct, although he recanted at one point, and was eventually fired.
Now, the authors have retracted the crystallographic data from the Journal of Immunology paper. Here’s the partial retraction, which is listed as a correction:
Zaborsky, N., M. Brunner, M. Wallner, M. Himly, T. Karl, R. Schwarzenbacher, F. Ferreira, and G. Achatz. 2010. Antigen aggregation decides the fate of the allergic immune response. J. Immunol. 184: 725–735.
The authors wish to retract the crystallographic section of this article, in particular Fig. 8A (ribbon diagram of the crystal structure of Bet v 1d) and Fig. 8B (electrostatic surface potential map of Bet v 1a, left, and Bet v 1d, right).
An analysis published in Acta Crystallographica Section F. 68: 4, p. 366–376 resulted in an investigation by the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity. The Austrian Agency for Research Integrity has confirmed that Robert Schwarzenbacher concedes he committed scientific misconduct concerning the crystallographic data in this article. Furthermore, the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity confirms that the other data in the article are valid and that there is no suspicion of scientific misconduct apart from that in Fig. 8A and Fig. 8B.
The Protein Data Bank has been informed and has retracted the 3K78 entry.
Retraction of the crystallographic section does not affect the major conclusions of the article.
The paper has been cited 18 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.
We asked the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity for a copy of their investigational report, but they said their rules only allowed them to release the report to the university and the researchers involved. Salzburg has not responded to our requests for the report
A partial retraction appears for former Salzburg crystallographer who admitted misconduct
A paper by a crystallographer fired from his university for misconduct has been partially retracted.
Last year, we covered the case of Robert Schwarzenbacher, formerly of Salzburg University. Schwarzenbacher had provided the crystallographic data for a paper in the Journal of Immunology, but those results raised questions with another crystallographer and prompted an investigation by the university. Schwarzenbacher admitted he’d committed misconduct, although he recanted at one point, and was eventually fired.
Now, the authors have retracted the crystallographic data from the Journal of Immunology paper. Here’s the partial retraction, which is listed as a correction:
Zaborsky, N., M. Brunner, M. Wallner, M. Himly, T. Karl, R. Schwarzenbacher, F. Ferreira, and G. Achatz. 2010. Antigen aggregation decides the fate of the allergic immune response. J. Immunol. 184: 725–735.
The authors wish to retract the crystallographic section of this article, in particular Fig. 8A (ribbon diagram of the crystal structure of Bet v 1d) and Fig. 8B (electrostatic surface potential map of Bet v 1a, left, and Bet v 1d, right).
An analysis published in Acta Crystallographica Section F. 68: 4, p. 366–376 resulted in an investigation by the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity. The Austrian Agency for Research Integrity has confirmed that Robert Schwarzenbacher concedes he committed scientific misconduct concerning the crystallographic data in this article. Furthermore, the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity confirms that the other data in the article are valid and that there is no suspicion of scientific misconduct apart from that in Fig. 8A and Fig. 8B.
The Protein Data Bank has been informed and has retracted the 3K78 entry.
Retraction of the crystallographic section does not affect the major conclusions of the article.
The paper has been cited 18 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.
We asked the Austrian Agency for Research Integrity for a copy of their investigational report, but they said their rules only allowed them to release the report to the university and the researchers involved. Salzburg has not responded to our requests for the report