Publication Ethics for Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops
In order to strengthen the academic integrity construction of Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops, standardize the process of writing, reviewing, editing and publishing papers, and resist academic misconduct, according to the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China, Academic Publishing Specification-Definition of Academic Misconduct for Journals (CY/T 174-2019), Code of Ethics for Publishing Scientific and Technological Journals, and relevant articles of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), and in combination with the actual situation of this journal, the ethical norms for the authors, reviewers, editors and publishers of Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops are formulated.
1. “Publication ethics” in this code refer to the moral norms and codes of conduct that should be followed by all subjects in the publication of academic journals.
2. Academic misconducts refer to the behaviors that violate academic norms and ethics, including the misconducts defined in Copyright Law and Academic Publishing Specification-Definition of Academic Misconduct for Journals (CY/T 174-2019).
3. Conflict of interest refers to the conflict between different individuals or groups in scientific activities, or between individuals and groups in the secondary interests (such as economic interests, friendship, kinship, etc.) and the main interests represented by their duties (such as ensuring the objectivity of research results, etc.).
4. This journal adopts the “Scientific and Technological Journal Academic Misconduct Literature Crosscheck System (AMLC)” of China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI) to detect academic misconduct of submitted papers. This journal requires that the coincidence between the manuscript and other studies should not exceed 20%, and it should consider: (1) whether the repetitive part is the main result and viewpoint. If yes, it will not be published; (2) Whether the rest of the manuscript can support a paper if the duplicate content is expressed by reference after deletion. If not, it will not be published.
Ethics for Authors
1. The author shall be responsible for the authenticity of the paper, and be responsible for cooperating with the editorial department to provide original pictures, original data, fund project contract, project name and other supporting materials when necessary.
2. The author must submit the paper copyright transfer agreement signed and confirmed by all the authors when submitting the manuscript to ensure that the manuscript does not involve multiple submissions, confidentiality issues, and signature disputes.
3. The author should abide by the principle of “Five Prohibitions”: no third party is allowed to write the paper; No third party is allowed to submit papers; No third party is allowed to modify the content of the paper; The false peer reviewer information is not allowed; It is not allowed to violate the paper signature norms (see articles 4-7 of this part), and the non-substantial academic contributor is strongly prohibited to affix his signature on the paper.
4. The signed author is the substantive contributor of the paper, including:
——Those who make important contributions to the idea or design of research work, or who obtain, analyze or interpret data for the research data;
——Drafters of research papers, or revisers of papers on important intellectual contents;
——Those who finalize the version to be published;
——Those who agree to be responsible for all aspects of the research work to ensure that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the paper are properly investigated and resolved.
Those who do not meet the above criteria should not be listed as authors. If they only provide technical assistance to the paper or provide financial and material support, the author can express gratitude to those who provide assistance in the acknowledgment.
5. In principle, the author's signature shall be sorted according to the contribution, which shall be jointly agreed by the signed authors of the paper and determined at the time of submission. Generally, the author's and the unit's signature shall not be changed (including the change of order and the addition of signature). If the change is necessary for some reasons, the main person in charge of the paper (the first author and the corresponding author) shall submit a written change application to the editorial department, state the reasons, provide relevant certificates, and be signed by all the signed authors. The editorial department shall handle it cautiously after verifying the facts. The author shall not change the order of signatures or add signatures to the revised manuscript without authorization.
6. In principle, the first author and corresponding author shall not be changed after submission; If more than one co-first author or co-corresponding author is added, the contents of the manuscript must be the core research results funded by the national project of multi-center or multi-disciplinary collaborative research, and the two units are different.
7. The author should indicate the author's name and unit when submitting the manuscript. The author unit should be related to the research content of the paper. If it is not, the author should explain his contribution in the research, or the author unit should issue a certificate to prove that he is indeed engaged in the research.
8. If the institution to which the author belongs is inconsistent with the institution that completes the topic selection and research scheme design, conducts research work and provides research conditions (such as graduate students leaving the training unit, advanced students, visiting scholars, cooperative research, etc.), the institution that provides research conditions and completes research work shall be the first signatory.
9. The author should declare whether there is a conflict of interest when submitting the manuscript. If there is a conflict of interest, all economic interests that may affect the research results shall be explained, such as whether there is a commercial interest relationship between the research and the enterprise; Whether the enterprise has given any financial support in the aspects of experimental design and implementation, data processing, paper writing and publication, etc.
10. If the author has any objection to the review opinions and results, he can submit a written statement to the editorial department, and make a detailed interpretation and explanation for each review opinion.
11. When publishing the main achievements of master or doctor graduates, it should try to ensure that the submitted papers and graduation papers are independent of each other. If the degree thesis is published in the journal database, the editorial department must be notified in time to take preventive measures for academic misconduct detection.
