Elite Chinese University Fires Researchers Over Faked Nature Study
Listen to the full version
A prestigious Chinese university has stripped a prominent dean of his post and fired a lead researcher after an investigation confirmed intentional data fabrication in a highly touted cancer study published in the journal Nature.
On May 6, Tongji University announced the dismissal of Wang Ping from his role as dean of the School of Life Sciences and Technology, alongside the termination of lead author Jin Jiali for severe academic misconduct. The fraudulent findings were published in Nature and had been described by the research team as the culmination of “a decade in the making.” The paper endured nearly a year of intense scrutiny from independent scholars before authorities officially confirmed the fraud.
Unlock exclusive discounts with a Caixin group subscription — ideal for teams and organizations.
Save an extra $50. Introductory offer for new readers. Subscribe now.
- RELATED
- DIGEST HUB
Digest Hub
Back
- Tongji University dismissed dean Wang Ping and fired researcher Jin Jiali for fabricating data in their January 2025 Nature paper on HDAC6 sensing valine to induce cancer cell DNA damage.
- PubPeer exposed impossible stats (e.g., 10^-23 probability for 0.3% differences across 35 measurements; 1.5×10^-32 for decimal precision).
- Similar probes launched at Nankai and Sun Yat-sen Universities amid Chinese academic pressures.
1. Tongji University dismissed dean Wang Ping and fired lead researcher Jin Jiali on May 6 for intentional data fabrication in a Nature paper described as "a decade in the making," after nearly a year of scrutiny [para. 1][para. 2].
2. Published in January 2025, the paper "Human HDAC6 senses valine abundancy to regulate DNA damage" claimed HDAC6 detects valine starvation, relocates to the nucleus, activates TET2, causing toxic DNA damage to tumor cells [para. 3].
3. Researchers proposed dietary valine restriction to inhibit tumors, synergizing with PARP inhibitors for enhanced treatment [para. 4].
4. PubPeer scholars flagged unnatural data patterns like identical image overlaps and abnormal decimals; widespread dissection by researchers, bloggers, and scientists exposed misconduct [para. 5].
5. Nature promised a response when contacted by Caixin [para. 6].
6. Pre-publication reviews from 2022 noted blurry images, poor blots without controls, and mechanism implausibility in cancer cells, but massive sequencing data swayed reviewers to approve [para. 7][para. 8][para. 9][para. 10][para. 11].
7. Post-publication, PubPeer revealed impossible 0.3% additions across 35 measurements (probability 10^-23) and uniform one-decimal data over 70 groups despite varying cell counts (probability 1.5×10^-32), suggesting reverse-engineering [para. 12][para. 13][para. 17].
8. Image duplications led to a July 2025 erratum with replacements [para. 14][para. 15].
9. Further exposures included AI-detected uniform trends from single baselines, video analyses, and critiques by biologist Rao Yi; Wang promised raw data review [para. 18][para. 19].
10. Tongji launched investigation on April 16, 2026; Nature added concern note on April 23; 20 days later, confirmed Jin's fabrication and Wang's negligence, imposing penalties including firing Jin, demoting Wang, and bans [para. 20][para. 21].
11. Jin worked at Tongji Institute and hospital; Wang (PhD 2002) held U.S./China posts, became dean September 2025; paper funded by major state grants [para. 22][para. 23][para. 24][para. 25].
12. Similar scandals: Nankai's Chen Quan investigated May 1, 2026, for identical data in Nature Cancer paper [para. 26][para. 27].
13. Sun Yat-sen's Kang Tiebang probed May 5, 2026, over 2020 Nature Cell Biology paper with duplications [para. 28].
14. China's research boom ties publications, titles, grants to pressure, fostering fabrication risks; past case: Nankai's Cao Xuetao sanctioned for image issues, 16 retractions [para. 29][para. 30].
(Word count: 498)
- MOST POPULAR
Sign in with Google
Sign in with Facebook
Sign in with 财新