Retraction: Gastroprotective Activity of Ethyl-4-[(3,5-di-tert-butyl-2-hydroxybenzylidene) Amino]benzoate against Ethanol-Induced Gastric Mucosal Ulcer in Rats

Following the publication of this article [1], concerns were raised regarding reuse of results presented in Figs 6, 7, and 8. Specifically,

• The Fig 6d panel appears to partially overlap with Fig 9 panel G7 of [2, corrected in 3, retracted in 4] when rotated, despite being used to represent different experimental conditions.

• Fig 7a of this article [1] appears similar to Fig 8G of [5, retracted in 6], despite being used to represent different experimental conditions.

• Fig 7e of this article [1] appears to fully or partially overlap with the following results, despite being used to represent different experimental conditions:

  • ○ Fig 7G of [5, retracted in 6]
  • ○ Fig 4e of [7, corrected in 8]*
  • ○ Fig 8C of [9]
  • ○ Fig 4e of [10]
  • ○ Fig 5F of [11]
  • ○ Fig 5 panel G3 of [12, retracted in 13]
• Fig 8a panel of this article [1] appears to overlap with the following results, despite being used to represent different experimental conditions:

  • ○ Fig 5a of [10]
  • ○ Fig 6 panel G1 of [12, retracted in 13]
  • ○ Fig 10A of [14]
  • ○ Fig 6D of [15, retracted in 16]*

The authors did not provide a response to the concerns raised with this article and did not provide the data underlying this study for editorial review. Given the nature and extent of the issues, the PLOS ONE Editors are concerned about the reliability of data management and/or reporting for this study [1].

In light of the above concerns, the PLOS ONE Editors retract this article.

Some figure panels discussed above appear to report previously published material that are offered under a CC BY license, but the original articles were not attributed in [1]. For these images, the * by the citation, above, marks the oldest publication of the image of which PLOS is aware.

PH, AN, and MAA agreed with the retraction. MH responded but expressed neither agreement nor disagreement with the editorial decision. MFH, RMS, DAB, NSAW, and AA either did not respond directly or could not be reached. MAA stands by the article’s findings.