publication ethics and malpractice statements

INTRODUCTORY STATEMENT

The below mentioned publication ethics and publication malpractice rules for Animal Science Papers and Reports, regard the parties participating in the process of publishing (the Author, the Journal, the Reviewer and the Publisher). It is essential for all the parties to agree upon standards of ethical behaviour. The ethics declarations are derivatives from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors recommendations.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE EDITOR

Answerability

The Editor is responsible for both deciding which articles submitted to the journal shall be published, and, following, for everything published in the Journal. In making these decisions, Editor can be resorted to policies of the Journal’s editorial board as well as to legal prerequisites regarding plagiarism, defamation, and copyright violation. The Editor can communicate with other editors and with the reviewers while making decisions about publication. The Editor shall maintain reliability of academic record excluding breach of intellectual and ethical standards which may result from business needs, and shall always be ready to publish corrections, clarifications of the withdrawal reasons, and apologies when needed.

The Editor shall follow the COPE’s guidelines when considering withdrawal, expressing concern about, and issuing corrections related to papers that have been published in Animal Science Papers and Reports.

Integrity and Privacy

The Editor shall evaluate submissions for intellectual substance regardless to race, ethnic derivation, citizenship, confession, gender, sexual orientation, or the world outlook of the authors. The Editor shall not divulge any information about a submission being considered to anyone other than the Author, the Editorial board members, the Reviewer and potential reviewers, as appropriate.

Disclosure, conflicts of interest, and miscellaneous

Unpublished matter revealed in a submission shall not be used in an Editor’s own research without written consent of the Author. The knowledge of confidential data or designs acquired in the process of peer review shall be kept private and not exploited for personal benefit.

The Journal binds itself to ensure that advertising, reprint or other commercial income shall have no effect on editorial decisions.

The Editor shall do her/his best to guarantee a fair and right review process. Editor (executive editor, co-editor, associate editor, editorial board member) shall refrain from considering submissions in which she/he have conflicts of interest resulting from their  co-operative or competitive involvement with any of the authors, firms, and institutions associated with the submission. All contributors shall address the conflict of interest issues in the cover letter to their submission. If competing interests are revealed after publication a rectification shall be published. If necessary, pertinent action shall be undertaken, such as the publishing of a revocation or expression of concern.

Editor shall protect the integrity of the circulated record by issuing amendments and renunciations, if needed, and pursuing suspected or alleged research and publication misconduct. Editor shall take rational measures when ethical complaints have been presented regarding a submission or published paper.

Plagiarism

The Editor shall endeavour to ensure that the submission is not plagiarism or self-plagiarism by consulting it with the Reviewer and/or by using screening software.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE REVIEWER

Reviewer’s contribution

Peer review supports the Editor in making editorial decisions and assists the Author in improving the submission.

Promptitude

Any requested Reviewer who feels incompetent to referee the reported research results or realizes that its timely review is not possible shall promptly inform the Editor so that other reviewers can be considered.

Discretion

Any submission accepted for review must be considered as confidential record. It shall not be revealed to or discussed with unauthorized persons except if permitted by the Editor.

Objectivity

Reviews shall remain objective. No personal criticism of the author shall be accepted. Reviewers shall state their views plainly with apt arguments supporting their judgement.

Acknowledgement of sources

Reviewers should spot published key work pertinent to the evaluated submission that has not been cited by the authors. The Reviewer shall also call to the Editor's attention any extensive resemblance between the submission under consideration and any other published record of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflict of interest

Confidential information or designs obtained through the review shall be kept private and not used for personal benefit. Reviewers shall refrain from evaluating submissions in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from their co-operative or competitive involvement with any of the authors, firms, and institutions associated with the submission.

RESPONSIBILITIES OF THE AUTHOR

Publishing standards

Authors submitting results of original research shall present a precise account of the work carried out and an objective justification of its importance. Fundamental data should be represented accurately in the manuscript. The paper should contain satisfactory information and references to allow others to reproduce the work. Deceptive or intentionally erroneous statements constitute unethical behaviour and are intolerable.

Originality and Plagiarism

The Authors shall guarantee that they have submitted original report, and if the Authors have made use of the work and/or words of others that this has been properly cited or quoted.

Correct recognition of the work of others must always be observed. Authors should also cite publications that have been significant in establishing the nature of the submitted work.

Multiple or concurrent publications

The Author shall not in general publish papers describing in actual fact the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Simultaneous submission of the same report to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is intolerable.

Authorship of a submission

Authorship shall be restricted to those who have made a major contribution to the idea, plan, carrying out, or analysis of the submitted research. All persons who have made major contributions should be listed as legitimate co-authors. If there are others participants in certain important  phases of the research, they should be named in an Acknowledgement section.

The corresponding author shall ensure that all legitimate co-authors and no illegitimate co-authors are present in the author list of the submission, and that all co-authors have read and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted and only if approved by the Editor. To request such a change, the Editor must receive from the corresponding author the reason for the change in author list and written confirmation (e-mail, letter) from all authors that they agree with the addition, removal or rearrangement. In the case of addition or removal of authors, this includes confirmation from the author being added or removed.

Ethical use of animals

 If required, research involving animal subjects and animal material have to be approved by an appropriate ethics committee. A statement detailing this, including the name of the ethics committee and the reference number where appropriate, must appear in manuscript reporting such research.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Authors should reveal in the submission any financial or other important conflict of interest that might affect the results or their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the study should be revealed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When Author discovers an important error or incorrectness in her/his own published work, it is the Author’s duty to immediately notify the Editor or Publisher and cooperate with them to either retract the paper or to publish an appropriate erratum.

Publisher's confirmation

In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism the Publisher, in close collaboration with the Editor, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum or, in the most severe cases, the complete retraction of the affected work.