E-Paper
NCBS paper retraction: TIFR ethics panel finds evidence of image manipulation
The paper, titled “Discovery of iron-sensing bacterial riboswitches”, drew the attention of many readers on review website PubPeer. Many reviewers pointed out suspicious features in certain images in the paper
The Academic Ethics Committee of Tata Institute of Fundamental Research (TIFR) looking into allegations of data manipulation by researchers has found ‘compelling evidence’ of image manipulation and result falsification in a scientific paper. This is in connection to a paper published by scientists from National Centre for Biological Sciences (NCBS), Bengaluru, which had to be retracted following allegations of manipulation of raw data.
On October 5, 2020, a team of researchers from a laboratory in NCBS, which is a part of TIFR, published a scientific paper in the peer-reviewed journal Nature Chemical Biology. Soon after, the paper, titled “Discovery of iron-sensing bacterial riboswitches”, drew the attention of many readers on review website PubPeer. Many reviewers pointed out suspicious features in certain images in the paper.
After Arati Ramesh, a senior author of the paper and principal investigator, brought these concerns to the attention of NCBS, the institution initiated an inquiry. The committee completed its investigation on November 23, 2020 and concluded that image manipulation had indeed occurred, and were carried out by a single individual. “This individual is no longer affiliated with NCBS. In accordance with the committee’s recommendations, Ramesh initiated the process of retracting the paper on February 1, 2021. The final retraction occurred on June 30, 2021,” said NCBS in a statement.
Also Read | Maharashtra students union seeks nod for ITI students’ travel by train
TIFR, the parent institute, set up an investigation by its ethics committee. In a statement issued on Thursday, the ethics committee said, “There is compelling evidence which indicate that the image manipulation and result falsification in the NCB paper (now retracted) were carried out entirely by the first two authors. The first author has admitted to his role in the offence. The third co-author, as well as the fourth and corresponding author (Principal Investigator, PI), were unaware of this malpractice, and did not encourage it in any way.”
The committee considered two papers for its investigation: the paper that appeared in the journal Nature Chemical Biology and was later retracted by the journal and another that appeared in the Journal of Molecular Biology (JMB), that contained an error traceable to inadvertent mislabelling of two samples.
The committee found that in the second paper, no malpractice of data or image manipulation was found in this paper. “Once this mistake is corrected, the findings reported are genuine. The journal has accepted the explanation of the authors, and will publish a suitable corrigendum.”
However, for the first paper, the committee said that the corresponding author and PI of the laboratory must bear the overall responsibility for not subjecting ‘results’ to proper scientific scrutiny before the paper was communicated for publication.
The committee also found substance in allegations of authoritarian conduct by Ramesh in her laboratory environment. “The committee is of the view that no lapses in the behaviour of the PI ─ in any way ─ justify dishonest practices by any of her lab members,” it said.
TIFR director S Ramakrishnan said he had received the conclusions and recommendations of the ethics committee. “We will implement its recommendations,” he said.
“The TIFR Management accepts the findings of the TAEC, and will be considering its recommendations with utmost seriousness. TIFR as an institution remains committed to maintaining the highest standards in matters of ethics, scientific output and an amicable work atmosphere. The Management will take all efforts to see that systems are put in place to ensure that incidents like the current one cannot be repeated in the future,” the institute said in a statement.
The committee recommended that Ramesh be immediately counselled to be more professional in her scientific practices and her conduct in the laboratory; this should be monitored by the Centre.
