Another author withdrawal from JBC earns another opaque notice

The authors of a 2014 study on the biochemical changes that can encourage the progression of cancer have withdrawn the paper from the Journal of Biological Chemistry. The post from the JBC – which we’ve noted are rarely helpful – doesn’t provide any details or reason for the withdrawal. As usual, this is all we … Continue reading Another author withdrawal from JBC earns another opaque notice

Opaque retraction notice for imaging paper

Sometimes we run across retraction notices that are vague, and others that are contorted, but we’ve just found one that gets highest marks for being completely inscrutable. The article, “Bayes Clustering and Structural Support Vector Machines for Segmentation of Carotid Artery Plaques in Multicontrast MRI,” was written by a group from China and Cambridge University … Continue reading Opaque retraction notice for imaging paper

Nature, facing “considerable rise” in retractions, blames lawyers for opaque and delayed notices

Nature, as we and others have noticed, has had what Paul Knoepfler referred to as a “torrent” of retractions in the past two years. That torrent — 13 research papers — has prompted a welcome and soul-searching editorial, as it did in 2010 when the journal had what it called an “unusually large number” of … Continue reading Nature, facing “considerable rise” in retractions, blames lawyers for opaque and delayed notices

Journal of Neuroscience retraction, typically opaque, from author with history of errors

The Journal of Neuroscience has retracted a 2011 paper by an international group of scientists, including the prominent Maryland researcher Ronald Dubner, but readers won’t know why. As the notice “explains“:

Majority of retractions are due to misconduct: Study confirms opaque notices distort the scientific record

A new study out in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences (PNAS) today finds that two-thirds of retractions are because of some form of misconduct — a figure that’s higher than previously thought, thanks to unhelpful retraction notices that cause us to beat our heads against the wall here at Retraction Watch. The … Continue reading Majority of retractions are due to misconduct: Study confirms opaque notices distort the scientific record

Another opaque notice from the JBC, for paper author says is correct and valid

The Journal of Biological Chemistry has posted another of its inscrutable and opaque retraction notices, this one for a study first published in September 2011. The retraction reads in full:

Bugging out: An opaque retraction notice reveals why an entomology journal only looks dark

We hope it doesn’t bug Retraction Watch readers that we’ve been writing about entomology more than usual this week. That’s because a reliable tipster has been sending us material that checks out.  Here’s another case, of a retraction that appeared some months ago in Entomological News. The retraction notice itself revealed little, but we did learn … Continue reading Bugging out: An opaque retraction notice reveals why an entomology journal only looks dark

Reason behind opaque Antioxidants & Redox Signaling retraction notice revealed

There’s an unhelpful retraction notice online in the journal Antioxidants & Redox Signaling, a Mary Ann Liebert publication. The paper, “Inhibition of LXRalpha-dependent steatosis and oxidative injury by liquiritigenin, a licorice flavonoid, as mediated with Nrf2 activation,” has been removed from the site, except for the abstract, which now has this in front of it: THIS WORK HAS BEEN RETRACTED … Continue reading Reason behind opaque Antioxidants & Redox Signaling retraction notice revealed

Remember the $32 opaque retraction notice? Molecular Biology and Evolution removes paywall

On Tuesday, we reported on the case of a retraction notice in Molecular Biology and Evolution, an Oxford University Press (OUP) journal, that had three problems:

Author of retracted Molecular Biology and Evolution paper explains opaque notice that’ll still cost you $32

A completely unhelpful retraction notice appears in the September issue of Molecular Biology and Evolution for “Investigating the Role of Natural Selection on Coding Sequence Evolution in Salmonids Through NGS Data Mining,” a paper first published in March. Here’s the entire notice for the paper — which has been removed completely from the journal’s site, … Continue reading Author of retracted Molecular Biology and Evolution paper explains opaque notice that’ll still cost you $32