Ethics of the scientific publication

Details: Hits: 4780

Ethics of the scientific publication

The Editorial Board of Biotechnologia Acta adheres to international publication ethics standards established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/guidance/Guidelines). Fabrication or falsification of data, plagiarism (including duplicate publication of one’s own work without proper citation), and unlawful appropriation of research results are strictly unacceptable practices. The Editorial Board treats all cases of ethical misconduct with the utmost seriousness; each case will be considered in accordance with COPE recommendations.
Compliance with ethical rules by all participants in the publication process ensures:
• protection of authors’ intellectual property rights,
• enhancement of the journal’s quality and credibility in the global scientific community,
• prevention of unauthorized use of authors’ materials.
The journal’s policy requires the publication of only new and original works. Use of copyrighted texts, even in introductory sections, is permissible only with clear citation of the source. Each article must demonstrate scientific novelty and be written in the author’s own words.
If substantial textual overlap with previously published works is detected without proper explanation, the manuscript will not be reconsidered for publication. This requirement is an integral part of the editorial policy and peer review process of Biotechnologia Acta.

1. Authors’ Responsibilities
Authorship is limited to those who have made a significant intellectual contribution to the conception, execution, or interpretation of the research. Individuals whose contributions do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged but not listed as authors.
Authors bear personal responsibility for submitted manuscripts and are required to adhere to the following principles:
• Reliability and originality: present accurate, original research results; avoid fabrication, plagiarism, or excessive borrowing. All sources must be properly cited.
• Publication uniqueness: submit only works not under review elsewhere and not previously published. If elements of prior publications are used, differences must be clearly indicated with references.
• Data transparency: be prepared to provide raw data for editorial review and retain them for a reasonable period after publication.
• Acknowledgment of contributions: recognize all individuals who influenced the research and obtain permission for use of private or illustrative materials.
• Accurate authorship: include only those with substantial contributions; all co-authors must approve the final manuscript and share responsibility for its content.
• Error correction: promptly notify the editorial office of significant errors and cooperate in their correction.
• Funding and conflicts of interest: openly declare sources of support and any circumstances that may affect results or interpretation.

2. Reviewers’ Ethical Principles
Reviewers of Biotechnologia Acta conduct independent and impartial evaluation of manuscripts in line with COPE recommendations. Their responsibilities include:
• Objectivity and constructiveness: provide fair, reasoned feedback aimed at improving the manuscript; personal or offensive remarks are unacceptable.
• Timeliness: deliver reviews within the agreed timeframe or inform the editor of delays.
• Competence: accept assignments only when qualified; specify areas of expertise if limited.
• Conflict of interest: disclose any personal, professional, or financial conflicts that may affect impartiality.
• Confidentiality: treat manuscripts as confidential documents; content must not be used for personal benefit or shared with third parties.
• Accuracy of references: alert the editor to uncited relevant sources or overlaps with other works.
• Responsibility: promptly report errors or inaccuracies discovered during review.

3. Editorial Board and Editors’ Ethical Principles
The Editorial Board of Biotechnologia Acta follows COPE recommendations, ensuring transparency, impartiality, and adherence to high standards of scholarly publishing.
Key principles:
• Impartiality: manuscripts are evaluated solely on scientific merit, regardless of authors’ personal or social characteristics.
• Confidentiality: manuscript information (content, status, reviews) is not disclosed; unpublished data must not be used for personal gain.
• Editorial responsibility: publication decisions are based on data reliability and scientific significance, free from conflicts of interest.
• Process transparency: clear requirements are communicated to authors and reviewers; complaints or errors are addressed promptly.
• Respect for authors: authors’ ideas and materials must not be used or discussed prior to official publication.

4. Publisher’s Ethical Principles
The publisher of Biotechnologia Acta upholds high standards of publication ethics and ensures:
• support for ethical responsibilities of authors, reviewers, and editors,
• confidentiality of submitted materials and use of personal data solely for journal purposes,
• readiness to issue corrections, clarifications, or retractions when necessary,
• removal of works containing plagiarism or unreliable data,
• preservation of manuscripts, reviews, and correspondence for at least three years,
• investigation of ethical complaints, even years after publication,
• timely processing of manuscripts and communication with authors regarding delays or decisions,
• protection of interests by prohibiting use of unpublished data or reviewer comments without consent.

5. Disclosure of Potential Conflicts of Interest
To ensure transparency, all participants must declare relationships or interests that may directly or indirectly affect objectivity.
• Authors must disclose grants, financial support, consulting, employment, advisory roles, multiple affiliations, etc.
• Reviewers and editors must recuse themselves from manuscripts where conflicts exist (competition, collaboration, personal or professional ties).
• Confidential information or ideas from manuscripts must not be used for personal benefit.
• If conflicts are discovered post-publication, the editorial office must issue a notice, correction, or expression of concern.
Examples include: research funding, honoraria, consulting, employment, advisory positions, or personal/professional beliefs that may influence evaluation.

6. Compliance with Ethical Standards
Authors must include a section titled “Compliance with Ethical Standards” specifying:
• sources of funding and conflicts of interest (financial and non-financial),
• informed consent for studies involving humans,
• animal welfare statements for studies involving animals.

7. Appeals and Complaints
Appeals and complaints are handled by the Editor-in-Chief or responsible editor.
• Content appeals: the editor reviews authors’ and reviewers’ arguments to decide whether to uphold the rejection, seek an independent opinion, or reconsider the manuscript. Decisions are final.
• Process complaints: issues such as delays are investigated, and feedback is provided to improve procedures.
• Ethical complaints: considered jointly with the publisher; confirmed violations result in corrective actions ranging from retractions to notifying relevant institutions