- Problematic text parallels can be found in the following chapters (state of analysis: 2016-10-20):
- 1 INTRODUCTION
- 1.1 Hematopoiesis and hematopoietic stem cells (p. 1-3): pages 2, 3
- 1.2 Self-renewal and leukemogenesis (p. 3-6): pages 4, 5
- 1.3 Role of homeobox gene in normal and leukemic hematopoietic cells (p. 6-8): pages 6, 7, 8
- 1.3.1 HOX gene expression in normal and leukemic hematopoietic cells (p. 8-10): pages 8, 9
- 1.3.2 Non-clustered homeobox genes in leukemogenesis (p. 10 [beg.]): page 10 – [completely]
- 1.6.1 Role of ETV6 in hematopoiesis (p. 20): page 20 – [completely]
- 1.6.2 ETV6 fusion partners (p. 20-21): pages 20, 21
- 1.6.3 Protein tyrosine kinase fusion partners of ETV6 (p. 21-22): pages 21, 22 – [completely]
- 1.6.4 Transcription factors and other fusion partners of ETV6 (p. 22-23): pages 22, 23 – [completely]
- 1.6.5 Ectopic and aberrant expression of a proto-oncogene gene (p. 23): page 23 – [completely]
- 1.7 The t(12;13)(p13;q12) translocation in myeloid leukemia (p. 24): page 24
- 3 METHODS
- 3.1 cDNA constructs and retroviral vectors (p. 30): page 30
- 3.3 Retrovirus Production (p. 32): page 32 – [completely]
- 3.4 Retroviral infection of primary BM cells (p. 33): page 33 – [completely]
- 3.5 Proliferation Assay (p. 33-34): pages 33, 34 – [completely]
- 3.6 Colony Forming Cells Assay (CFC-assay) (p. 34): page 34 – [completely]
- 3.8 Cyto-Morphology (p. 35): page 35 – [completely]
- 3.9 Immunophenotyping 35): page 35 – [completely]
- 3.12 BM transplantation and assessment of mice 36): page 36 – [almost completely]
- 3.13 Analysis of sacrificed/dead experimental mice 37): 37 – [completely]
- 3.14 Preparation for histopathology 37): page 37 – [completely].
- Fontanari Krause (2006): there are substantial text parallels between Vpr's thesis and another thesis that has been submitted by a member of the same research group roughly at the same time (see here for an argument why the text most likely was copied from Fontanari Krause (2006) into Vpr's thesis.)
- Yuasa (2003) and Lessard et al. (2004) are source that have not been mentioned anywhere in the thesis.
- The dissertation has received the top mark (summa cum laude) and was given the Best Thesis Award, Helmholtz Center Munich for Environment & Health, Munich, see here.
- Chapters 5 (Discussion, pp 62-66) and 6 (Summary, p 67) follow closely in both content and wording an article that the present author has co-authored with eight other authors, including both of his supervisors. The present author is named as first author of this article, which is also indicated as a pre-publication of the thesis and annexed to its publication. It remains unclear, however, which parts of Chapters 5 and 6 have been drafted by the thesis author and which by other authors.
These text parallels have not been documented in this Wiki but can easily be shown by opening the VroniPlag Wiki Online Text Comparison Tool, downloading, copying and pasting pp 62-67 of the thesis into one window, dowloading, copying and pasting the article into the other, and then pressing the "Text vergleichen!" button.
- The regulations governing dissertations (="Promotionsordnung") valid at the time of submission demand the following:
"eine Erklärung darüber, dass der Bewerber die Dissertation selbständig angefertigt hat, sich außer der angegebenen Hilfsmittel keiner weiteren Hilfsmittel bedient und alle Erkenntnisse, die aus dem Schrifttum ganz oder annähernd übernommen sind, als solche kenntlich gemacht und nach ihrer Herkunft unter Bezeichnung der Fundstelle einzeln nachgewiesen hat;"
- Currently there are 34 reviewed fragments documented that are considered to be violations of citation rules. For 25 of them there is no reference given to the source used („Verschleierungen“ and „Komplettplagiate“). For 9 fragments the source is given, but the extent of the used text is not made clear („Bauernopfer“).
- The publication has 67 pages that have been analyzed. On a total of 27 of these pages violations of citation rules have been documented. This represents a percentage of 40.3%. The 67 analyzed pages break down with respect to the amount of text parallels encountered as follows:
- From these statistics an extrapolation of the amount of text of the publication under investigation that has been documented as problematic can be estimated (conservatively) as about 19% of the main part of the publication.
- In all, text was taken from 10 sources.
Folgende Grafik illustriert das Ausmaß und die Verteilung der dokumentierten Fundstellen. Die Farben bezeichnen den diagnostizierten Plagiatstyp:
(grau=Komplettplagiat, rot=Verschleierung, gelb=Bauernopfer)
Die Nichtlesbarkeit des Textes ist aus urheberrechtlichen Gründen beabsichtigt.
Zum Vergrößern auf die Grafik klicken.
(state of analysis: 05.04.2014)