Journal retracts embryo-sperm creation paper
Source: Agencies |
August 1, 2009, Saturday
|
Print Edition
Print Edition
A SCIENTIFIC journal has retracted a controversial paper claiming to have created the first human sperm from embryonic stem cells.
The journal's editor told science publication Nature that the study by scientists at Britain's Newcastle University was retracted because two paragraphs in its introduction had been plagiarized.
Newcastle University blamed the plagiarism on a research associate who has left the institution, and said the science behind the research, and its conclusions, were not in question.
Experts said the plagiarism charge did not necessarily undermine the rest of the paper, though they acknowledged concerns might now be raised about the study's credibility.
The Newcastle scientists reported last month that they had produced the sperm in a laboratory and that it could one day help infertile men father children. Critics said the sperm did not have the specific shape, movement or function of real sperm.
Graham Parker, editor of Stem Cells and Development, said on the journal's Website that the sperm study "is being retracted," without explaining why.
But Nature quoted him as saying that half of the introduction paragraphs were plagiarized from a 2007 review in the journal Biology of Reproduction.
Experts said Parker was right to retract the paper.
"This is clearly scientific misconduct," said Allan Pacey, secretary for the British Fertility Society.
"I can understand why people might think, if they were sloppy here, maybe they were sloppy elsewhere."
When the initial paper was published, Pacey said he was not convinced the cells produced could accurately be called spermatazoa.
"It was bad enough to begin with, and now we've got another scandal," he said.
Pacey said he was saddened and thought the fallout might confuse the public further and hurt scientists' credibility.
The field of stem-cell research has battled controversy before, as when South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk claimed falsely to have derived stem cells from a cloned human embryo in 2004.
Karim Nayernia, who led the sperm research at Newcastle University, was unavailable to comment.
Second try
But a statement released by the university blamed research associate Jae Ho Lee, who has since left the school, for the plagiarism. "No questions have been raised about the science conducted or the conclusions of the research," the statement said.
It added that the paper would now be submitted to another academic journal and that Newcastle University would be examining the supervision of research associates.
Elizabeth Wager, chairperson of the Committee on Publication Ethics, an international organization of publishers and editors, applauded the decision to retract the paper. "This sets a line in the sand," she said. "Editors have a responsibility to correct the scientific record if misconduct has occurred."
Wager said the plagiarism charge was serious, but less worrisome than data fabrication.
The journal's editor told science publication Nature that the study by scientists at Britain's Newcastle University was retracted because two paragraphs in its introduction had been plagiarized.
Newcastle University blamed the plagiarism on a research associate who has left the institution, and said the science behind the research, and its conclusions, were not in question.
Experts said the plagiarism charge did not necessarily undermine the rest of the paper, though they acknowledged concerns might now be raised about the study's credibility.
The Newcastle scientists reported last month that they had produced the sperm in a laboratory and that it could one day help infertile men father children. Critics said the sperm did not have the specific shape, movement or function of real sperm.
Graham Parker, editor of Stem Cells and Development, said on the journal's Website that the sperm study "is being retracted," without explaining why.
But Nature quoted him as saying that half of the introduction paragraphs were plagiarized from a 2007 review in the journal Biology of Reproduction.
Experts said Parker was right to retract the paper.
"This is clearly scientific misconduct," said Allan Pacey, secretary for the British Fertility Society.
"I can understand why people might think, if they were sloppy here, maybe they were sloppy elsewhere."
When the initial paper was published, Pacey said he was not convinced the cells produced could accurately be called spermatazoa.
"It was bad enough to begin with, and now we've got another scandal," he said.
Pacey said he was saddened and thought the fallout might confuse the public further and hurt scientists' credibility.
The field of stem-cell research has battled controversy before, as when South Korean scientist Hwang Woo-suk claimed falsely to have derived stem cells from a cloned human embryo in 2004.
Karim Nayernia, who led the sperm research at Newcastle University, was unavailable to comment.
Second try
But a statement released by the university blamed research associate Jae Ho Lee, who has since left the school, for the plagiarism. "No questions have been raised about the science conducted or the conclusions of the research," the statement said.
It added that the paper would now be submitted to another academic journal and that Newcastle University would be examining the supervision of research associates.
Elizabeth Wager, chairperson of the Committee on Publication Ethics, an international organization of publishers and editors, applauded the decision to retract the paper. "This sets a line in the sand," she said. "Editors have a responsibility to correct the scientific record if misconduct has occurred."
Wager said the plagiarism charge was serious, but less worrisome than data fabrication.
- About Us
- |
- Terms of Use
- |
-
RSS - |
- Privacy Policy
- |
- Contact Us
- |
- Shanghai Call Center: 962288
- |
- Tip-off hotline: 52920043
- 娌狪CP璇侊細娌狪CP澶05050403鍙-1
- |
- 浜掕仈缃戞柊闂讳俊鎭湇鍔¤鍙瘉锛31120180004
- |
- 缃戠粶瑙嗗惉璁稿彲璇侊細0909346
- |
- 骞挎挱鐢佃鑺傜洰鍒朵綔璁稿彲璇侊細娌瓧绗354鍙
- |
- 澧炲肩數淇′笟鍔＄粡钀ヨ鍙瘉锛氭勃B2-20120012
Copyright 漏 1999- Shanghai Daily. All rights reserved.Preferably viewed with Internet Explorer 8 or newer browsers.
