Methodological inconsistencies in 'Chromosomal fusions trigger rediploidization of autopolyploid genomes' (Xie et al., Nature, 2026)

Academic fraud report · Geng Detector

Summary

This Geng report flags a published 2026 Nature paper on autopolyploid rediploidization as highly suspicious based on internal textual contradictions rather than image or statistical analysis. The first major issue concerns an apparent cooling rate of '1.5 °C per year' applied to one-year-old fish, which would require roughly 11.3 years to traverse the 17 °C span from 22 °C to 5 °C—longer than the lifespan of the experimental subjects. The second issue concerns ethics approval IDs dated 26 January 2026 (IACUC-20260126-05 and IACUC-20260126-02) cited in a manuscript submitted on 18 October 2025, meaning core experiments on multiple tissues and a 3.73 Gb genome assembly were reportedly completed and analyzed before ethics approval was obtained. The combined timeline suggests either methodological fabrication, severe copy-paste errors, or use of unrelated project data. Verdict: highly suspicious pending official investigation; confidence is moderate because findings rest on textual analysis only, and innocent explanations (transcription error, post-approval backdating) cannot be fully excluded.

Verdict

🟠 Highly suspicious — multiple internal inconsistencies in methods and ethics documentation raise serious concerns about experimental authenticity. Formal institutional investigation is warranted.

Key findings

Implausible cooling protocol: The Methods section describes a cold-exposure regime with a stated rate of 1.5 °C per year for fish starting at 22 °C and held at 5 °C. This implies an ~11.3-year cooling ramp applied to fish aged "approximately 1 year" — a physical impossibility unless the unit is a typographical error (e.g., 'per day').
Ethics-approval timeline paradox: The manuscript was submitted on 18 October 2025, but cites IACUC approval numbers IACUC-20260126-05 (RNA-seq for cold exposure) and IACUC-20260126-02 (genome assembly of *Schizothorax curvilabiatus*) dated 26 January 2026. Core experiments thus post-date submission on paper.
Compressed post-approval workflow: Between the apparent ethics approval (26 January 2026) and acceptance (23 March 2026), the authors would have had to complete animal experiments, tissue collection, RNA extraction, library prep, sequencing, a 3.73 Gb genome assembly, multi-omics bioinformatics, and major revision — a timeline deemed implausible.

Evidence highlights

DOI: 10.1038/s41586-026-10439-1
Cooling rate cited: 1.5 °C per year (Methods → RNA-seq for cold exposure)
Temperature span: 22 °C → 5 °C (Δ = 17 °C; required time ≈ 11.3 years at the stated rate)
Fish age at experiment: approximately 1 year
Submission date: 18 October 2025
IACUC IDs: IACUC-20260126-05, IACUC-20260126-02 (26 January 2026)
*Schizothorax curvilabiatus* genome assembly size: 3.73 Gb
Acceptance date (reported): 23 March 2026

Notes

These findings are derived entirely from textual/logical analysis of the published Methods; no image duplication or statistical reanalysis was performed in this report.
Plausible benign explanations include a unit typo ('per day' miswritten as 'per year') and retroactive ethics-number assignment. Such alternatives still require formal clarification and correction by the authors.
Confidence in flagging the inconsistencies is high; confidence that they constitute deliberate fraud is moderate pending institutional verification of raw data, lab notebooks, and ethics records.
Recommended actions: contact authors for raw experimental logs, post concerns on PubPeer, and notify the Nature editorial office to audit ethics compliance and data provenance.