Cell Microbiol. 2020 Nov;22(11):e13259. doi: 10.1111/cmi.13259. Epub 2020 Sep 22.
"MiRNA-218 regulates osteoclast differentiation and inflammation response in periodontitis rats through MMP9", Cell. Microbiol. 2019;21:e12979, by Jie Guo, Xuemin Zeng, Jie Miao, Chunpeng Liu, Fulan Wei, Dongxu Liu, Zhong Zheng, Kang Ting, Chunling Wang, and Yi Liu. The Editors of Cellular Microbiology and the publisher John Wiley & Sons agree to publish an Expression of Concern regarding the above article, published online in Cellular Microbiology on November 16, 2018, in Wiley Online Library (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cmi.12979). In September 2019, the journal was contacted regarding concerns about the data presented in Figures 6 and 7 because of high level of similarities in the graphs presented in these figures. The different bars in the graphs show identical height. The standard deviation bars are also of identical length. Although one graph expresses the number of TRAP-positive cells (Figure 6b) and the other graphs express the relative mRNA expression of different osteoclast-related genes (Figure 6c-g), all graphs are identical. The bars in the graphs in Figure 7 that represent 5 different osteoclast genes show the same height. Figures 6 and 7 show identical mRNA expression for a series of different genes: V-ATPase, NFATc1, CTSK, DC-STAMP and TRAP. In December 2019, the journal requested the authors to provide the raw data of the experiments presented in the article and for explanations of the similarities. The authors responded that the similarities were due to unintentional errors and provided Excel spread sheets containing processed data in March 2020. The data provided in the Excel sheets that were sent by the authors were analyzed and it was concluded that the calculations as shown in the Excel sheets are correct. However, the concerns raised regarding similarities in the heights of bars representing different parameters and narrow range of standard deviations presented in Figures 6-7 remained. The authors disagree with the concerns raised. In addition, the editors were concerned by manipulations of western blot images to represent single bands instead of doublets for COL1 in Figures 5 and 8 and for MMP9 in Figures 3A and C, 4C, 5A and D, and 8A. The first issue concerning COL1 bands has been addressed and corrected during the peer-review process. The latter has been clarified after publication and following a request from the editors for the raw data of all figures in the article. In the published article, western blots of MMP-9 in Figures 3A and C, 4C, 5A and D, and 8A show active-MMP-9 only and do not include pro-MMP-9 bands that were present in the original western blot experiments. The authors explained that on the original blots that were provided during the peer-review process, MMP-9 show doublets that represent pro-MMP-9 and active-MMP-9. As no significant difference was found for pro-MMP-9, the authors only presented single bands for active-MMP-9 in the publication version. The authors' institution, Shandong University, did not respond to a request from the Publisher and the Editor-in-Chief to investigate whether the data arose from the originally reported experiments, are unmodified, and are suitable for publication. As a result, the journal is issuing this expression of concern to readers.
《微小RNA-218通过基质金属蛋白酶9调节牙周炎大鼠破骨细胞分化和炎症反应》,作者为郭杰、曾雪敏、苗杰、刘春鹏、魏福兰、刘东旭、郑忠、丁康、王春玲和刘毅。发表于《细胞微生物学》2019年;21:e12979。《细胞微生物学》编辑及出版商约翰·威利父子公司同意就上述文章发布关注声明。该文章于2018年11月16日在线发表于《细胞微生物学》,刊载于威利在线图书馆(https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/cmi.12979)。2019年9月,期刊收到关于图6和图7中数据的疑虑,原因是这些图中的图表相似度极高。图中不同的条显示相同的高度。标准差条的长度也相同。尽管一个图表示抗酒石酸酸性磷酸酶阳性细胞数量(图6b),其他图表示不同破骨细胞相关基因的相对mRNA表达(图6c - g),但所有图都是一样的。图7中代表5种不同破骨细胞基因的条显示相同的高度。图6和图7显示一系列不同基因(V - ATP酶、活化T细胞核因子1、组织蛋白酶K、树突状细胞特异性跨膜蛋白和抗酒石酸酸性磷酸酶)的mRNA表达相同。2019年12月,期刊要求作者提供文章中实验的原始数据并解释这些相似性。作者回应称这些相似性是无意的错误,并于2020年3月提供了包含处理后数据的Excel电子表格。对作者发送的Excel表格中的数据进行分析后得出结论,Excel表格中的计算是正确的。然而,关于图6 - 7中代表不同参数的条高度相似以及标准差范围狭窄的疑虑仍然存在。作者不同意所提出的疑虑。此外,编辑们还关注到在图5和图8中针对I型胶原(COL1)以及图3A和C、4C、5A和D以及8A中针对基质金属蛋白酶9(MMP9)的蛋白质免疫印迹图像被处理为只显示单条带而非两条带。关于COL1条带的第一个问题在同行评审过程中已得到解决和纠正。后者在发表后以及编辑要求提供文章所有图的原始数据后得到了澄清。在已发表的文章中,图3A和C、4C、5A和D以及8A中MMP - 9的蛋白质免疫印迹仅显示活化的MMP - 9,不包括原始蛋白质免疫印迹实验中存在的前体MMP - 9条带。作者解释说,在同行评审过程中提供的原始印迹上,MMP - 9显示两条带,分别代表前体MMP - 9和活化的MMP - 9。由于前体MMP - 9没有显著差异,作者在发表版本中仅展示了活化MMP - 9的单条带。作者所在机构山东大学未回应出版商和主编关于调查这些数据是否源自最初报告的实验、是否未被修改以及是否适合发表的请求。因此,期刊向读者发布此关注声明。