Publication Ethics

Ethical Practices

Adapted By Arab Univ J Agric Sci

Introduction

Arab Universities Journal of Agricultural Sciences (Arab Univ. J. Agric. Sci.) is a double-blind peer-reviewed journal that aims to improve authors' abilities to produce high-quality publications. The publishing process encompasses Authors, editors, and reviewers; each one should perform a vital role and have a definite responsibility to achieve ethical standards at each stage of the publication process. The journal can intervene at any stage to avoid violating ethical standards.

 “Animal Welfare Committee” of the Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University is committed to ensuring the highest values of publication ethics for animal experiments. This document aims to establish standards and guidelines for publishers, editors, reviewers, and authors to achieve high standards of ethical behavior during research and publications. Guidelines include but are not limited to the following practices.

A) General tasks, responsibilities, and standards for publisher

  • The publisher must protect intellectual property and copyright agreements submitted by the authors.
  • The publisher must respect the privacy and personal data, especially for authors and peer reviewers.
  • The publisher must cooperate closely with the editors and peer reviewers to ensure the transparency and integrity of the peer-review process.
  • The publisher must protect and maintain the independence of the decisions of the Editorial Board.
  • The publisher must help the Editorial Board sustain the journal's quality.
  • The publisher must deliver necessary logistic support to editors to maintain the journal's publication ethics. 

B) General tasks, responsibilities, and standards for the editorial board

The Editorial Board of Arab Univ. J. Agric. Sci. is committed to maintaining independent editorial decisions and preventing bargains across competing interests, terror, business, political influence, or any other corporate. The Editorial Board is responsible for:

  • Making an initial assessment of the manuscripts based on their intellectual merit, without regarding author(s)’ race, age, nationality, frailty, gender, religious certainty, sexual nature, ethnic source, political orientation or community class.
  • Select the appropriate manuscripts to be sent to reviewers after the initial evaluation based on the MS value, following the “Guide for Authors”, plagiarism, ethical commitments and legal requirements concerning copyright agreement.
  • Providing guidance to authors and reviewers about their responsibilities and ethical expectations in addition to describing the publication processes through the journal website.
  • Select appropriate peer reviewers to assess the manuscripts and consider their evaluation before issuing the final decision.
  • Guarantee an impartial and unbiased double-blind peer review of the manuscripts.
  • Guarantee that all information concerning the manuscripts, authors, and reviewers is kept confidential and that both authors' and peer reviewers’ identities are secured.
  • Developing and maintaining a database of appropriate reviewers based on the reviewer’s competence, punctuality and responsiveness.
  • Support submissions from researchers of various agricultural disciplines to meet the needs of readers and authors.
  • Strive to improve their journal quality and academic record's integrity.
  • Cooperate with the publisher to produce a high-quality publication with valuable content and respect standard publication ethics.

C) General tasks, responsibilities, and standards for reviewers

Manuscripts are peer-reviewed by two or more experts in the fields. The journal protects the confidentiality of participants in the peer review process. Reviewers are expected to:

  • Reviewer who feels that the MS is out of his/her interest or has any conflict of interest about the manuscript should inform the editor and decline to review the MS.
  • Keep information linked to the manuscript confidential and should not be disclosed or multiplied in any form.
  • Send a report to the editorial board for any information that may be a reason to reject the publication of a manuscript.
  • Evaluate the manuscripts with clear logic and fairness based on their intellectual contents without imagining the author’s race, age, gender, ethnic origin, sexual orientation, disability, religious certainty, citizenship, political orientation, or community class of the author(s).
  • Evaluate the manuscripts for their creativity and importance to the field.

