BirdForum is the net's largest birding community dedicated to wild birds and birding, and is absolutely FREE!

Register for an account to take part in lively discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Klaas van Dijk" data-source="post: 3424954" data-attributes="member: 115771">Dear all,A report of a thorough investigation into the serious allegations of fabricated and/or falsified data in the two papers on the breeding biology of the Basra Reed Warbler in the journal 'Zoology in the Middle East' (Al-Sheikhly et al. 2013, 2015) has been released on 1 July 2016.The investigation was focused on:(a) getting access to raw research data reportedly collected in the years 2006 and 2007 and reportedly collected for the statement “males are often polygynous (42.9%, n= 317 observed males)”;(b) getting reviews from experts about the allegations;(c) getting responses from the authors and their affiliations on preliminary versions of the investigation;(d): getting a good picture of the role of the three authors and their affiliations.The main findings of the investigation are:(a) the set of raw research data is unavailable. The first author refuses to release them, the last author and his affiliation have never properly responded on requests to release them. The data are also not in the possession of Taylor & Francis, the publisher, and Max Kasparek, the Editor-in-Chief of the journal;(b) all responses from the first and the last author and from the affiliation of the last author are invalid and/or insufficient and/or unsatisfactory;(c) lots of experts, including members of the editoral board of the journal, support the views of several organisations and of a large amount of ornithologists and others that the papers contain fabricated and/or falsified data;(d) we were unable to find experts who endorse the views of the first and of the last author that their papers are based on solid scientific data;(e) we were unable to locate a university in Saudi Arabia who had endorsed this study;(f) there is no conclusive evidence about an involvement of the second author, there is no conclusive evidence of an endorsement by the affiliation of the first author.The investigation has determined that there is a preponderance of evidence that the allegations of fabricated and/or falsified data in Al-Sheikhly et al. (2013, 2015) are founded. Both publications must thus be retracted to correct the scientific record. The report is since 1 July 2016 in the possession of the publisher and the EiC of the journal. We have asked them to sent us in due time a point-by-point rebuttal (of an expert with a name and contact details in case we want to have a scientific dialogue with this expert) in case they disagree with (one or more items of) the report. A formal 'Expression of Concern' has been published on 5 July 2016: "We have been informed of a question of the reliability and validity of the data reported in the above work. We note that the data described in this article have not been independently verified, and we recommend that readers take this into account when reading the paper or performing further work based on this study.” It seems that this Expression of Concern is a direct result of the recent release of the report. The report is not confidential. Please contact me if you would like to get a copy. Please distribute widely. See <a href="http://www.osme.org/content/basra-reed-warbler-update" target="_blank">http://www.osme.org/content/basra-reed-warbler-update</a> for backgrounds. We are always willing to have a scientific dialogue with anyone who is not endorsing the conclusion of this investigation. We invite all opponents to join the debate at <a href="https://pubpeer.com/publications/CBDA623DED06FB48B659B631BA69E7" target="_blank">https://pubpeer.com/publications/CBDA623DED06FB48B659B631BA69E7</a>Klaas</blockquote>

Verification