Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement for Animal Production Research
Animal Production Research journal is committed to maintaining high standards through rigorous peer review and strict ethical guidelines. Any violations of professional ethics, such as plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, or false claims of authorship, are taken very seriously by the editors and without any tolerance.
The ethical policy of Animal Production Research is based on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Readers, authors, reviewers, and editors should follow these ethical guidelines when working with Animal Production Research. Further information on this topic in publication and ethics guidelines can be found below:
Authorship and Contribution Guidelines:
Only individuals who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript, as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content, including: (i) significant contributions to conception, design, execution, data collection, or analysis/interpretation carried out the study; (ii) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (iii) have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication. Anyone who has made significant contributions to the work referred to in the manuscript (e.g. technical assistance, writing, and editing assistance, general support) but does not meet the criteria for authorship should not be listed as an author but should be included in the “Acknowledgments”. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors (as defined above) and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the author list, and ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and its submission for publication.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose at the earliest opportunity (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript) any conflicts of interest that could affect the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial conflicts of interest such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers' bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership or other holdings, and paid expertise or patents. License agreements and non-financial agreements such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or beliefs relating to the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number, if available).
Reporting standard: The authors undertake to report their results fully and to take particular care in presenting the results and interpreting them. The underlying data should be accurately presented in the paper. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to enable others to reproduce the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Data access and sharing: Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study along with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if possible. In any case, authors should ensure that these data are accessible to other competent professionals (preferably through an institutional or discipline-based data repository or other data center) for at least 10 years after publication, provided that participants' confidentiality and legal rights to protected data can be protected do not oppose their publication.
Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism: All data and statements in the manuscript should be free from plagiarism, falsification, fabrications, or omission of significant material. Authors should ensure that they have written and submitted only original works and that, where they have used the works and/or words of others, they have been appropriately cited. Publications that influenced the type of work presented in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism can take many forms, from "passing off" someone else's work as that of the author, to copying or paraphrasing significant portions of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms represents unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Multiple, Duplicate, Redundant, or Concurrent Submission/Publication: Articles describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Therefore, authors should not submit a manuscript for consideration that has already been published in another journal. Submitting a manuscript to more than one journal at the same time constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Peer Review: Authors are required to participate in the peer review process and to cooperate fully by promptly responding to editors' requests for raw data, clarifications and evidence of ethics approval, patient consent, and copyright permissions. In the case of an initial “need revision” decision, authors should respond systematically, point by point, and promptly to the reviewers’ comments, revise their manuscript within the specified deadline and resubmit it to the journal.
Acknowledgment: The author should specifically cite all sources that support the research. Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others and also cite publications that have influenced the type of work reported. Information obtained privately (from conversations, correspondence, or discussions with third parties) may not be used or disclosed without the express written permission of the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as the review of manuscripts or funding applications, unless they have obtained the express written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.
Fundamental Errors in Works: If authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their duty to promptly notify the editors or editor of the journal and to cooperate with them to either correct the work in the form of an erratum or to retract the work. If the editors or publisher learn from third parties that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, the authors are obliged to immediately correct or retract the article or provide proof of its accuracy to the journal editors.
Publication Decisions: The Editors will ensure that all submitted manuscripts considered for publication are peer-reviewed by at least two reviewers who are experts in the relevant field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for making the decision to accept or reject manuscripts submitted to the journal based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, reviewers' comments, and legal requirements as currently applicable Defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other Editors or reviewers when making the final decision.
Fair Review: Editors should fairly consider all manuscripts offered for publication and judge each on its merits, without regard to the country, race, religion, nationality, gender, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). Editing and publication decisions are not governed by the policies of any government or authority outside this journal. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over all editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.
Confidentiality: The Editors will ensure that systems are in place to ensure the confidentiality and protection against misuse of the material submitted to the journal during the review, as well as the protection of the identity of authors and reviewers, and will themselves take all reasonable measures to ensure confidentiality to protect authors’ information and the identity of the reviewers.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Editors should ensure that submitted manuscripts are treated confidentially and that no content of the manuscript is disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author or reviewers. Editors should excuse themselves from reviewing a manuscript in which they have an actual or potential conflict of interest arising from competitive, collaborative, financial, or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscript. In such a case, they will assign another member of the editorial team to edit the manuscript.
Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations: Editors will take appropriate action if ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted manuscript or published work. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior is investigated, even if it is discovered years after publication. When processing suspected cases of misconduct, the editorial team follows the COPE flowcharts. If the investigation determines that the ethical concerns are justified, a correction, retraction, statement of concern, or other relevant comment, as appropriate, will be published in the journal.
Fair Reviews: Peer review is an essential part of formal scholarly communication and is at the heart of scholarly endeavors. Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and professionally. They should avoid personal bias in their comments and judgments and express their views clearly with supporting arguments. Reviewers must provide informed and fair reviews to assist the Editor in editorial decisions, and can also assist the author in improving the manuscript through editorial communication with the author.
Right of Refusal: Any selected reviewer who believes that they are not qualified to review the assigned manuscript or are unable to provide a timely review should notify the Editor and excuse themselves from the review process. If they know other reviewers, they can suggest them to the Editor-in-Chief via the dedicated email/comments section in the reviewer dashboard. In addition, reviewers should refuse to review manuscripts if they have provided the author with written comments on the manuscript or a previous version and for which they have conflicts of interest arising from collaborative, financial, institutional, personal or other relationships or affiliations with any of the companies, institutions or individuals associated with the manuscript.
Confidentiality: Information about manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and treated as confidential information. Reviewers should not discuss the manuscript with anyone other than the Editor-in-Chief, nor should they discuss any information in the manuscript without permission. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations should be clearly stated with supporting arguments so that authors can use them to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.
Acknowledgment of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published papers that have not been cited by the authors. Any statement that has already been reported elsewhere should be accompanied by an appropriate citation. Reviewers should also bring to the Editor-in-Chief's attention any significant similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under consideration and other published articles of which they have personal knowledge.
Conflict of Interest: Any invited reviewer who has conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative or other relationships or affiliations with any of the authors, companies or institutions associated with the manuscript and the work described therein should promptly notify the editors to disclose their conflicts of interest to explain and reject the invitation for review so that alternative reviewers can be invited.
Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript may not be used for a reviewer's own research without the express written consent of the authors. Confidential information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer's personal benefit. This also applies to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.
Handling of Unethical Publishing Behavior: In the event of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication, or plagiarism, the publisher will, in close cooperation with the editors, take all appropriate measures to clarify the matter and correct the article in question. This includes the immediate publication of an erratum, the clarification, or, in the worst case, the withdrawal of the affected work. The Publisher, together with the Editors, will take reasonable measures to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts where scientific misconduct has occurred and will not, under any circumstances, encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
Access to Journal Content: The publisher is committed to the long-term availability and preservation of scientific research and ensures accessibility through partnerships with organizations and the maintenance of its own digital archive.
Publisher Business Model: “University of Guilan” as publisher supports the journal for each published issue by paying a fixed budget according to its published annual rank in the portal of scientific journals of the Ministry of Science, Research and Technology of Iran for costs, including the costs of setting up and maintaining the publication infrastructure, the routine operation of the journal, the processing of manuscripts through peer review, editing, publication, maintenance of the scientific record and archiving.
Identification of and Dealing with Allegations of Misconduct
The Publisher and Editors of the journal take appropriate measures to identify and prevent the publication of articles where scientific misconduct has occurred, including, but not limited to, plagiarism, citation manipulation, and data falsification/fabrication. This includes the immediate publication of an erratum, the clarification, or, in the worst case, the withdrawal of the affected work. The Publisher, together with the Editors, will take reasonable measures to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts where scientific misconduct has occurred and will not, under any circumstances, encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.
Journal’s policy on intellectual property
All intellectual property policies, including copyright and publishing licenses, are described below:
- License terms
All content of the Journal is published with open access under the License of Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0). All authors are given the option to make articles available under the terms of the license (CC-BY 4.0).
The workings of the Creative Commons CC BY License, as stated on the Creative Commons website, is defined as below:
"This license lets others distribute, remix, adapt, and build upon your work, even commercially, as long as they credit you for the original creation. This is the most compatible of licenses for maximum publication and use of licensed materials."
- Copyright Policy
Copyright in any article published by Animal Production Research under license (CC-BY 4.0) is retained by the author(s). But, allow anyone to download, reuse, reprint, distribute, and copy as long as the original authors and source are cited properly. The authors retain unrestricted copyrights and publishing rights. The author has complete control over the work (e.g., retains the right to reuse, distribute, republish, etc.).
