In an article written by Denise Gellene and Thomas H. Maugh II of the Los Angeles Times report that Dr. Charles B. Nemeroff of Emory University failed to report a third of the income he received from companies whose drugs he was evaluating.

Dr. Nemeroff is a prominent Emory University psychiatrist who received at least $2.8 million in consulting fees from companies whose drugs he was evaluating and failed to report a third of it, congressional investigators studying medical conflicts of interest said Friday.

The allegations against Dr. Charles B. Nemeroff, the latest in a series of such charges, are the most striking to emerge from the probe, which seems likely to alter the cozy relationships between prominent academics and the drug industry.

Nemeroff received the money from GlaxoSmithKline between 2000 and 2007 while he was the principal investigator on a $3.9-million National Institutes of Health study of five Glaxo drugs for treatment of depression.

Nemeroff continued to receive large amounts of money for delivering talks to other physicians even after he signed university documents pledging to accept no more than $10,000 a year from any one company, the inquiry found.

Responding to the allegations, Nemeroff voluntarily stepped down as chairman of the psychiatry department at Emory on Friday pending a resolution of the matter.

Frankly, is his misbehavior should have caused Emory to ask for his complete resignation.

A university statement quoted him as saying, “To the best of my knowledge, I have followed the appropriate university regulations concerning financial disclosures.”

Nemeroff is at least the sixth psychiatrist identified with such conflicts since this spring, when the congressional investigation began.

Experts added, however, that the problems extend throughout the profession.

The findings are beginning to have repercussions.

At least two companies, Eli Lilly & Co. and Merck & Co., have said they will begin making such disclosures of all payments over $500 made to physicians next year.

At issue is the safety and efficacy of the stream of new drugs undergoing clinical trials. Several studies have shown that researchers who receive money from drug companies are more likely to report positive results from such trials.