2014.05.29【英译中】Researcher Behind Stem Cell Controversy Agrees to Retraction

发表于:2014-05-29 10:40 [只看楼主] [划词开启]


A STAP backward? STAP stem cells may not have contributed to multiple cell types in this mouse fetus, as claimed.

STAP细胞要倒退了?有消息称,STAP干细胞或将无法在老鼠胚胎中形成多种细胞类型。        (STAP:“刺激触发采集多功能(Stimulus Triggered Acquisition of Pluripotency)”细胞---本人注解)


After steadfastly defending her work against accusations of falsified data and an official misconduct ruling, the lead author on two controversial stem cell papers published this year in Nature has reportedly agreed to retract one of them. Earlier today,Japanese media began reporting that stem cell researcher Haruko Obokata of the RIKEN Center for Developmental Biology in Kobe, Japan, is willing to retract a paper concluding that so-called STAP stem cells can form a wide variety of tissues, but does not intend to retract the paper describing how to make those stem cells.

在受到涉嫌数据造假指控和一项官方不当裁定之后,第一作者(小保方晴子--本人注)--今年在出版的《自然》杂志上曾发表过两篇饱受争议的关于干细胞内容的论文--同意撤销其中的一篇论文。今天早些时候,日本媒体报道称,来自日本理化学研究所再生科学综合研究中心的小保方晴子将撤销一篇关于所谓的STAP干细胞能够形成多种类型组织的论文,但同时也表示不会撤销另一篇关于如何生成干细胞的论文。


Along with colleagues in the United States and Japan, Obokata described online on 29 January in Nature a new method for reprogramming mature cells into stem cells. The technique, called stimulus-triggered acquisition of pluripotency (STAP), appeared amazingly simple—exposing mature cells to an acid bath or physical pressure could seemingly switch them into stem cells. But it drew almost immediate accusations of image manipulation and plagiarism. In April, an investigating committee at RIKEN ruled that the issues with the papers constituted research misconduct, but did not call for their retraction. Obokata’s lawyer now tells the Japanese press that she will retract a secondary paper describing what STAP cells can develop into, but not the methods article, in which the committee had identified image manipulation and data apparently reused from Obokata’s graduate thesis.
今年1月29日,小保方晴子与其美国和日本的同事一起通过网络在《自然》杂志上公开了一种重新将成熟细胞转化为干细胞的技术方法。这种技术称之为“刺激触发采集多功能”,即STAP。它运用起来貌似十分简单--将成熟细胞置于酸洗环境或物理压力环境中,这样就会将这些成熟细胞转换成为干细胞。但此技术一经公布,即招致通过影像处理和剽窃的指控。四月,一个在再生科学综合研究中心负责调查的调查委员会裁定这篇论文存在技术层面的不当行为,但没有宣布撤销该论文。小保方晴子的律师日前对日本媒体表示,小保方晴子将撤销第二篇关于STAP细胞如何演变(而不是介绍方法的那篇)的论文,这篇论文经调查委员会鉴定,其中的影像处理方式和数据都明显来源于小保方晴子的毕业论文。

Obokata has argued that the problems with the papers were the result of inexperience, not deliberate wrongdoing, and that STAP cells really do exist. After the ruling, she issued a statement saying that she intended to appeal the judgment.
小保方晴子辩解道,这篇论文招致的问题源于缺乏经验,而非故意为之,同时STAP细胞的确存在。裁定后,她发表了一篇声明表示将予以上诉。

The Japan Times reports that at least two of Obokata’s 10 co-authors on the letter have also agreed to the rejection, including Teruhiko Wakayama of the University of Yamanashi, the paper’s last author. Wakayama has been consistently critical of the work, telling the Japanese press he had “lost faith” in the paper, and calling for its retraction. However, Charles Vacanti of Brigham and Women's Hospital (BWH) in Boston, last author on the main article and Obokata’s former adviser, has continued to defend the research. A BWH spokesperson told ScienceInsider that Vacanti had no comment on Obokata’s announcement.
日本时报报道,曾共同署名发表该论文十人中至少有两人支持对小保方晴子的裁定,其中包括最后署名的来自山梨大学的若山照彦。若山照彦一直怀疑这个项目,他告诉日本媒体在这篇论文中他“迷失了自我”并且要求撤销这篇论文。然而,来自位于波士顿布莱根妇女医院的查尔斯·文森提--他是这篇论文的高级通讯作者同时也曾是小保方晴子的顾问--表示将继续支持这项研究。布莱根妇女医院的发言人日前告诉ScienceInsider,文森提还没有对小保方晴子的公告发表声明。

Willingness to retract one paper but not the other is a sign of the lingering disagreement among the co-authors, says stem cell researcher Paul Knoepfler of the University of California, Davis. He argued in a blog post earlier this week that Nature should editorially retract both. “It would be naive to think that only the letter [the second paper] can be retracted and that the [methods] article will remain with the STAP cell narrative overall having any legitimacy,” he told ScienceInsider in an e-mail. “I believe the ultimate fates [of the two papers] are tightly tied together.”
来自加州大学的干细胞研究员Paul Knoepfler表示,撤销其中一篇论文而非另外一篇说明这些共同署名的作者们内部出现了分歧。在本周早些时候发表的一篇博文中他认为《自然》杂志应当以编辑身份同时撤销这两篇论文。在给ScienceInsider写的一封电子邮件中,Paul Knoepfler表示:“只撤销第二篇论文,而继续保留另一篇关于STAP细胞生成方法的论文的做法无疑没有任何合理性,太过于天真了。我坚信最终这两篇论文的命运将紧密联系在一起。”

最后编辑于:2014-10-29 20:50
分类: 英语
全部回复 (18) 回复 反向排序

  • 0

    点赞

  • 收藏

  • 扫一扫分享朋友圈

    二维码

  • 分享

课程推荐

需要先加入社团哦

编辑标签

最多可添加10个标签,不同标签用英文逗号分开

保存

编辑官方标签

最多可添加10个官方标签,不同标签用英文逗号分开

保存
知道了

复制到我的社团