D) General tasks, responsibilities, and standards for authors

  • Authors pledge that they have followed all standard ethics, including those described here and in the resources listed below; besides, they do not practice any act that may harm the trust of the journal. Authors also declare no conflict of interest among themselves or with other parties.
  • All authors should make substantial scientific contributions to the work's conception, design, performance or interpretation.
  • The corresponding author is responsible for collaborating with the journal for publication.
  • The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors are listed appropriately in the manuscript's authors' list.
  • The corresponding author should sign and submit a written statement in the “Copyright Transfer Agreement & Declaration Form” on behalf of the other co-authors to confirm and declare that the paper is original, has not been published, and is not currently published by another publisher.
  • The corresponding author is accountable for manuscript correction, proofreading, handling the revisions, and re-submission of revised manuscript in due time up to receiving the acceptance of the manuscript in addition to the payment of the article processing charge when required.
  • The corresponding author is accountable for confirming that all other co-authors have given their approval for the article to be published and inform them about the current status and any modification of the manuscript during the publication process.
  • The corresponding author is accountable for confirming that the article originating from a certain institution is submitted with its agreement for publication.
  • The corresponding author is liable for ensuring that all of the journal's ethical considerations are met.
  • The corresponding author should give clear information about the funder and should list all sources of funding support in the acknowledgment section.
  • Non-authors who contributed to the work should be acknowledged, and their contributions should be specified.
  •  Authors should respond to editors' and reviewers’ remarks professionally and on time.
  • Authors are responsible for the originality and accuracy of the contents of their publications as well as indicating any danger or harm may result from applying the reported experiments.
  • Authors should archive all data supporting the results in an appropriate public repository as supplementary materials or be ready to submit them when needed before or after publication.
  • Authors should display their data analysis clearly and describe their works appropriately and in sufficient details to guarantee the reproducibility of the work by other researchers.
  • Authors should present the results clearly, honestly, and without fabrication or falsification.
  • Authors should cite publications relevant to the submitted work and represent them correctly and precisely.
  • Authors should not copy references from other publications if they are inaccessible.
  • Authors should respect that all plagiarism forms, including self-plagiarism, are unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable.
  • Authors should check their manuscript accurately at all stages to ensure that all its parts are reported accurately.
  • The journal is freely available online. All authors should approve the open access policy, which allows unlimited access and reuse of all published articles.
  • Authors should make sure that images present in the manuscript (e.g. pictures, micrographs, X-rays,) are original, high quality and not modified misleadingly (image-biased manipulation is not accepted).
  • Any changes to the author list (adding or deleting) throughout the revision phases is mostly not acceptable but, in some circumstances, may be accepted with conditioning the approval by all authors including the ones who have been added or removed from the list.
  • Any conflict of interest needs to be declared (If no conflicts exist, the authors should state: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest”.
  • Using commercial products should be avoided during the conduction of the experiments. When they are used, the name and location of the manufacturer must be mentioned.
  • If the manuscript is based on a thesis, the editor should be informed in the cover letter.

E) Plagiarism

All articles submitted to the journal are subjected to plagiarism test (online plagiarism detection software). Cross-Check is applied across the web-based iThenticate system (http://www.ithenticate.com/content) by uploading a document and operating a similarity check contrary to the Cross-Check database and the Internet. Editors reserve the right to check all submissions for plagiarism, including self-plagiarism. In case unacceptable plagiarism is observed, the manuscript will not be considered for publication. 

F) General tasks, responsibilities, and standards for animal studies, welfare and feed legislation

Upon submitting a new manuscript containing animal studies, the corresponding author will be asked to confirm that the manuscript meets all the animal protection and/or feed legislation requirements. Manuscripts that do not meet these standards will not be considered for publication; only investigations that follow high standards for animal welfare in research will be considered. Research involving animals should contain general duties, responsibilities, and international standards that include:

  • Authors must provide an “Animal Welfare Statement” in the Materials and Methods section, confirming that the animal experiment followed the animal care guide and resources in the journal “Ethical Practices” and/or was approved by a specific committee, e.g., “Animal Welfare Committee” of Faculty of Agriculture, Ain Shams University.
  • Justifying the purpose of the experiment and its importance to humanity and the advances of scientific knowledge.
  • The protocol should use appropriate husbandry and minimize unwanted discomfort, stress, and pain for the animals by employing proper treatments, animal management, and laboratory practices.
  • Methods used in scarifying experimental animals should be clarified in the text.
  • Surgical procedures must be identified, as well as the type and amount of sedation, analgesia, or anesthesia agents.
  • Authors should state the sex of animals and the influence (or association) of sex on obtained results.
  • Validate using living animals rather than other techniques e.g. using separated organs, tissue or cell culture or computer simulation programs.
  • Using minimum number of animals e.g. avoid unnecessary duplication of experiments or excessive replicates.
  • Involving experienced persons in performing animal experiments under the supervision of qualified scientist.
  • Post-treatment care of still-living animals

In addition, if humans are involved in a sensory panel for food evaluation, members must be informed of the detailed experiment, the food ingredients and the recipe or any side effects may arise.   

G) Post-publication correction and retraction

Corrections after publication are not encouraged. Authors should review the MS carefully during the proofreading stage; the decision is made only by the journal editorial board. In case of minor errors found after publication, e.g., author name spelling or order, figure or table number, or reference details, corrections are posted as “erratum” as close as possible to the published paper.  

MS contains major errors should be retracted. A retraction comment is posted freely online close to the MS and includes the article title, authors and reason for retraction on factual and objective bases without inflammatory language. Retraction is made to correct available literature, not punish the authors. However, the MS is not retracted if the principal scientific and finding contents are still reliable, while correction can be posted as an erratum. Authorship disputing is not a reason for retraction as long as the contents are valid. MS can be retracted after publication if one of the following cases is found:

1) Major error was discovered as in miscalculations, experimental errors or false findings.

2) MS is found to suffer from falsification and fabrication.

3) Report data or findings published previously without adding appropriate citations.

4) Include unethical contents, e.g., unethical research, unauthorized figures or illegal issue.

5) Plagiarism is high.

6) Authors fail to disclose significant conflict of interest.

Resources:

  • The Code of Conduct and Practice Guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics – COPE. https://publicationethics.org/
  • COPE Council. COPE Guidelines: Retraction Guidelines. November 2019. © 2021 Committee on Publication Ethics (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). https://publicationethics.org. https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4
  • Directive 2010/63/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 22 September 2010 on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes https://eur lex.europa.eu/eli/dir/2010/63/oj