Are plagiarists parasites? And what if they work in the field of parasitism — like M. Shafiq Ansari and colleagues at Aligarh Muslim University in India?
The Journal of Insect Behavior is retracting a 2011 paper by Ansari’s group, “Foraging of host-habitat and superparasitism in Cotesia glomerata: A gregarious parasitoid of Pieris brassicae,” for its similarity to a 2003 article on the same species by other researchers. The insect in question is a form of wasp that, in a case of life imitating Alien, lays its eggs in living caterpillars, which the little buggers eat from the inside out. (Turnabout apparently is fair play in this grisly interaction.)
Here’s the retraction notice (it’s a PDF):
The Journal of Insect Behavior was notified in December 2012 of the possibility of plagiarism in “Foraging of host-habitat and superparasitism in Cotesia glomerata: A gregarious parasitoid of Pieris brassicae”; Fazil Hasan, M. Shafiq Ansari and Nadeem Ahmad, Journal of Insect Behavior, Vol. 24: 363–379. After careful review, the Co-Editors determined that article did include significant plagiarism of “Superparasitism in Cotesia glomerata: response of hosts and consequences for parasitoids,” Hainan Gu, Qun Wang and Silvia Dorn, Ecol. Entomol. 2003,Vol. 28: 422–431. Consequentially, the Journal of Insect Behavior retracts the article and will not consider for publication future submissions by the offending authors.
The paper has not been cited, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.
Ansari and Hasan are co-authors of a 2012 textbook about C. glomerata. Here’s what the authors’ note has to say about them:
Mr. Fazil Hasan is pursuing his Ph.D under the able guidance of Dr. M. Shafiq Ansari. His major area of interest is agricultural entomology. Dr. Ansari is Assoc. Prof. of Entomology in Aligarh Muslim University, India. He has publications in reputed journals. He is leading entomologist sharing his knowledge in teaching and guiding Ph.D students.
We wonder if all of the material in that book is their own. If not, and a retraction is in order, it wouldn’t be the first such case we’ve covered involving suspect entomology.