Tenth Bulfone-Paus retraction notice appears, in Journal of Biological Chemistry

The tenth of 12 promised retractions by Silvia Bulfone-Paus and colleagues has appeared, in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC).

The paper, “Reverse signaling through membrane-bound Interleukin-15,” was published in 2004 and has been cited 31 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. The retraction notice, just like the other one for the team’s work that appeared in the JBC, was completely uninformative:

Bulfone-Paus retraction notice appears in the Journal of Biological Chemistry

Silvia Bulfone-Paus

Another retraction notice for a paper by Silvia Bulfone-Paus and colleagues has appeared, this one for a 2007 paper in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC), “Soluble IL-15Rα is generated by alternative splicing or proteolytic cleavage and forms functional complexes with Il-15.”

This is the sixth retraction notice of a promised 12 in several journals. The original paper has been cited 37 times,  according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

Some of the notices have gone into great detail about what was wrong with the original papers, and journals have even allowed the team to declare that some of the results had been replicated. One simply said there had been misconduct.

Then there’s this one:

Expression of Concern for a Bulfone-Paus paper

Retraction Watch readers may recall the story of Silvia Bulfone-Paus, who has been forced to retract 12 papers and has another under review at Blood. All of that scrutiny came after an investigation by her home institution, Germany’s Borstel Institute, that found evidence of image manipulation.

The latest development is perhaps no surprise. It concerns a review Bulfone-Paus and her colleagues published in BioEssays in 2006. Here’s the Expression of Concern, which was published online in July but just came our attention (we’ve added links to our coverage of specific retractions):

As last of 12 promised Bulfone-Paus retractions appears, a (disappointing) report card on journal transparency

The final two retractions by Silvia Bulfone-Paus and colleagues, among the 12 promised by Research Centre Borstel following an investigation into scientific misconduct, have appeared. Both are in the Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC), and read as follows:

This article has been withdrawn by the authors.

We find that near-complete lack of information frustrating, not to mention useless to the scientific community. Unfortunately, it’s par for the course when it comes to the JBC and Bulfone-Paus retractions. The other three said exactly the same thing.

With that in mind, we thought it would be worth looking at all 12 retraction notices, as a sort of case series in journals’ transparency. We often look at particular retractions in a vacuum, but here was a chance to look at 12 papers, all retracted for the same reason, to see how each journal reported the withdrawal.

Here are the 12, in rough order, worst to best, based on how useful they are to scientists coming across them:

Two more Bulfone-Paus retraction notices appear

The number of retraction notices of papers co-authored by Silvia Bulfone-Paus is up to eight.

The Journal of Leukocyte Biology, which was apparently the first to announce they had accepted a retraction, has published its notice:

The Year of the Retraction: A look back at 2011

Don Quixote and Sancho Panza, Madrid. Photo by Zaqarbal via Wikimedia

If Retraction Watch was actually a business, as opposed — for the moment, anyway — to a labor of love for two guys with day jobs, 2011 would have been a very good year for business.

It was a year that will probably see close to 400 retractions, including a number of high-profile ones, once the dust settles. Those high numbers caught the attention of a lot of major media outlets, from Nature to NPR to the Wall Street Journal. Science publications, including LiveScience and The Scientist, have done their own end-of-year retraction lists.

It was also a good year for us at Retraction Watch. Many news outlets featured us in their coverage, either picking up stories we’d broken or asking us for comment on big-picture issues. Three national NPR programs — Science Friday, On the Media, and All Things Considered — had us on air. We launched a column in LabTimes, and Nature asked us to write a year-end commentary. We even earned a Wikipedia entry.

Four mysterious retractions in the JBC for a group whose PI recently passed away

The Journal of Biological Chemistry (JBC) has retracted four studies done in a Mount Sinai School of Medicine lab whose principal investigator died last month. The studies, by the late Maria Diverse-Pierluissi and colleagues, were as follows:

• N-type Ca2+ channels as scaffold proteins in the assembly of signaling molecules for GABA-B receptor effects (cited 9 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge)
• Arrestin is required for agonist-induced trafficking of voltage-dependent calcium channels (cited 15 times)
• G protein-induced trafficking of voltage-dependent calcium channels (cited 34 times)
• B-Adrenergic receptor activation induces internalization of cardiac Cav1.2 channel complexes through a B-arrestin 1-mediated pathway (cited 8 times)

According to a Mount Sinai release, Diverse-Pierluissi died on May 7 of this year. The retractions are dated June 17, and all say the same thing:

Freedom from Information Act? Another JBC retraction untarnished by any facts

There’s helpful but uninformative:

Ivan: What’s the weather like today?

Adam: Sunny.

And then there’s uninformative as served up by the Journal of Biological Chemistry.

We’ve already recounted one teeth-grinding experience with the JBC, a publication of the American Society for Biochemistry and Molecular Biology. The case involved two papers in JBC by Axel Ullrich, an esteemed cancer researcher at the Max Planck Institute in Germany. According to Ullrich, one of his then-postdocs, Naohito Aoki, had manipulated figures that appeared in the papers, necessitating their retraction.

Round two involves another JBC retraction of a 2000 paper by Aoki and co-author Tsukasa Matsuda, titled ‘A cytosolic protein-tyrosine phosphatase PTP1B specifically dephosphorylates and deactivates prolactin-activated STAT5a and STAT5b.’ The paper has been cited more than 100 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge.

According to the notice: