ISSN : 2277 -7601

"An International Indexed & Peer Reviewed Quarterly Journal in Agriculture and Sciences"

web-based Editorial Management System

National Academy of Agricultural Sciences 2024

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements

Publication Decisions:-

The editor of a learned journal is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjugation with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and the reader must always underwrite such decisions.
The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by
such legal requirement as shall then be in force regarding issues as libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism, the editor may confirm with other editors or reviewers (society officers) in making these decisions.

Peer Review:-
The editor shall ensure that the peer-review process is fair unbiased and timely. Research the article must typically be reviewed by at least two external and independent reviewers, and where necessary the editor should seek additional opinions.
The editor shall select reviewers who have suitable expertise in the relevant field and shall follow best practices in avoiding the selection of fraudulent peer reviewers. The editor shall review all disclosure of potential conflicts of interest and suggestions for self-citations made by reviewers to determine whether there is any potential for bias.

Fair play:-
The editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race,
gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
The editorial policies of the journal should encourage transparency and complete, honest reporting, and the editor should ensure that peer reviewers and authors have a clear understanding of what is expected of them. The editor shall use the journal's standard electronic submission system for all journal communications.
The editor shall establish, along with the publishers, a transparent mechanism for appeal against editorial decisions.

Journal Metrics:-
The editor must not attempt to influence the ranking of the journal by artificially increasing any journal metrics. In particular, the editor shall not require the references to that (or any other) journals articles are included except for genuine scholarly reasons and authors should not be required to include references to the editors own articles or products and services in which the editors have an interest.

The editor must protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers, unless otherwise agreed with the relevant authors and reviewers. In exceptional circumstance and consultation with the publishers, the editor may share limited information with the editor of other journals where deemed necessary to investigate suspected research misconduct.
Unless the journal is operating an open peer- review system and/or reviewers have agreed to disclose their names, the editor must protect the reviewer’s identities.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Competing Interests:-
Any potential editorial conflicts of interest should be declared to the publisher in writing before the appointment of the editor, and then updated if and when new conflicts arise. The publisher may publish such a declaration in the journal.
The editor must not be involved in decisions about papers which s/he has written him/herself or have been written by family members or colleagues or which relate to product or service in which the editor has an interest. Further, any such submission must be subject to all of the journals usual procedures, peer review must be handle independently of the relevant authors/editor and their research groups, and there must be clear statements to this effect on any such paper that is published.
The editor shall apply Elsevier’s policy relating to the disclosure of potential conflicts of interest by authors and reviewers e.g. the ICMJE guidelines.

Vigilance over published record:-
The editor should work to safeguard the integrity of the published record by reviewing and assessing reported or suspected misconduct (research, publication, reviewer, and editorial) in
conjunction with the publisher (or society).
Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration to the respective complaint or claim made but may also include further communication to the relevant institutes and research bodies. The editor shall further make appropriate use of the publisher's system for the detection of misconduct, such as plagiarism.
An editor presented with convincing of misconduct should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to arrange the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other correction to the record, as may be relevant.

Contribution to Editorial Decisions:-

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication and lies at the heart of the scientific method. In addition to the specific ethics-related duties described below, reviewers are asked generally to treat authors and their work as they would like to be treated themselves and to observe good reviewing etiquette.
Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or know that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and decline to participate in the review process.

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share the review or information about the paper with anyone or contact the authors directly without permission from the editor.
Some editors encourage discussion with colleagues or co-reviewer exercises, but reviewers should first discuss this with the editor to ensure that confidentiality is observed and that participants receive suitable credit.
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in the reviewer's research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Ethical Issues:-
A reviewer should be alert to potential ethical issues in the paper and should bring these to the the attention of the editor, including any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which the reviewer has personal knowledge. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation.

Standards of Objectivity and Conflict of Interest:-
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Reviewers should be aware of any personal bias they may have and take this into account when reviewing a paper. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should consult the Editor before agreeing to review a paper where they have potential conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships of connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
If a reviewer suggests that an author includes citations to the reviewer’s work, this must be for genuine scientific reasons and not to increase the reviewer’s citation count or enhancing the visibility of their work.

