An investigation committee at Wayne State University (WSU) recommends that 42 articles from Fazlul Sarkar to be retracted (report finished August 31, 2015). This article represents one of them.
This information was published by Retraction Watch (November 17, 2016) and you can find a link to the full report here:
http://retractionwatch.com/2016/11/17/details-of-investigative-report-into-sarkar-released-by-aclu/
This article should therefore no longer be cited.
2018 retraction. https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0205288
In this article [1], concerns were raised about similarities between the following figure panels:
Fig 2A, A clone + NAC cells and Fig 6D, A clone Fig 3A, A clone at 0 h and Fig 3A, B clone + NAC at 24 h Fig 2B, 4T1 cells and Fig 2B, C clone + NAC Fig 4C and 4D, H2O2 panels Fig 4D, control and Fig 6C, A clone Fig 4C, Mito-TEMPO and Fig 6D, A clone shRNA Fig 6C, A clone shRNA and Fig S2A, B clone Fig 5B, β-actin lanes 1, 2 (labelled “4T1 cells” and “C clone”, respectively) and Fig 6B β-actin lanes 1, 2 (labelled “A clone” and “A clone shRNA”, respectively) Fig 5B β-actin lane 5 (labelled “D clone + NAC”) and Fig 6B HIF-1α lane 1 (labelled “A clone”) In addition, it was noted that in Fig 3B, the 24 h panels each have clusters of cells that appear highly similar to and in the same location as cell clusters in the 0 h panels, with additional cells present in the 24 h panel. There are also cell clusters similar in appearance and location in the 0 h, 24 h, and 48 h data for the C clone, and in the 24 h and 48 h data for C clone + NAC.
Vertical discontinuities suggestive of image splicing were also noted in Fig 5B between lanes 1 and 2 in the Hypoxic HIF-1α blot.
A Correction was published in 2014 in which the authors provided new panels for Fig 3A (B clone + NAC, 24 h), and for the Western blot and cell images in Fig 6B, C, D [2].
Wayne State University investigated this work and found evidence of data duplications, image adjustments, and data mislabeling in Figs 2, 4, 5, and 6. The corresponding author did not provide the original data and records to the investigating committee.
In light of these concerns, and in line with the institution’s recommendation, the PLOS ONE Editors retract this article.
QY and CC agreed with the retraction. JM, QZ, SC, BF, LM, FHZ, JX and ZW did not respond.
"Cancer researcher hit with 10-year ban on federal US funding for nearly 100 faked images"
Also, I was Peer 1 on post #2. The second image in my post #2, Figure 3, is not showing up correctly, so here it is again:
Reported to the journal in August 2014.
Attach files by dragging & dropping, selecting them, or pasting from the clipboard. Uploading your files… We don’t support that file type. with a PNG, GIF, or JPG. Yowza, that’s a big file. with a file smaller than 1MB. This file is empty. with a file that’s not empty. Something went really wrong, and we can’t process that file.
Comment must be at least 15 characters.