Proteomics paper retracted for plagiarized figure of mysterious origin

The journal Proteomics has retracted a paper for a plagiarized figure — but how the authors came to possess the image in the first place remains a mystery.

Here’s the notice:

Allergy researchers lose second paper over “severe problems” with data

Last spring, we reported on the retraction in Clinical and Translational Allergy of a 2011 paper by researchers in Egypt and Finland after “severe problems in the data set” were uncovered. The notice cited an earlier study, from 2009, in Acta Paediatrica, that formed the basis for the subsequent trial.

At the time, the Acta Paediatrica paper still stood. No longer:

Paper linking vitamin C and reduced asthma retracted after authors find “severe” problems with data

It’s never a good sign when a paper has “severe” problems with its data. But when even the researchers are at a loss to explain how those problems made their way into the manuscript, well, that’s downright alarming.

Consider: The journal Clinical and Translational Allergy has retracted a 2011 article by researchers from Egypt and Finland, who have been studying the effects of vitamin C on childhood asthma. In a previous article, published in 2009 in Acta Paediatrica, members of the team reported that

After Luxembourg firing, U. Eastern Finland reportedly looking into Carlberg, too

The news isn’t getting any better for Carsten Carlberg. Earlier this month, Carlberg received a pink slip from the University of Luxembourg in the wake of a data fraud scandal involving a former student named Tatjana Degenhardt. As we wrote last November, journals retracted two of Carlberg’s papers after Degenhardt was found to have fabricated data. Although Degenhardt worked at the University of Kuopio (now the University of Eastern Finland), and Carlberg was not accused of wrongdoing, officials in Luxembourg decided that the mess threatened the public image of their fledgling institution and fired him.

We’d assumed that the University of Eastern Finland considered the matter finished, and that what happened in the Grand Duchy would stay in the Grand Duchy. But we were wrong.

Carsten Carlberg out at University of Luxembourg

The University of Luxembourg has fired researcher Carsten Carlberg after concluding that his name was a drag on the institution.

Here’s an English  translation of an article about the firing, which many readers were kind enough to forward to us:

U. Luxembourg official offers more detail — or tries to — on Carsten Carlberg case

We’re continuing to try to find out more about the developing story surrounding Carsten Carlberg. Carlberg, as we have reported, was senior author on two papers retracted last year because one of the authors, a graduate student in Carlberg’s lab at the University of Eastern Finland  (formerly Kuopio), fabricated data.

Carlberg holds a dual appointment with the University of Luxembourg, which recently announced the results of a months-long investigation into his behavior.

We have been relying on unofficial translations of a May 20th statement by university officials such as this one, by a generous Retraction Watch reader:

Four genetics papers retracted for duplication

Petter Portin, of the University of Turku, Finland, has been forced to retract four papers because they were duplicates of work he had already published.

Two of those retractions appear in the February 2011 issue of Hereditas. Here’s one retraction notice (link added):

The following article from Hereditas: Portin, P. ‘The effect of the mus309 mutation, defective in DNA double-strand break repair, on crossing over in Drosophila melanogaster suggests a mechanism for interference’, published online in Wiley Online Library (http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/) on 1 September 2009, Hereditas, volume 146, pp. 162–176, has been retracted by agreement between the author, the Editor-in-Chief, Anssi Saura, and John Wiley & Sons A/S. The retraction has been agreed due to prior publication of a similar article in Genetica.

And the other (link added):

*Grad student’s misdeeds may cost prof Carsten Carlberg a job

In November, we reported on two retractions in Cell and the Journal of Molecular Biology involving misconduct in the lab of biochemist Carsten Carlberg, of the University of Eastern Finland, in Kuopio.

Carlberg also holds an appointment in computational biology at the University of Luxembourg, which last year launched an investigation — at his behest, he says — into the case. Well, the officials in Luxembourg finally have spoken, and Carlberg, it seems, may soon be out of his job there, the Tageblatt newspaper reports.

Carlberg, to our knowledge, has never been accused of ethical violations in the case, and the inquiry didn’t change that. Rather, the bad actor appears to be his former post-doc graduate student in Finland, Tatjana Degenhardt. But the University of Luxembourg may seek to dismiss Carlberg after concluding that, as the senior author of the two retracted articles, he bore responsibility for the validity of the results and, by implication, the deception.

Ironically, Carlberg says he asked the school to undertake the investigation even though none of Degenhardt’s research had been conducted using that school’s resources. In an email today to Retraction Watch, he writes:

More on the latest Cell retraction: PI says a graduate student was at fault

Carsten Carlberg

This morning we reported on a new retraction in Cell involving fraud from a lab in Finland, which led us to a second retraction of a paper by the same group in the Journal of Molecular Biology. The first author on both papers was Tatjana Degenhardt, who at the time was a graduate student in the lab of Carsten Carlberg, professor of biochemistry at the University of Kuopio.

A few minutes ago Retraction Watch spoke with Carlberg, who had this to say about Degenhardt:

Cell retraction for bogus images in genetics paper reveals another, in Journal of Molecular Biology

Call it bad luck, but the journal Cell has been victimized again by image manipulation. For the second time this month, the publication has retracted a paper whose authors acknowledged that one of them had played around with the figures.

Published in August 2009, the paper, “Population-Level Transcription Cycles Derive from Stochastic Timing of Single-Cell Transcription,” has been cited 16 times, according to Thomson Scientific’s Web of Knowledge. It purported to show using computer modeling that

transcriptional cycling, i.e., periodic assembly of transcription factors and their cofactors and the resulting cyclical accumulation of mRNA, may stem from stochastic timing and sequential activation of transcription in individual cells.

The authors, from several European institutions, presented experimental data to back up their computer model, including multiple figures. Some of those, they now admit, were fabricated — to the point where the whole paper collapsed: