Dozens of papers co-authored by Nobel laureate raise concerns - Nature.com

Images showing the results of experiments successful molecular-biology probe papers are often scrutinized connected websites specified arsenic PubPeer. Credit: Shutterstock

Several probe articles co-authored by Nobel-prizewinning geneticist Gregg Semenza are being investigated by publishers aft net sleuths raised concerns astir the integrity of images successful the papers. Journals person already retracted, corrected oregon expressed concerns astir 17 papers implicit the past decade, and others are investigating image- and data-integrity issues successful further studies.

Semenza, who works astatine Johns Hopkins University successful Baltimore, Maryland, shared the 2019 Nobel prize successful physiology oregon medicine with 2 different scientists for discovering however cells consciousness and accommodate to oxygen availability successful the body. He published his Nobel-prizewinning enactment successful the 1990s; the latest concerns absorption connected related molecular-biology probe published since.

Image integrity successful technological papers has travel nether expanding scrutiny successful caller years, arsenic integer tools person made it easier for scientists to manipulate their results. There tin beryllium morganatic reasons to change images — to marque results clearer by raising opposition oregon colour balance, for example. Figures mightiness besides beryllium mistakenly mislabelled oregon go distorted portion the insubstantial is being prepared. But image-editing tools tin besides beryllium utilized to make fraudulent results.

Elisabeth Bik, a salient image-integrity advisor successful San Francisco, California, who is among those who person pointed retired irregularities successful enactment co-authored by Semenza, says that the fig of corrections seems tenable for a 20-year play successful a palmy laboratory and galore of the concerns perchance autumn into “sloppy subject territory”. But “five retractions for papers with representation manipulation is overmuch much than 1 should expect”, she adds.

Semenza did not respond to requests for remark from Nature’s quality team.

Image concerns

Commenters connected the website PubPeer — wherever users scrutinize published research, often anonymously — person questioned images successful 52 articles co-authored by Semenza that were published betwixt 2000 and 2021. Since 2011, 17 of these papers person been retracted, corrected oregon had an look of interest issued connected them. The editorial notices mention the imaginable alteration, reuse oregon incorrect labelling of images showing experimental results. Another 15 of the papers are presently nether probe astatine their respective journals, Nature’s quality squad has learned.

Across the 32 papers that person truthful acold drawn steadfast scrutiny, each database Semenza arsenic an author, but determination are galore combinations of antithetic co-authors. Semenza is the corresponding oregon co-corresponding writer connected 14 of these papers, which screen probe related to the molecular mechanisms of oxygen sensing successful antithetic types of cancer, and the relation and dysfunction of humor vessels, among different topics. No wrongdoing has been proven, and with a deficiency of clarity astir who contributed what to the papers, it is unclear who mightiness person been liable for immoderate errors oregon problems with images. Corresponding authors do, however, transportation work for ensuring a paper’s wide integrity.

In Bik’s opinion, “the information that determination are aggregate papers present retracted for manipulated images, and respective others inactive nether probe suggests an volition to mislead”.

Retractions and corrections

The archetypal station astir Semenza’s enactment appeared connected PubPeer successful 2015, but astir posts are from 2020 and 2021. Journals had issued 1 retraction successful 2011 and corrections successful 2013 to 2 papers Semenza co-authored, but the remainder of the editorial notices person appeared successful the past 2 years.

In 2021, 5 journals issued corrections connected 5 papers due to the fact that of errors including mislabelled information and the evident re-use of images. In March, the diary Cancer Research corrected 1 insubstantial and issued an look of interest connected different aft an probe recovered that the authors inadvertently presented the aforesaid information arsenic results of antithetic experiments, and reused information from an earlier publication.

And past month, the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences USA retracted 4 compartment biology papers co-authored by Semenza and corrected 3 others. The editorial notices picture concerns astir figures including imaginable information duplication — wherever 1 acceptable of results are utilized for much than 1 experimentation — and ‘splicing’ of immunoblot images (when circumstantial parts of an representation are chopped retired and relocated). In 3 of the 4 retraction notices, the authors accidental that updated figures oregon confirmatory experiments are elaborate successful caller articles uploaded to the bioRxiv preprint server. And successful each of the retraction notices, the authors accidental they judge the wide conclusions of the enactment stay valid but they are retracting the enactment due to the fact that of concerns implicit the figures.

A spokesperson for Johns Hopkins University says that the instauration “maintains the highest standards for accuracy and integrity successful research” and takes allegations of impropriety seriously. It adds that determination are “strict protocols and processes successful spot to vet immoderate specified allegations and to find an due way forward, if necessary”. They declined to disclose details of these reappraisal processes, oregon to remark connected whether determination were immoderate circumstantial allegations against Semenza oregon his group.

Further investigations

The twelve papers presently nether probe see 1 insubstantial successful Nature Genetics and 1 insubstantial in Oncogene, which are published by Springer Nature (Nature’s quality squad is autarkic of its publisher). Science Signalling, which is looking into 2 papers, has concluded an probe into 1 and says that it volition people an erratum soon.

Another title, The Journal of Physiology, says that it is reconsidering its presumption connected 2 papers that it had antecedently investigated successful airy of the caller retractions. A spokesperson for the diary says that it didn’t instrumentality enactment aft the archetypal probe due to the fact that the archetypal information were unavailable and “the solution of the fig successful the published insubstantial was excessively poor”.

Seven journals that published 20 of the papers co-authored by Semenza that person received comments connected PubPeer told Nature that they were alert of the criticisms raised but declined to remark connected them. Three different journals made nary comment, 2 said they were not alert of the allegations and were not investigating the papers and 1 did not respond to requests for comment.

A researcher successful the field, who wished to stay anonymous, says that they are awaiting the results of the investigations “with a substance of interest and interest”. (Several different researchers successful the tract contacted by Nature’s quality squad declined to sermon the irregularities successful papers co-authored by Semenza.)

The researcher says that Semenza’s astir influential publication to probe connected oxygen-sensing — the recognition of a macromolecule analyzable called HIF-1 — has stood the technological trial of being reproduced and built upon by others. “The enactment nether treatment [on PubPeer] does not person the aforesaid wide significance, though its full grade is large.” It remains to beryllium seen whether the problems with images impact the papers’ conclusions, the idiosyncratic says.