On 2017 Jul 28, Morten Oksvold commented:

“Dunoyer has been a long-time colleague and collaborator of Olivier Voinnert, and recently a number of their studies, three with Dunoyer as first author, have been retracted while a number more have had formal corrections published to address problems with presented data."

Please note that Olivier VOINNET is his correct name and Dunoyer's master has so far eight retractions and twenty corrections(only 12 of them are directly searchable in PubMed):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=(voinnet o[Author]) AND "retracted publication"[Publication Type]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=(Voinnet o[Author]) AND "published erratum"[Publication Type]

(Link to full report here: https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/news/medienmitteilungen/2015/PDF/untersuchungsbericht/Report_of_ETH_Commission_Voinnet.pdf )

Please also note that in reference 7 in the mentioned article (Incarbone, M et al., Nature Plants, June 2017) they cite Deleris A et al., Science 2006, which represents one of the articles that supposed to be retracted (see quote from the report below).

From the investigation report: "Although it is obviously the journal's prerogative, the former (category 2) papers, particularly those containing well documented intentional manipulations (PLoS Pathogens 2013 9:e1003435; Plant Cell 2004 16: 1235; Science 2006 313: 68; PNAS 2006 103: 19593 and EMBO J 2010 29: 1699), should be retracted through OV's requests as being non-factual, irrespectively of whether the reported observations have been reproduced by others."

I find it problematic that Nature Plants accept this kind of practice, by apparently legitimating well documented intentional manipulations as facts.

On 2017 Jul 28, Morten Oksvold commented:

“Dunoyer has been a long-time colleague and collaborator of Olivier Voinnert, and recently a number of their studies, three with Dunoyer as first author, have been retracted while a number more have had formal corrections published to address problems with presented data."

Please note that Olivier VOINNET is his correct name and Dunoyer's master has so far eight retractions and twenty corrections(only 12 of them are directly searchable in PubMed):

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=(voinnet o[Author]) AND "retracted publication"[Publication Type]

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed?term=(Voinnet o[Author]) AND "published erratum"[Publication Type]

(Link to full report here: https://www.ethz.ch/content/dam/ethz/news/medienmitteilungen/2015/PDF/untersuchungsbericht/Report_of_ETH_Commission_Voinnet.pdf )

Please also note that in reference 7 in the mentioned article (Incarbone, M et al., Nature Plants, June 2017) they cite Deleris A et al., Science 2006, which represents one of the articles that supposed to be retracted (see quote from the report below).

From the investigation report: "Although it is obviously the journal's prerogative, the former (category 2) papers, particularly those containing well documented intentional manipulations (PLoS Pathogens 2013 9:e1003435; Plant Cell 2004 16: 1235; Science 2006 313: 68; PNAS 2006 103: 19593 and EMBO J 2010 29: 1699), should be retracted through OV's requests as being non-factual, irrespectively of whether the reported observations have been reproduced by others."

I find it problematic that Nature Plants accept this kind of practice, by apparently legitimating well documented intentional manipulations as facts.