Adam's Blogroll: click through to the author's blog
A cell biology journal has retracted a 2016 paper after an investigation revealed that the corresponding author failed to include two co-authors and acknowledge the funding source. According to the retraction notice, the Journal of Cellular Physiology retracted the paper after the University of Texas, MD Anderson Cancer Center found that last author Jin Wang […]
The post Former MD Anderson researcher objects to retraction of his paper appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Fazlul Sarkar, who sued PubPeer commenters for criticizing his work, has logged two more retractions, bringing his total to seven. The two retractions appear in the Journal of Cellular Physiology, and follow five others released last week by another Wiley journal, Journal of Cellular Biochemistry. All notices mention an investigation at Wayne State University, where Sarkar […]
The post Seventh retraction appears for cancer researcher who sued PubPeer commenters appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Wiley Periodicals is withdrawing a biochemistry paper after mistakenly publishing it in the wrong journal. The mistake took a few months to sort out. Wiley initially published “Protein Kinase C Is Involved in the Induction of ATP-Binding Cassette Transporter A1 Expression by Liver X Receptor/Retinoid X Receptor Agonist in Human Macrophages” online in Journal of Cellular […]
The post Wiley published a biology paper in the wrong journal appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Authors of a study on a potential biomarker for ovarian cancer have been hit with two retractions after the results were published twice. We don’t usually see both copies of a duplicated paper retracted, but this is a somewhat unusual case. In November 2011, a group of authors submitted the paper to Gynecologic Oncology. But two months’ prior, the […]
The post “Dual submission issues” retract both copies of ovarian cancer paper appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Two researchers, Tong Wu and Chang Han, have lost a second paper as the result of a University of Pittsburgh investigation into image manipulations. The first retraction, in Journal of Cellular Biochemistry, went live in February. The researchers, currently based at Tulane University, were originally tapped by pseudonymous tipster Juuichi Jigen, who created a website in 2012 to chronicle the […]
The post Second cell bio retraction from UPitt investigation of tweaked images appeared first on Retraction Watch.
Rui Curi
Rui Curi, the Brazilian scientist whose lawyers’ threats helped force the shutdown of Science-Fraud.org, has corrected another paper criticized by the site.
Here’s the correction for “Effects of moderate electrical stimulation on reactive species production by primary rat skeletal muscle cells: Cross-talk between superoxide and nitric oxide production,” in the Journal of Cellular Physiology:
After the publication of this manuscript we observed an error in Figure 2. The representative images for the results of the E + DPI and C + CCCP groups (Fig. 2b and f, respectively) were replaced. The mean values, standard errors of means, legends, discussion and conclusions are the same as in the original article. Please, accept our apologies and refer to the correct corresponding Figure 2b and f that we provide in this erratum.
Figure 2. Effects of electrical stimulation on superoxide production by: (1) skeletal muscle NADPH oxidase complex evaluated by (a) cytochrome c reduction assay and (b) by DHE oxidation assay in the presence and absence of DPI (NADPH oxidase inhibitor); (2) skeletal muscle xanthine oxidase enzyme evaluated by (c) cytochrome c reduction assay and (d) by DHE oxidation assay in the presence and absence of allopurinol (xanthine oxidase inhibitor); (3) skeletal muscle mitochondria evaluated by (e) cytochrome c reduction assay and (f) by DHE oxidation assay in the presence and absence of CCCP, a mitochondrial uncoupler. Muscle cells were incubated for 1 h in the presence or absence of the moderate electrical stimulus. Representative examples are shown above graphs. The values are presented as means ± SEM. *P < 0.05 for comparison between groups. C, control; E, electrical stimulated.
The paper has been cited just once, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge, by another paper by Curi’s group.
Curi has retracted a paper and corrected another. Both of those papers had also been criticized on Science-Fraud.org.
We’re Curi-ous, you might say, about “we observed an error” (emphasis ours) in the new notice. We’re pretty sure someone other than the authors observed the error. But hey, as long as the scientific record is corrected, right?
We’ve been covering the case of Alirio Melendez, three of whose papers have been retracted amidst questions about almost 70 studies. The latest development is a correction in the Journal of Cellular Physiology, which has already retracted one of his papers, of a study on which he was a co-author.
Here’s the correction for “Short dysfunctional telomeres impair the repair of arsenite-induced oxidative damage in mouse cells”:
In Newman et al., 2008, Figure 2 contained duplicate profiles in Fig 2H and 2 J. The correct Figure 2E to 2J is shown here. This error doesn’t have any influence on the data discussed and conclusions drawn in the article.
Figure 2. Figure 2 (E–J) FACS profiles of dual staining for Annexin V and propidium iodide to determine apoptosis and necrosis. Early and late passage G1-mTERC +/+ and G1-mTERC −/− MEFs were exposed to sodium arsenite (3.0 µg/ml) for 48 h and subjected to Annexin V staining. (E) Untreated mTERC +/+ MEFs; (F) arsenite-treated mTERC +/+ MEFs; (G) mTERC −/− (EP) MEFs; (H) arsenite-treated mTERC −/− (EP) MEFs; (I) untreated mTERC −/− (LP) MEFs; (J) arsenite-treated mTERC −/− (LP) MEFs. Annexin V staining in early apoptosis and dual staining in the late apoptosis in mTERC −/− (EP) MEFs were higher as compared to the mTERC +/+ MEFs at both early (data not shown) and late passages (F). Arsenite-treated mTERC −/− (EP) MEFs showed greater number of late apoptotic cells when compared to the untreated mTERC −/− (EP) MEFs and mTERC +/+ MEFs (H). Arsenite-treated G1-mTERC −/− (LP) MEFs displayed greater cell death by apoptosis (J).
The paper, which was first published online in 2007, has been cited 15 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.
Hat tip: Clare Francis