Reporting Standards:-

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient details and references to permit the other to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial ‘opinion’ works should be identified as such.

Data Access and Retention:-
Authors may be asked to provide the research data supporting their paper for editorial review and/or to comply with the open data requirements of the journal. Authors should be prepared to provide access to such data, if practicable, and should be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable number of years after publication. Authors may refer to their journal’s Guide for Authors for further details.

Originality and Acknowledgement of Sources:-
The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the world and /or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted and permission has been obtained where necessary.
Proper acknowledgment of the work of the others must always be given. Authors should cite publication that have influenced the reported work and that give the work appropriate the context within the larger scholarly record. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
Plagiarism takes many forms, from’ passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s paper, to copying or paraphrasing a substantial part of another’s paper without attribution, to claiming a result from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication:-
An author should not, in general, publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical behavior and is unacceptable.
In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal paper the has been published previously, except in the form of an abstract as a part of a published lecture or academic thesis or as an electronic preprint.
Publication of some kind of articles e.g. clinical guidelines, translations in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The author and the editor of the journal concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further details on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found in the ICMJE.

Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper:-
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made substantial contributions should be listed as co-authors.
Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the paper e.g. language, editing, or medical writing, they should be recognized in the acknowledgment section.
The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
Authors are expressed to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide a definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Only in exceptional circumstances will the Editor consider the addition, deletion, or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been submitted and the author must flag any such request to the Editor. All authors must agree with any such addition, removal, or rearrangement.
Authors take collective responsibility for the work. Each author is accountable for ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.
Individual journals may have particular definitions of authorship e.g. medical journal may follow the ICMJE definition and authors should ensure that they comply with the policies of the relevant journal.

Hazards and Human/Animal Subjects:-
if the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual inherent in
their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.
If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
For human subjects, the author should ensure that the work described has been carried out. The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Declaration of Helsink) for experiments involving humans. All animal experiments should comply with the ARRIVE guidelines and should be carried out by the U.K. Animal (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986 and associated guidelines or EU Directive 2010/63/EU on the protection of animals used for scientific purposes or the U.S. Public Health Services Policy on Humane Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and, as applicable, the Animal Welfare Act. Appropriate consents, permission, and releases must be obtained where an author wishes to include case details or other personal information or images of patients and any other individuals in an Elsevier publication. Written consents must be retained by the author and copies of the consents or evidence the consents have been obtained must be provided to Elsevier on request.

Competing Interests:-
WAME defines a conflict of interest as ‘a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities, such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behavior or judgment was motivated by consideration of his or her competing interests’. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial and personal relationships with other people or an organization that could be viewed as inappropriately influencing (bias) their work.
All sources of financial support for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article should be disclosed, as should the role of the sponsors, if any, in study design, in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and the decision to submit the article for publication, if the funding sources had no such involvement then this should be stated.
Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent application/registration, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should
be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

Fundamental Errors in Published Works:-
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper if deemed necessary by the editor. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains an error, it is the obligation of the author to cooperate with the editor, including providing evidence to the editor where requested.

Image Integrity:-
It is not acceptable to enhance, obscure, move, remove, or introduce a specific feature within an image. Adjustment of brightness, contrast, or color balance is acceptable if and as long as they do not obscure or eliminate any information present in the original.
Manipulating images for improved clarity is accepted, but manipulation for other purposes
could be seen as scientific ethical abuse and will be dealt with accordingly.
Authors should comply with any specific policy for graphical images applied by the relevant journal, e.g. providing the original images as supplementary material with the article, or depositing these in a suitable repository.

Clinical Trial Transparency:-
Elsevier supports clinical trial transparency. For relevant journals, authors are expected to conform to industry best standards in clinical trial registration and presentation, for example the CONSORT guidelines, as further set out in the policies of the relevant journal.