Geng Integrity Report: Neuronal Sensitization Drives Bone Regeneration via Energy Metabolism and BMP2‐ErbB1 Signaling (Adv. Funct. Mater., DOI: 10.1002/adfm.76607)

Academic fraud report · Geng Detector

Summary

This report assesses integrity concerns in the article 'Neuronal Sensitization Drives Bone Regeneration via Energy Metabolism and BMP2‐ErbB1 Signaling' published in Advanced Functional Materials (DOI: 10.1002/adfm.76607; received 8 January 2026). Overall verdict: highly suspicious. Three substantive findings are documented. First, Table 1 reports a ZDOCK score of 13553.6 for BMP2–ErbB1, an outlier roughly an order of magnitude above other receptors (ErbB2 1937.10; BMPR1A/BMPR1B/ErbB3/ErbB4 ~1500–1900), inconsistent with normal ZDOCK scoring ranges and suggestive of fabricated or misunderstood output. Second, BMP2 binding energies with ErbB1 and ErbB2 are both reported as exactly -17.7 kcal/mol, an implausibly identical value for distinct receptors. Third, funding acknowledgement lists 2025 China Postdoctoral Science Foundation grants (2025M772930, GZC20251928) in a paper submitted January 2026, raising a chronological inconsistency with normal funding cycles. Image-level analyses were not possible due to lack of high-resolution figures. Confidence is moderate-to-high for the computational and funding findings; final judgment requires journal investigation and raw docking logs.

Verdict

Highly suspicious. Multiple inconsistencies in reported molecular docking values and a chronological mismatch with funding acknowledgements warrant formal investigation by the journal. Image-level checks were not feasible with the supplied PDF.

Key findings

Implausible ZDOCK score outlier: Table 1 reports ErbB1 = 13553.6, vs. ErbB2 = 1937.10 and other BMP receptors ~1500–1900. This ~10× deviation exceeds normal ZDOCK score distributions (shape complementarity + desolvation + electrostatic statistical potentials typically in the low thousands), suggesting tampering or misreporting.
Identical binding energies: BMP2–ErbB1 and BMP2–ErbB2 binding energies are both listed as exactly -17.7 kcal/mol, which is statistically unreasonable for independent docking runs of two distinct receptors.
Funding timeline inconsistency: Paper received 8 January 2026 yet acknowledges China Postdoctoral Science Foundation grants 2025M772930 and GZC20251928; standard funding announcement windows may conflict with this submission date.
Image integrity: Not assessable from the supplied PDF (Figures 1–9 unavailable at high resolution); flagged for follow-up.

Evidence highlights

DOI: 10.1002/adfm.76607
Table 1 (p. 9): ZDOCK score for ErbB1 = 13553.6; ErbB2 = 1937.10; BMPR1A, BMPR1B, ErbB3, ErbB4 all in the ~1500–1900 range.
Table 1 (p. 9): Binding energies ErbB1 = -17.7 kcal/mol; ErbB2 = -17.7 kcal/mol (identical to one decimal place).
Manuscript timeline: Received 8 January 2026.
Acknowledgements (p. 16): "China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (2025M772930)" and "Postdoctoral Fellowship Program of China Postdoctoral Science Foundation (GZC20251928)".

Notes

Limitations: Image-based reuse, splicing, and noise analyses (Geng methods 1 and 3) could not be performed; raw Western blots (e.g., Figure 6F) and fluorescence images (Figure 9) were not available.
Recommended next steps: request raw docking project files and log outputs; verify grant award dates against official CPSF records; alert the journal editorial office; consider PubPeer comment.
Disclaimer: This AI-assisted draft is for academic discussion only and does not constitute a formal finding of misconduct. Any final determination should be made by the relevant institutional or editorial authority. Uncertainty regarding the funding chronology is flagged as requiring official verification rather than asserted as definitive misconduct.