12. After the publication of the paper, if the author finds that there are obvious errors or changes in the paper, please inform the editorial department to coordinate and deal with them, and publish corrections or withdraw the manuscript.
Ethics for Reviewers
1. Reviewers should adhere to the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality and timeliness to give responsible professional review opinions on the manuscript. No prejudice or discrimination shall be made against the author's scientific research institution, region, qualification, nationality, etc., and the author's research contents shall not be disclosed.
2. When there is a conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author (such as kinship, teacher-student relationship, alumni relationship, colleague relationship, competition relationship), in order to ensure the fairness of the review, the reviewer shall declare the conflict of interest to the editorial department in time, and the editorial department shall decide whether to withdraw.
3. When reviewers find that the author's research is similar to their own, they shall not use the convenience of manuscript review to suppress or belittle the author's thesis.
4. Before the publication of the paper, reviewers are not allowed to use the useful information in the paper for their own research without the consent of the author.
5. The reviewer shall review the manuscript in time according to the agreement. If the reviewer cannot return the manuscript in time, he/she shall inform the editorial department in time and return the manuscript for review. The reviewer can be recommended. Without the consent of the editorial department, the reviewers shall not authorize their own students and colleagues to review on their behalf.
6. The reviewer shall not imply or directly ask the author to quote relevant papers published by himself or his team, unless the author is negligent and the relevant citation is directly related to the paper.
7. If the review experts find that the manuscript they reviewed is the same as the manuscript they have reviewed, they are obliged to report the situation to the editorial department and fill in the review opinions according to the journal inclusion standards. The editorial department will handle it carefully according to the actual situation.
8. Reviewers should use their professional knowledge and abilities to review the originality, scientificity and practicability of the manuscript; make a fair evaluation on whether the research methods are appropriate, whether the scientific research design is reasonable, whether the results and conclusions are accurate, whether there are ethical problems and breaches of confidence so as to help the editor judge the selection of manuscripts; put forward detailed modification suggestions on the existing problems of the article to help the author improve the manuscript quality.
Ethics for Editors
1. The editor shall handle each manuscript fairly, justly and timely, and make the decision of accepting or rejecting the manuscript according to the importance, originality, scientificity, readability, authenticity of research and its relevance to the scope of periodical reports.
2. Editors shall abide by the principle of confidentiality, and shall not disclose the information of reviewers to the author, disclose the information of the author's paper to anyone other than the Editorial Committee and reviewers, or use the data information in the paper for their own relevant research without authorization.
3. Editors shall not interfere with peer review driven by interests, and shall ensure the independent review of peer experts to ensure the fairness and impartiality of peer review.
4. For the peer review experts recommended by the author, the editor should verify whether the information of reviewers is true, and decide whether to use the recommended reviewers according to their research fields and expertise and whether there is a conflict of interest with the author. If the author requests to avoid an expert from reviewing his manuscript, and this request is reasonable, the editor should respect it.
5. When selecting paper review experts, editors should try their best to avoid selecting experts from the same unit as the author, and should not select the signed author or the experts explicitly mentioned in the paper acknowledgements as the review experts.
6. When there is a conflict of interest between the editor and the author (such as kinship, teacher-student relationship, alumni relationship, colleague relationship, competitive relationship), the editor should avoid handling the manuscript.
7. The editor should treat the author's complaint carefully, organize a collective discussion or ask the review experts to review it again.
8. Editors should consider publishing controversial results obtained through rigorous scientific research to fully highlight the concept of "letting a hundred flowers blossom and a hundred schools of thought contend".
9. The editor has the obligation to remind the author of possible copyright and intellectual property problems after changing the signature, unit and order.
10. The editor shall obtain the consent of the author for the key revisions to the paper involving academic views, and shall ensure that the edited paper can clearly express the author's academic views.
11. The editor shall be responsible for timely checking the problems and complaints proposed by readers or papers found to have academic misconduct with the author, and the editorial department shall make a final decision.
Ethics for Publishers
1. This journal follows the principle of first publication and only publishes academic papers with original research results.
2. This journal has the responsibility to avoid academic misconduct such as multiple submissions and repeated publication of one manuscript, and to conduct academic misconduct detection and review on the papers submitted for the first time and the papers to be published.
3. In case of doubt about the authenticity of the paper, if the author cannot provide the original pictures, original data, fund project contract, project name and other relevant supporting materials, this journal has the right to reject or withdraw the manuscript.
4. If academic misconduct is found in the manuscript that has been finalized and accepted, this journal has the right to reject the manuscript and notify the author’s unit and relevant journals.
5. For published papers, if academic misconduct is found, this journal will withdraw the manuscript, publish a withdrawal statement, and notify the author’s unit and relevant journals.
6. Our website (http://gdnykx.cnjournals.org/) publish and timely update the detailed guidelines required by the author (such as submission guidelines, submission instructions, paper templates, etc.).
Editorial Department of Chinese Journal of Tropical Crops