Academic Integrity Review Report: β2-tubulin regulates the development and migration of eupyrene sperm in Spodoptera frugiperda

Academic fraud report · Geng Detector

Summary

Verdict: Questionable (yellow flag). The review identified two confirmed metadata/copy-editing errors in the published paper (DOI: 10.1007/s00018-025-05722-9). First, the Authors' Contributions section lists 'G.H.' among supervisors, yet no author with initials G.H. exists among the ten listed authors, indicating a templating error. Second, the Funding section references 'Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities of the Central South University' for Shun-Fan Wu, but no author is affiliated with Central South University; Shun-Fan Wu's affiliation is Nanjing Agricultural University. These strongly suggest template reuse. Image manipulation analysis was not possible due to lack of image data. Data consistency checks (mathematical modeling vs. experimental hatch rates of 0.91 and 0.75) showed internal logical coherence, with no signs of fabricated data. Confidence is high for the metadata findings; image-related concerns remain unverified.

Verdict

� Questionable — Confirmed editorial/metadata errors; image analysis inconclusive; data logic intact.

Key findings

Finding 1 (Image reuse/manipulation): Unable to verify. The review operated on text only; no image pixel data was available for Western blot, fluorescence, or composite-image analysis across Figures 1–9. Severity: 🟡 Unverifiable. Status: ⚠️ Insufficient evidence.
Finding 2 (Authorship/contribution mismatch — CONFIRMED): The Authors' Contributions section credits "Supervision: G.H., C.F.G., J.C., and S.F.W.", but the ten authors are Hao Sun, Ling-Ao Bu, Xin-Yue Zhang, Zhi-Ruo Zhang, Shao-Cong Su, Di Guo, Cong-Fen Gao, Subba Reddy Palli, Jackson Champer, and Shun-Fan Wu. No "G.H." appears in the byline. This is almost certainly a leftover initials string from a prior manuscript template. Severity: 🟠. Status: ✅ Confirmed.
Finding 3 (Funding/affiliation mismatch — CONFIRMED): The Funding section cites "Fundamental Research Funds for Central Universities of the Central South University, KJJQ2025014, Shun-Fan Wu", yet Shun-Fan Wu is affiliated with Nanjing Agricultural University and no author lists Central South University. Severity: �. Status: ✅ Confirmed.
Finding 4 (Data consistency — CLEAR): The mathematical model's assumed unviable egg fraction (0.09, yielding 0.91 mean hatch rate) aligns with the reported experimental hatch rate (91%). The reported 75% female sterility after B2t−/− male mating matches the model's parameter setting that 75% of such crosses yield zero hatch rate. Sample sizes (n=34–37 mating pairs; n=3 for qPCR) are typical for entomological experiments. Severity: ✅ Clear. Status: ✅ Confirmed.

Evidence highlights

Author byline (10 names) contains no initials matching "G.H.", directly contradicting the supervision list on page 16.
Funding grant text references "Central South University", which does not appear in any author affiliation; corresponding author Shun-Fan Wu is listed under Nanjing Agricultural University.
Quantitative check: 1 − 0.09 = 0.91 (model) matches reported 91% wild-type hatch rate; 75% sterility reported in results matches the model's 75% zero-hatch scenario for B2t−/− × WT crosses.
DOI 10.1007/s00018-025-05722-9 recorded as the article identifier; no DOI-level corrections or retractions located in this review.

Notes

Both confirmed issues are classic copy-paste/template-reuse artifacts and are consistent with a manuscript prepared from a prior group's template rather than deliberate misconduct.
No evidence of data fabrication; biological sample sizes and modeling parameters are internally coherent.
Recommended actions: contact the corresponding author for clarification regarding "G.H." and the Central South University funding entry; request original unmodified microscopy images (Figures 3, 4); post a comment on PubPeer noting the metadata discrepancies; await an erratum before considering escalation.
Limitations: this review was text-based; image forensic analysis was not performed. Final determination of any misconduct requires investigation by an appropriate institutional body.