A series of journal articles authored or co-authored by chemist Louis Hitler Muzong have been removed from the scholarly record, with publishers citing concerns about duplicated visual data, unexplained citation increases, irregular peer review, and scientific inaccuracies. According to a detailed report on the case, 35 papers have been retracted over 24 months, with most appearing in journals from major publishers such as Elsevier and the Royal Society of Chemistry.
In one instance, the Royal Society of Chemistry formally retracted an article by Louis and colleagues, “Computational design and molecular modeling of the interaction of nicotinic acid hydrazide nickel-based complexes with H2S gas,” after determining that identical molecular plots were used to represent different chemical systems and that citations had been inappropriately replaced by self-citations during revisions.
The reporting notes that some retraction statements explicitly removed affiliations previously listed by Louis, including a doctoral research position at the University of Leeds, on the basis that the published research was not associated with that institution.
Profiles on academic platforms nonetheless link Louis with the Computational Chemistry and Bio Simulation Research Group at the University of Calabar.
Many retractions focus on duplicated charts or plots used to depict different experimental conditions, sometimes within the same paper and sometimes across different publications, undermining confidence in the results. Other notices describe dramatic increases in self-citations between submission and publication that editors were unable to satisfactorily explain, as well as compromised peer review that included recommendations to cite certain papers without clear scientific justification
Publishers stated that investigations into these matters were triggered in part by external alerts and whistleblower reports. An Elsevier spokesperson said that biased and inaccurate reviewer comments resulted in flawed articles and that these concerns justified withdrawal rather than correction.
In addition to issues involving data presentation and citations, some retraction notices identified fundamental errors in the scientific content, including incorrect unit conversions, absent analytical data referenced in abstracts, and unsupported claims about spectroscopy results.
Frequent coauthor Innocent Benjamin, associated with 19 of the retracted articles, stated that editorial concerns were primarily about visual presentation and interpretation rather than deliberate fabrication of data, and that he is cooperating with ongoing inquiries. Institutional representatives have clarified that their investigations are limited to work directly associated with a student’s degree program.
This case underscores the importance of robust peer review and editorial oversight, especially in high-volume publishing environments such as the journal Heliyon, which has recently undergone internal audit and retraction activity as part of broader quality control efforts.