Stem cells researchers in Boston and Stockholm facing a strange and uncomfortable situation last week: scientific fraud accusations from an anonymous email sent not only for researchers in question but also to other leading biologists of stem cells, several scientists and journalists journals. In response, the journal in which one of the documents was published, Nature , contacted some of those on the original list to make a case for the scientific veracity of the paper. In the other case, scientists themselves have reacted, and the newspaper, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences ( PNAS ), decided that no further action is necessary.
For Konrad Hochedlinger of the Harvard Stem Cell Institute, it was a bad start to the week: Just after 6:00 last Monday, he and many others received an unsigned e-mail from a practically untraceable address, stemcellwatch@yahoo.com, highlighting what he said "appears to duplicate images and embryos used in a manuscript Nature published in 09." The e-mailer went on to detail misconduct claims, saying 3C, Hochedlinger and his co-authors used two pictures of the same embryo while claiming they were different.
"I was very shocked and upset that this anonymous email was sent and copied to half of the world of stem cells and the [ Boston ] Globe and Nature cell and science , "says Hochedlinger. Unsure how to respond, he began compiling images to show that he had photographed two different embryos, including an original photo that showed both in the same image. "We have evidence quite clear that these accusations are baseless," he said.
Nature declined to comment on the case but said the journal Hochedlinger subsequently emailed some of those copied on the e-mail with original images Hochedlinger had provided. The scientists said they either ignored the mail or seen clear differences in the two embryos.
On Friday 22 October, the group resurfaced again, this time charging a paper on stem cells in PNAS published in 09 contained duplicate images, pointing to the figure 5A. Contacted by Science about e-mail, one of the corresponding authors, Thomas Perlmann of the Karolinska Institute in Stockholm, said that the images are of triple immunohistochemical staining, thus in effect from the same set of cells "displayed as double staining for clarity."
Perlmann did not stop there. In a reply sent on Sunday to those on the email list stemcellwatch he and the second corresponding author, his colleague Karolinska Johan Ericson, gave a detailed refutation of the charges. They also noted that a sentence stating that the pictures were taken from triple immunohistochemistry was deleted from the original manuscript to save space. Perlmann said PNAS Editor Randy Schekman decided no published clarification is needed.
At the end of his note, and Perlmann Ericson wrote: "We regret that these serious allegations were made anonymously, we strongly believe in the concept of open and transparent communication on. alleged errors in the data published "the elusive e-mailers, who claim to belong to a group called the Stem Cell Research Watch group, responded to an email from Science saying they are "a group of students majoring in biology and often discuss documents that are taught in the classroom." they do not sign their names or say where they were based, and did not respond to a following email to request additional information.
Contrary to what appears here, PNAS working to publish a correction to the legend of the figure in question.
0 Komentar