An investigation is currently underway into research misconduct allegations against a University of Guelph professor after questions arose about data used to support several of his research papers.
The publication Science first reported on the matter earlier this month, bringing the work of Steven Newmaster, a professor in the department of integrative biology, under scrutiny from the scientific community.
Attempts to reach Newmaster for a comment on the investigation were not returned.
Ken Thompson, currently a post-doctoral scholar at Stanford University, worked with Newmaster while studying at the U of G, helping publish a paper that has since been retracted.
At the time, Thompson said he felt honoured to be working with Newmaster and was impressed with the work he was doing, noting the newly published herbal barcode paper – which has also been considered fraudulent by some – as an impressionable paper gaining Newmaster recognition.
“That just came out, he was on the news and telling me about all these interview requests he was getting, and he was saying he couldn't meet with me for a while because he was going on Dr. Oz,” said Thompson.
Working with Newmaster and another student, Thompson was assigned to a new course to do a research project – for which he was given a data set that would be published in a paper.
“I thought he had this amazing research program, I thought he had tonnes of people working for him and working with him and that he was a really, really important employer at the university and a big-time scientist and I was in a really lucky position to be getting any time to spend with this guy at all,” said Thompson.
Over time, Thompson began to notice a weird feeling due to the fact he had not seen any raw data, only summary data.
“It felt weird to me I had never seen the raw genetic data, and it got more weird and weird as the results seemed kind of perfect and it was a clean story,” said Thompson.
In 2020, Thompson took a hard look into the data and discovered some implausibilities, which included finding the raw data was never uploaded to the permanent repository.
“I reported my concerns about the data to the University of Guelph in February 2020 and requested an investigation. In September 2020, the University of Guelph shared their conclusion that further investigation was not required. In November 2020 I contacted the journal, Biodiversity and Conservation, to ask if they might consider investigating.
"In May 2021, the journal concluded that since the University of Guelph had already considered the situation they were not willing to investigate,” reads part of a letter published in May of 2021 which outlines the timeline posted by Thompson.
Thompson's hope was for his technical report to undergo public scrutiny of the data, encouraging the U of G and/or Biodiversity and Conservation to reconsider their earlier decisions and undertake a formal and impartial investigation.
In speaking of the response by the U of G, Thompson felt that this was not the first time the university has attempted to sweep an issue under the rug, referencing the disgraced former U of G coach Dave Scott-Thomas.
"I think it's important for the readers to know this isn't the first time the U of G has done this, it's sort of becoming a pattern," said Thompson. "I think the investigations are underway and hopefully they turn up something, I think there should be changes, it shouldn't be this hard to get the university to do something."
On Tuesday afternoon, the U of G posted an online response to the allegations, including a reference to the numerous times Thompson brought forward his concerns.
“As has been reported, the university received an allegation of research misconduct in 2020 and launched an inquiry in accordance with its policies and procedures. Due to the onset of the pandemic, the inquiry stage took longer than usual. The evidence reviewed through the inquiry stage did not support proceeding to the full investigation stage,” the post from the U of G reads.
“A second inquiry was launched in 2021 following a separate allegation of research misconduct. Based on the results of that inquiry, an active investigation is now underway. The university is following due process, and the investigation is being completed as expeditiously as possible. The length of the investigation will depend on its complexity and circumstances, with planned completion before June 2022. The university will take appropriate action based on the result of the investigation."