Article Processing Charge (APCs)
- There are no submission fees in this journal, but all accepted papers will be subject to an Article Publishing Charge (APCs) of 7000000 Rials for publication.
- No fee is charged to any reader for downloading articles and reviews for their own scholarly use.
Policy against Plagiarism
The Animal Production Research Editorial Team takes the necessary measures to check incoming contributions for their originality, the reliability of the information contained, and the correct use of quotations. The editorial board of the journal recognizes that plagiarism is unacceptable and therefore establishes the following guidelines, which establish specific actions when plagiarism is detected in a manuscript submitted for publication to Animal Production Research.
Plagiarism in any form, including quoting or paraphrasing significant portions of another's article (without attribution), “passing off” another's article as the author's own, or claiming results from research conducted by others constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscript fully describes the original work and is free from any aspects of plagiarism. All authors are recommended to use plagiarism detection software for similarity checking. Care should be taken to ensure that the work has not yet been published in another language and is not submitted to other journals at the same time (multiple submissions are not acceptable).
If the Editorial Board of the journal or one of the reviewers detects any of the above unethical publishing behavior, the paper will be rejected immediately and the Editorial Board will contact the author(s) to request an explanation and change of the plagiarized content. If the author(s) does not respond within a reasonable time or does not make the necessary adjustments, the Editors of other journals (in case of multiple submission) and the author's respective institution will be notified and the author's name will be blacklisted not possible to submit manuscripts to Animal Production Research.
If plagiarism is reported by someone after publishing an article, the case will be investigated by the journal's Editorial Board. If the plagiarized content is noticed, the article will be removed from our journal's archive and the author's respective institution will be notified. The authors' names will be blacklisted.
Check for Plagiarism
In the first step, the manuscript is inspected for plagiarism, and depending on the similarity check report by the “Hamanandjo system” of the Iranian Research Institute for Information Science and Technology (IranDoc) (https://tik.irandoc.ac.ir/), the manuscript is either progressed into the review phase or rejected due to similarities. The acceptable similarity percentage is less than 30%.
Policy on complaints and appeals
If authors disagree with the editorial decision on their manuscripts, they have the right to appeal. Authors wishing to appeal an editorial decision should contact the Editor-in-Chief of Animal Production Research. In such cases, the Editor-in-Chief reviews the manuscript as well as the comments of the Editor and reviewers and decides whether to accept or reject a manuscript. If necessary, the Editor-in-Chief can send the manuscript to a new Editor in charge for further editorial review and to a new reviewer for further peer review. In this case, the journal's Editorial Board is the final decision maker.
How to Make a Complaint against the Staff of Journal, Editorial Board, or Publisher
The process for filing a complaint is simple. The complaint can be submitted via email.
Please email: ar@guilan.ac.ir or arj.guilan@gmail.com
All complaints will be acknowledged within three working days.
Policies on data sharing and reproducibility
Authors can archive the final published version of their articles in personal or institutional repositories immediately after publication.
Post-Publication Discussions
This journal allows post-publication debate on the journal's website via "Send Letter to the Editor". Our mechanisms for correcting, revising, or retracting articles after publication depend on the content of the comments received, and the comments submitted must be useful and applicable to readers/authors.
Correction and retraction policy
The corrections must be made by the author during the revision step. Adding or removing a new author from the manuscript should be requested from the corresponding author and all authors must sign it. Please note the following: Adding or removing a new author from the manuscript is possible prior to acceptance and publication. Adding or removing a new author from the manuscript is no longer possible after acceptance and publication.
Deceased Authors:
Animal Production Research's policy in the case of deceased authors is as follows:
Prior to acceptance of manuscripts, the deceased author's name may be removed from the manuscript with the consent of all authors. This decision depends on the late author's input and the final decision requires the approval of the editor of Animal Production Research. If the deceased author is the correspondent of the submitted manuscript, the corresponding author must be changed. The new corresponding author must be selected with the consent of all authors. Once manuscripts have been accepted, removing or adding the name of the deceased author is no longer possible. Authors may change the deceased corresponding author after acceptance. The new corresponding author must be selected with the consent of all authors. It should be noted that the name of the deceased author should be mentioned in the footnote of the work.
This Journal retracts a publication if: