An article published in Natural Product Communications has come under scrutiny due to concerns over authorship attribution, contribution statements, and funding disclosures. The issue arose when Klaus Heese, a professor at Hanyang University, discovered that neither he nor his collaborator Arulmani Manavalan were included in the published author list, despite having contributed substantially to the manuscript.
Manuscript Development and Submission History
Heese reported that the review was originally drafted in collaboration with Arulmani Manavalan, and that initial versions were submitted to two journals, Biomimetics and Heliyon. Both of those submissions listed Heese as a corresponding author and credited contributions from all team members, with descriptions of writing, editing, conceptualization and formatting responsibilities.
A later internal draft, saved under the filename “Jeyachandran et al. 2024‑May‑19”, reaffirmed these contributions. When the paper was ultimately published in Natural Product Communications, however, the author list had been altered: Heese and Manavalan were omitted, and two academics unknown to Heese were listed instead.
Changes in Authorship and Contributions
In the published version of the article, Hethesh Chellapandian and Prof. Kiyun Park of Chonnam National University were credited with conceptualization, formal analysis, data curation and writing. Another South Korean academic, Ihn‑Sil Kwak, was listed as the corresponding author and described as contributing validation, resources, supervision, project administration and funding acquisition. The paper also declared support from a grant of the National Research Foundation of Korea, contrasting with earlier versions that either listed no external funding or different grant support.
When Heese contacted the corresponding author, Sivakamavalli Jeyachandran, an associate professor at Saveetha University in Chennai, India, she initially attributed the authorship changes to delays and issues with earlier journals. In an emailed explanation, she said a mentor had “kindly covered the APC (article processing charge)” for Natural Product Communications, which charges authors a publication fee of about US $3,000.
Jeyachandran later offered an apology and acknowledged Heese’s contributions, describing the omission as an oversight. In subsequent correspondence, she revised her account again, stating that Heese’s role was “minimal” and that the decision to omit him from the final author list was consistent with accepted standards of authorship.
Third‑Party Responses and Publisher Status
One member of Kwak’s research group reportedly stated that they had no prior knowledge of the changes before publication, emphasized the seriousness of the situation, and suggested possible suspension of future collaborations if concerns were not addressed. Jeyachandran’s new Korean co‑authors did not provide direct comment on the matter in available correspondence.
Sage, the publisher of Natural Product Communications, has confirmed that the case is under formal investigation, though no further details have been shared while the inquiry is underway.
Broader Context of Authorship and Integrity Concerns
This incident joins a growing number of documented cases in which authorship changes, undisclosed contributions, and inconsistent funding statements have raised integrity questions. Academic reporting platforms such as Retraction Watch track instances where authors have been omitted or added without clear justification, and where editorial practices may be inconsistent with community standards.
Similar concerns have been highlighted in broader contexts: for example, investigations into authorship manipulation led to retractions in other fields when changes to author lists were made without transparent justification and contrary to journal policies. One such case involved a Biomedicine & Pharmacotherapy article that was withdrawn after its authorship was altered during revision without adequate explanation.
Implications for Scholarly Publishing
Disputes over authorship and contribution statements reflect ongoing challenges for journals and institutions in upholding ethical standards. Transparent credit for scholarly contributions is critical to ensure accountability, fair recognition, and trust in academic literature. Cases involving multiple submissions, revisions and altered author lists also underscore the need for consistent editorial oversight, clear authorship criteria, and robust dispute resolution mechanisms within and across research communities.