Search

The video assistant referee (VAR), popularized in football (soccer), has been decisive in many games played in several international and domestic competitions ever since the Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA) formalized its use for the first time in the 2018 Men’s Football World Cup. Serving as a support tool for on-field referees, it is not only a game unifier but also a conflict pacifier by using a technology-based method to objectively appreciate whether human decisions were accurate and fair or erroneous and thus in need of correction. Given the overwhelming support evidenced by its broad adoption, but also some criticisms and concerns about this technology, an objective assessment of the growing literature on VAR is timely to take stock of what is known and what is still unknown about its use and perception. Using primarily indexed English literature from 2018–2024, this narrative review aims to gauge four main talking points related to VAR, including, but not limited to, the technology used, why VAR is perceived as controversial, and its perception in a socio-cultural context. This review underscores the positive perception of referees towards VAR, highlighting improved decision accuracy and minimal match disruption. Fans and media express trust in VAR, but call for refinements. Concerns about in-stadium communication with spectators suggest a need for enhanced decision transparency. We also acknowledge limitations, including language bias, literature (un)availability and sex-based disparities, while proposing future research avenues. Overall, VAR has become integral to football, shaping its officiating landscape, and inviting continuous improvement.

Objectives: The choice of a scholarly journal, as opposed to a predatory journal, might impact a sport scientist’s career negatively if the wrong choice is made, especially at an early stage of their research and publishing careers. Artificial intelligence (AI) is increasingly impacting sport science and academia. In this study, we tested the accuracy and sensitivity of an AI-driven tool, applied specifically to sport science. Design: Our research relies on the use of a new and free online AI-driven tool, the AJPC System, which claims the ability to distinguish “normal” (scholarly) from “suspected predatory” (unscholarly) journals. Method: The AJPC System was used to assess (1 December 2023) the classification of all ranked sport journals (n = 124), namely those in all four quartiles (Q1–Q4) of SCImago Journal Rank (SJR), in the “Sports Science” category. Results: The AJPC System considered 47/124 journals to be “suspected predatory”, mostly in Q4 journals (54.8% of total), casting a negative image on their academic standing. Conclusions: Sport scientists are likely to consider SJR Q1–Q4 journals to be relatively safe to publish in, reliable and reputable, and might be confused with the “suspected predatory” label assigned to 37.9% of those journals. The AJPC System is thus misleading sport scientists.

Medical practitioners and healthcare workers rely on information accuracy in academic journals. Some Covid-19 papers contain “tortured phrases”, nonstandard English expressions, or imprecise or erroneous terms, that give the impression of jargon but are not. Most post-publication attention paid to Covid-19 literature has focused on the accuracy of biomedical aspects, the validity of claims, or the robustness of data, but little has been published on linguistic specificity. This paper highlights the existence of “tortured phrases” in select Covid-19 literature, arguing that they could serve as a class of epistemic marker when evaluating the integrity of the scientific and biomedical literature.

Retraction notices (RNs) are historical documents and must be as informative as possible to ensure the scholarly record is complete. RNs must be complete, informative, open, transparent, and comprehensive, and must include clear indication of fault and responsibility. A guideline about what RNs should or should not contain will help to ensure consistency and completeness. Declarations-related retractions can be prevented by conducting a thorough check in the initial quality check. The issuer of the RN should be named in the notice, and may include the name of research institutions and funders if necessary. To ensure complete transparency, RNs should include details of any investigation that supported the decision., SCOPUS: ar.j, DecretOANoAutActif, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Logically, and by most common standards, academics would be pleased to be cited, considering it a form of recognition of their intellect. In return, especially those with high citation counts, such as Clarivate Analytics’ Highly Cited Researchers, can benefit through peer recognition, rewards, funding, securing a better position, or expanding a collaborative network. Despite known and untold benefits, one issue has not been discussed: the right to refuse to be cited or the right to refuse a citation. Academics might not want to be cited by papers published in truly predatory journals, papers with false authors, or sting papers with falsified elements that employ underhanded ethical tactics. Currently, academics generally have the freedom to select where they publish their findings and choose studies they cite, so it is highly probable that requests to remove citations or refuse citations might never become formal publishing policy. Nonetheless, this academic discussion is worth having as valid and invalid literature increasingly gets mixed through citations, and as the grey zone between predatory/non-predatory and scholarly/unscholarly becomes increasingly difficult to distinguish., SCOPUS: le.j, DecretOANoAutActif, info:eu-repo/semantics/published

Shoot tip necrosis is a physiological condition and disorder that can arise in plantlets or shoots in vitro that results in death of the shoot tip. This condition, which can spread basipetally and affect the emergence of axillary shoots from buds lower down the stem, is due to the cessation of apical dominance. STN can occur at both shoot multiplication and rooting stages. One of the most common factors that cause STN is nutrient deficiency or imbalance. Moreover, the presence or absence of plant growth regulators (auxins or cytokinins) at specific developmental stages may impact STN. The cytokinin to auxin ratio within an in vitro plant can be modified by varying the concentration of cytokinins used in the culture medium. The supply of nutrients to in vitro shoots or plantlets might also affect their hormonal balance, thus modifying the occurrence of STN. High relative humidity within culture vessels and hyperhydricity are associated with STN. An adequate supply of calcium as the divalent cation (Ca2+) can hinder STN by inhibiting the accumulation of phenolic compounds and thus programmed cell death. Moreover, the level of Ca2+ affects auxin transport and ethylene production, and higher ethylene production, which can occur as a result of high relative humidity in or poor ventilation of the in vitro culture vessel, induces STN. High relative humidity can decrease the mobility of Ca2+ within a plant, resulting in Ca2+ deficiency and STN. STN of in vitro shoots or plantlets can be halted or reversed by altering the basal medium, mainly the concentration of Ca2+, adjusting the levels of auxins or cytokinins, or modifying culture conditions. This review examines the literature related to STN, seeks to discover the associated factors and relations between them, proposes practical solutions, and attempts to better understand the mechanism(s) underlying this condition in vitro

