The scientific community is abuzz as Science journal is finally contemplating the retraction of a controversial 2010 paper that claimed the discovery of a bacterium capable of substituting arsenic for phosphorus in its chemical makeup. "We feel the best thing to do would be to retract the paper," stated Holden Thorp, the journal's editor-in-chief, in an article published by the New York Times on Tuesday.
The article revisits Felisa Wolfe-Simon, the lead author of the contentious study, who withdrew from the scientific community and public life following the intense scrutiny and criticism her work received. After years away from the limelight, Wolfe-Simon has returned to the laboratory and was awarded a NASA exobiology grant in 2024.
Retraction Watch readers may recall that Science published numerous technical comments and two studies that refuted the original findings. In 2012, David Sanders, an emerging figure in scientific investigation, argued that the "only responsible action on the part of Science would be to retract the original article." He renewed his call for retraction again in 2021.
In 2012, Retraction Watch inquired if Science had asked the authors to consider retracting their article. At that time, the journal responded that, "Except in rare cases, corrections, clarifications, or retractions should ideally be initiated by the original research authors."
The New York Times article suggests that the journal's stance has evolved. Recently, Holden Thorp linked to the Times article on his LinkedIn page, expressing that, "Science is of the view that the paper should be retracted. We have not done so yet, because we are working with the authors to ensure that they have every opportunity to understand our position and to make any additional arguments."
As this topic continues to generate interest and discussion within the scientific community, the potential retraction of the paper remains a developing story. Stay tuned for further updates.
If you appreciate the work of Retraction Watch, consider making a tax-deductible contribution to support their efforts. You can follow them on X or Bluesky, like them on Facebook, add them to your RSS reader, or subscribe to their daily digest. Additionally, if you discover a retraction that's not in their database, they invite you to let them know. For comments or feedback, contact them via email.
