Falsified photos lead to retraction
MU might take steps to prevent future falsifying.
Published Aug. 21, 2007
Science magazine published a July 27 retraction letter written in response to doctored research photos submitted last year by an MU researcher. The current whereabouts of the researcher, post-doctorate fellow Kaushik Deb, are still unknown to colleagues.
Michael Roberts, MU professor of biochemistry, stated in the letter that he accepted full responsibility for the publication of the doctored photos. He attributed his folly to placing "excessive trust" in Deb and not verifying the raw data before the photos were published in the magazine in February 2006.
"We decided to withdraw the article in its entirety in view of the fact that the paper was founded at least in part on falsified or fabricated images," Roberts stated in the letter. "We deeply regret any scientific misconceptions that have resulted from the publication of this article."
Roberts, along with two other researchers, was cleared of any wrongdoing by MU officials in February 2007 and received no penalties.
Deb, who is accused of doctoring photos of developing mouse embryos in a study used for stem cell research, has since resigned from MU. Attempts by colleagues and MU officials to contact Deb have proven unsuccessful.
Roberts said this is the first case of alleged fraud brought against any researchers working in his laboratory. He said he was unaware of any motives Deb might have had for falsifying the images.
Robert Hall, MU associate vice chancellor for research, said that, though MU's image in the national research community would not necessarily be tarnished, additional steps might be taken by MU's researchers in the future to ensure the validity of further published materials.
"We certainly take it very seriously," Hall said. "Here at MU, we will be much more sensitive to the fact that digital alteration can occur."
Roberts said that also he doesn't think MU will catch any negative publicity from the incident.
"I don't think the university will suffer," Roberts said, "I would like to think that my own laboratory will not."
Roberts said a computer-based archiving system might be implemented to better verify the validity of research.
In a statement following Roberts' retraction, Natasha Pinol, a spokeswoman for Science magazine's publisher, said that, out of more than 900 scientific research papers presented by the publication every year, a "handful" usually result in some form of a printed retraction.
"In this case, we previously published an editorial expression of concern, and, now that the investigation at the University of Missouri is concluded, Dr. Roberts and colleagues have provided us with their retraction letter," Pinol said.
The magazine published its editorial concern in October 2006 after an outside researcher questioned the validity of the photos.