最近几篇被撤稿的文章

最近十几天,先后有3篇重量级的文章被撤稿,一个特点,都是同胞是第一作者,可以想象,发表时的喜悦早被不停地要求重复实验冲刷的一干二净了,最后还是被撤稿。看来搞科研也要如履薄冰才行,要谨慎求证,不要让自己想象的重要性冲昏了头脑。
第一Nature杂志,作者单位加州大学旧金山分校,撤稿原因,文章主要数据不能重复,看到第一作者已经有独立的实验室,如后的日子将是艰难。Nature的撤稿信如下:
Studies identifying APOBEC3G as a post-entry restriction factor for HIV in resting CD4 T cells (Nature 435:108ñ114, 2005).
The authors wish to retract this Letter because they have been unable to reproduce the experiments demonstrating APOBEC3G functions as a post-entry restriction factor in resting CD4 T cells. Two recent studies1, 2 have also challenged this conclusion. However, the authors report that several findings described in this Letter are reproducible, including: (1) low-molecular-mass (LMM) forms of APOBEC3G predominate in resting CD4 T cells and monocytes; (2) LMM APOBEC3G is recruited in high-molecular-mass (HMM) APOBEC3G RNA–protein complexes after activation of T cells or differentiation of monocytes into macrophages; (3) HMM APOBEC3G does not exhibit enzymatic activity; (4) when HMM APOBEC3G is treated with RNase A, LMM APOBEC3G forms are generated and enzymatic activity is restored. and (5) Vif assembles with and polyubiquitylates APOBEC3G present in HMM complexes. Nevertheless, because a central finding of the paper cannot be replicated either internally or externally despite repeated attempts, the authors request that Nature retract the paper and regret any confusion that may have been created by the paper’s publication.
作者的实验室
第二篇,作者来自康奈尔大学,是做植物研究的,原因是开始对数据的解读有错误,用其他更令人信服的实验无法验证原来的结论。文章发表在PNAS上,已经被引用很多次。
PLANT BIOLOGY
Retraction for “HOS10 encodes an R2R3-typeMYB transcription factor essential for cold acclimation in plants” by Jianhua Zhu, Paul E. Verslues, Xianwu Zheng, Byeong-ha Lee, Xiangqiang Zhan, Yuzuki Manabe, Irina Sokolchik, Yanmei Zhu, Chun-Hai Dong, Jian-Kang Zhu, Paul M. Hasegawa, and Ray A. Bressan, which
appeared in issue 28, July 12, 2005, of Proc Natl Acad Sci USA (102:9966–9971; first published online July 1, 2005; 10.1073/pnas. 0503960102).
The authors wish to note the following: “The locus AT1g35515 that was claimed to be responsible for the cold sensitive phenotype of the HOS10 mutant was misidentified. The likely cause of the error was an inaccurate tailPCRproduct coupled with the ability of HOS10 mutants to spontaneously revert to wild type, appearing as complemented phenotypes. The SALK alleles of AT1g35515 in ecotype Columbia could not be confirmed by the more reliable necrosis assay. Therefore, the locus responsible for the HOS10 phenotypes reported in ecotype C24 remains unknown. The other data reported were confirmed with the exception of altered expression of AT1g35515, which appears reduced but not to the extent shown in Zhu et al. The authors regrettably retract the article.”
第三篇来自亚利桑那州立大学,这篇文章曾经引起很大的轰动,因为用细菌可以生产并分泌脂肪酸,就是说可以生产生物能源,撤稿的原因是4名作者中的两位要求撤稿,很奇怪的事情。
APPLIED BIOLOGICAL SCIENCES
PNAS is retracting the following article: “Production and secretion of fatty acids in genetically engineered cyanobacteria,” by Xinyao Liu, Daniel Brune, Wim Vermaas, and Roy Curtiss III, which appeared online in Proc Natl Acad Sci USA on March 29, 2010 (10.1073/pnas.1001946107).
The editors wish to note that it has come to our attention that not all authors approved the final version of the article and that there are ongoing disagreements between the authors over some of the results in the article. According to the Arizona State University Office of Research Integrity, “Drs. Vermaas and Brune, both authors on the original manuscript, have elected to remove their names and their data from the manuscript.” The editors hereby wish to retract the article.
Randy Schekman
Editor-in-Chief
这里有新闻衔接并附有视频,其中有第一作者,毕业于北京大学的Xinyao Liu对研究内容的介绍。





Related posts:

  1. 晶体结构造假还有更牛的
  2. 撤稿的走势
  3. 博客与个人生活—一篇JBC文章
  4. 喝水太少能引发糖尿病?
  5. 美国人睡觉前都干了什么?

发表评论?

9 条评论。

  1. 问好青方!

  2. “第三篇来自亚利桑那州立大学,这篇文章曾经引起很大的轰动,因为用细菌可以生产并分泌脂肪酸,就是说可以生产生物能源,撤稿的原因是4名作者中的两位要求撤稿,很奇怪的事情。”

    根据此文章致谢列表里的人,和其实验室的人说,这文章能发表,不被撤反而是很奇怪的事:
    1)可能涉及造假;2)很多应该在作者栏里的人被移到致谢中;3)其实文章内容没有新意,之所以能发表时因为老板是美国科学院院士,2009年同样的东西已经被Craig Ventor申请了专利;4)这样的东西能够引起轰动,跟第一作者的造势有很大的关系。

    具体情况ASU里面的人都比较了解。大家还是不要学第一作者这样的为人处世做研究之道的好,出来混,迟早要还的。

  3. @duochen
    你也好,有时间到你的博客看看你的新文字。

  4. @keke
    内部消息,谢谢分享。做科学的为人之道也是遵循很多基本原则的,很同意你的观点。

  5. 有些可惜,希望不是故意造假。

  6. 第三篇文章那个说奇怪也不奇怪。第一作者和要求撤稿的作者分别是同一项目的两个实验室,利益冲突被报复而已,不然也不会在接收甚至发表了以后要求撤稿——所有作者自然都多次看该过文章。

发表评论


*


注意 - 你可以用以下 HTML tags and attributes:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>