It was because the work couldn't be replicated that David Vaux says he asked to retract a paper he wrote — though the work that could not be reproduced was not originally done by his lab. At Retraction Watch, Vaux recounts that, in the mid-1990s, he reviewed a manuscript from Bellgrau et al.

Get the full story

This story is free
for registered users

Registering provides access to this and other free content.

Register now.

Already have an account?
Login Now.

Related Posts

Retraction Time

STAP Papers Retracted

Papers Pulled

It's a Good Thing

In PNAS this week: rare variants linked to bleeding disorder, comparison of whole-exome and whole-genome sequencing, and more.

George Church tells The Sunday Times that his group has inserted some woolly mammoth genes into elephant cells.

A Scientific Reports editor resigns over a new policy at the journal allowing researchers to pay to fast track the peer review of their manuscripts, and poll.

The National Cancer Institute's Harold Varmus discusses the state of cancer research with the New York Times.