Organic chemists and readers of this blog will recall that earlier this summer, Amos B.

Smith III—the Editor-in-Chief of Organic Letters—penned an editorial documenting that he hired a data analyst to examine spectra and other data submitted to the journal for possible manipulation.

Dear Bracher, Thank you for bringing these discrepancies to my attention.

The responsibility to foster a research environment where all involved can confidently present their results, even if they are not optimal, resides with each research supervisor and Corresponding Author.

At times, the inherent power of a research advisor’s position can create an atmosphere that leads some to embellish results.

Most people recognize that relationships end for all sorts of reasons.

Some are nasty, some are amicable and some are mutual.

Guidelines for a course of conduct by those engaged in the publication of chemical research, specifically, editors, authors, and manuscript reviewers are set forth in ACS Ethical Guidelines to Publication of Chemical Research Editor/1218054468605/ Interestingly, there are a few more papers (listing Anxionnat as first author and Cossy as corresponding author) where you might notice similar-looking spectra: Anxionnat, B.; Pardo, D. This entry was posted by Paul Bracher on Monday, August 19th, 2013 at AM and is filed under Chem Bark Investigations, Ethics, Notable Chemists, Organic, Piquant Papers, Scientific Culture, Scientific Literature, Scientific Misconduct, Scientific Publishing.

You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed.

You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Rejection on any level sucks, no matter how you slice it.

But they generally follow the same pattern – relationship ends, one or both parties grieve and then move on.