A commentary published in «Nature» by Jeffrey Beall called for the ban of “predatory” journals from the scientific record. That call for a ban was deeply flawed since the lists on which the term “predatory” were based, were themselves flawed. Many papers published in such journals are valid, having been peer reviewed, and acting in an academically responsible manner, making Beall’s call unfair, and discriminatory. Beall’s blog served as a useful alert system, but in no way were Beall’s black lists, which failed to indicate precise inclusion criteria for each entry, validated by scholars around the globe, much less suitable for use in any policy-making. Even though the Beall blog suddenly went blank on January 15, 2017, with no explanation to the public by Beall, the lists continue to be flaunted as de facto publishing black lists by several academics and websites.

A commentary published in «Nature» by Jeffrey Beall called for the ban of “predatory” journals from the scientific record. That call for a ban was deeply flawed since the lists on which the term “predatory” were based, were themselves flawed. Many papers published in such journals are valid, having been peer reviewed, and acting in an academically responsible manner, making Beall’s call unfair, and discriminatory. Beall’s blog served as a useful alert system, but in no way were Beall’s black lists, which failed to indicate precise inclusion criteria for each entry, validated by scholars around the globe, much less suitable for use in any policy-making. Even though the Beall blog suddenly went blank on January 15, 2017, with no explanation to the public by Beall, the lists continue to be flaunted as de facto publishing black lists by several academics and websites.

It is more important to improve the salt tolerance of crops in a salinized world with the situations of increasing populations, declining crop yields, and a decrease in agricultural lands. Attempts to produce salt-tolerant crops have involved the manipulation of existing crops through conventional breeding, genetic engineering and marker-assisted selection (MAS). However, these have, so far, not produced lines growing on highly saline water. Hence, the domestication of wild halophytes as crops appears to be a feasible way to develop agriculture in highly saline environments. In this review, at first, the assessment criteria of salt tolerance for halophytes are discussed. The traditional criteria for the classification of salinity in crops are less applicable to strong halophytes with cubic growth curves at higher salinities. Thus, realistic assessment criteria for halophytes should be evaluated at low and high salinity levels. Moreover, absolute growth rather than relative growth in fields during a crop's life cycle should be considered. Secondly, the use of metabolomics to understand the mechanisms by which halophytes respond to salt tolerance is highlighted as is the potential for metabolomics-assisted breeding of this group of plants. Metabolomics provides a better understanding of the changes in cellular metabolism induced by salt stress. Identification of metabolic quantitative trait loci (QTL) associated with salt tolerance might provide a new method to aid the selection of halophyte improvement. Thirdly, the identification of germplasm-regression-combined (GRC) marker-trait association and its potential to identifying markers associated with salt tolerance is outlined. Results of MAS/linkage map-QTL have been modest because of the absence of QTLs with tight linkage, the non-availability of mapping populations and the substantial time needed to develop such populations. To overcome these limitations, identification by GRC-based marker-trait association has bee

Standardization of an efficient regeneration system for each strawberry genotype is generally an indispensible pre-requisite for the successful development of transgenic plants. In this paper, we review some key factors affecting the regeneration of strawberry plants via adventitious organogenesis or somatic embryogenesis, such as type of explant, growth regulators or dark/light treatments

This review highlights the advantages and current status of plant-derived vaccine development with special reference to the dengue virus. There are numerous problems involved in dengue vaccine development, and there is no vaccine against all four dengue serotypes. Dengue vaccine development using traditional approaches has not been satisfactory in terms of inducing neutralizing antibodies. Recently, these issues were addressed by showing a very good response to inducing neutralizing antibodies by plant-derived dengue vaccine antigens. This indicates the feasibility of using plant-derived vaccine antigens as a low-cost method to combat dengue and other infectious diseases. The application of new methods and strategies such as dendritic cell targeting in cancer therapy, severe acute respiratory syndrome, tuberculosis, human immune deficiency virus, and malaria might play an important role. These new methods are more efficient than traditional protocols. It is expected that in the near future, plant-derived vaccine antigens or antibodies will play an important role in the control of human infectious diseases. This article is open to POST-PUBLICATION REVIEW. Registered readers (see “For Readers”) may comment by clicking on ABSTRACT on the issue’s contents page.

Predatory publishing has been the subject of much heated debate and conjecture. Panagiotis Tsigaris and Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, argue that predatory publishing still remains under-scrutinized, enigmatic and in need of effective collective solutions. Without clearer and stronger ethical standards in scholarly publishing, they argue that responses to predatory publishing will continue to be uncoordinated and ultimately unsuccessful.

There are many arguments in favour of open peer review, from anticipated improvements to the speed and quality of reviews brought about by the greater accountability, through to the likely reduction in unfair or illogical decisions because of the system's transparency. Despite this, not all academics are comfortable with open peer review and remain fearful of their comments and views being subject to public scrutiny. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva argues this may prevent the open review system from being truly inclusive, and may even result in a similar situation to now, where limited groups of people undertake a large proportion of reviews.

Once an academic paper is retracted, it is by no means certain it will not go on being cited. Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva, Judit Dobránszki and Helmar Bornemann-Cimenti use three key examples to demonstrate how the continued citation of retracted papers can lead to the proliferation of erroneous literature, mislead young academics and cause confusion among researchers as to the veracity of scientific claims. Most damagingly, it can undermine the credibility of science and public trust in research. Retracted papers should not be cited and it is the responsibility of researchers, editorial teams and publishers to guard against this happening.