“坚定不移地将中国科研拖入深渊”的SCI杂志主编
在美国论文抄袭监测网站PlagiarismWatch采用了知名英文抄袭查重软件系统iPlagiarism艾普蕾成功检测并报道了“狼狈为奸：英文论文代写公司和SCI杂志默契合作攫取中国人的钱”后，有个正义的外国学者(名字叫Ian RD)给他们网站留言，感谢他们为揭露这个丑陋的事件而付出的努力；这个学者（从英语表达看应该是个美国人）说PlagiarismWatch揭露的事件可能仅仅是冰山一角，他也于今年年初发现了一起类似的中国人抄袭剽窃事件（外国人真有正义感和多管闲事？还是中国作者涉嫌抄袭的英文文章太多而随处可见？），并于5月31日写信给了相关两个杂志的主编和提供了详细的抄袭证据（见后面的附信），但均石沉大海（可惜可叹！谁叫你没事管中国人的事情！另外，各位看官和这两个主编应该都没有这两篇中国文章的通讯作者的级别高！）。PlagiarismWatch为此还立马专门写了一个批判的专题http://plagiarismwatch.org/?p=1593，表达同情和抗议。
近年来中国发表SCI文章数量增长迅猛，相关部门领导和国人自我感觉也异常良好。为了顺应咱的心情和发展思路，也为了不得罪中国作者，达到在掏出中国人的最后一张钞票的同时将中国科研拖入深渊，这些个“知名”SCI杂志的外国籍主编就一起默契的“装聋作哑”：想撤稿门都没有！！（其所在杂志社是否也一起“装聋作哑”就不知道了）。听起来有点危言耸听？那事实说话：
该外国人举报的这两篇文章的相似之处：
1. 这两篇文章在同一天投稿于两个不同SCI杂志
2. 所有作者相同
3. 作者排序也相同
4. 通讯作者相同
5. 通讯作者Email也相同
6.作者单位相同
7.表2、图6B、图7B、图8B相同
8.两个杂志的影响因子“基本相同”（一个是2.926，另一个是2.326；这个应该是Thomson Reuter的功劳，作者们应该没有操作，呵呵）
9.两个杂志版面费一样（均是$3000，作者们也应该没有操作，呵呵）
10.所投稿杂志主编均是外国人（一个瑞典人，另一个美国人，作者们应该控制不了，呵呵）
11.所投稿杂志出版商均是世界级出版商（一个是斯普林格，另一个是爱思唯尔，名字听起来就洋气）
下面是两篇文章的比对信息（关于文章的具体信息请自己前往http://plagiarismwatch.org/?p=1593参观）：
有个读者在博文“狼狈为奸：英文论文代写公司和SCI杂志默契合作攫取中国人的钱”下面留言说这些事都是医生干的，没有生科院啥事，真的吗？
这不，生科院来了! 这两篇文章作者的第三个单位均是“医学与生科院”，
附上这个“多管闲事”的外国人在PlagiarismWatch上的留言和附信：
From: Ian RD
Subject: Follow up on the post regarding plagiarism of Chinese authors
Hi Editors,
I am writing to express my sincereappreciation for your work on investigating the plagiarism of Chinese authors.
In my humble opinion, what you discoveredmay just be the tip of an iceberg. I discovered similar issues earlier thisyear regarding two papers published in Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy andTumor Biology. I have contacted the Editor-in-Chief of the two journals.However, they never replied me, nor investigated the issue further.
Below please find my email to theEditor-in-Chief, along with the specific issues regarding the papers.
On Tue, May 31, 2016 at 7:55 PM, Ian RDwrote:
Dear Dr. Stigbrand,
I am writing this email to report apossible misconduct regarding a paper published in Tumor Biology (TB), in whichyou serve as the editor-in-chief. The paper is entitled “miR-143 inhibits tumorprogression by targeting FAM83F in esophageal squamous cell carcinoma”, and waspublished on January 13, 2016 (doi:10.1007/s13277-015-4760-9).
This manuscript is highly similar toanother paper published in Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy (B&P) entitled“MiR-1290 promotes cancer progression by targeting nuclear factor I/X(NFIX) inesophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC)” (doi:10.1016/j.biopha.2015.10.005).These two papers are authored by a same group of authors, and were submitted tothe two different journals on the same date (Aug. 22, 2015), as per informationprovided on the papers.
In particular, these two papers containlarge amount of verbatim texts, with the only difference being the name of themiRNA of interest (miR-1290 vs. miR-143). For example, a part of the abstractof the B&P paper (“Since microRNA … to regulate FAM83F expression”) isalmost identical to the abstract of the TB paper (“Since microRA … to regulateNFIX expression”). The Material and Methods and Result sections are highlysimilar between the two papers, with a lot of verbatim sentences. Such act mayconstitutes self-plagiarism and may not be tolerated in a highly reputablejournal like Tumor Biology.
More seriously, I noticed that a number offigure panels are identical between the two papers, which suggests that theauthors may falsified the figures or used the same data to support twodifferent conclusions. For example, the Figure 6B, 7B, and 8Bare exactly the same between the two papers, even for the error bars.Such act of possible data falsification or re-use without proper referenceshould also not be tolerated in your journal.
Taken together, I found a number of redflags for scientific misconduct in the aforementioned paper. I was wondering ifyou, as the editor-in-chief, and the Journal could formally look into thismatter, and take appropriate actions regarding this paper if necessary. Iincluded the links to the two papers for your reference.
TB paper: http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007%2Fs13277-015-4760-9
B&P paper:http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0753332215300688
Thanks for your attention and all the best,
Ian RD
***End of the email***
It would be appreciated if you couldinvestigate this issue further and expose such act, which seriously violatedacademic ethics.
Thanks and best regards,
Ian RD
—
This e-mail was sent from a contact form on Plagiarism Watch (http://plagiarismwatch.org)
欢迎加入本站公开兴趣群
高性能计算群
兴趣范围包括：并行计算，GPU计算，CUDA，MPI，OpenMP等各种流行计算框架，超级计算机，超级计算在气象，军事，航空，汽车设计，科学探索，生物，医药等各个领域里的应用
QQ群：326600878
