Publication Ethics

General Principles

Notulae Scientia Biologicae is committed to high standards of research integrity, editorial independence, transparency, fairness, confidentiality, and accountability.

The journal is guided by internationally recognized principles and recommendations relevant to scholarly publishing, including the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing, and the recommendations of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE).

Where applicable, authors should also follow recognized reporting standards such as CONSORT for randomized controlled trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses, and other discipline-specific reporting guidelines.

Editorial Responsibility and Decision-Making

The Editors-in-Chief have overall responsibility for the editorial process. Each manuscript is assigned to a handling Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision regarding its acceptance or rejection.

Section Editors and other assigned editors may coordinate manuscript evaluation, select reviewers, assess review reports, communicate with authors and reviewers, request clarification or revision, and submit reasoned recommendations to the handling Editor-in-Chief.

Reviewers provide independent expert assessments and recommendations. They do not make editorial decisions.

Editorial decisions are based on scientific quality, originality, methodological soundness, ethical compliance, relevance to the journal’s scope, and the reliability of the evidence presented. Decisions must not be influenced by nationality, ethnicity, gender, religion, political beliefs, institutional affiliation, commercial considerations, or the authors’ ability to pay the Article Processing Charge.

Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, completeness, and ethical conduct of the work they submit.

Originality, Plagiarism, and Redundant Publication

All submitted manuscripts must represent original work. Plagiarism, self-plagiarism, duplicate publication, redundant publication, inappropriate text recycling, and undisclosed simultaneous submission are not permitted.

Manuscripts may be screened using similarity-detection software. Similarity reports are interpreted by editors and are not used as the sole basis for a decision.

Previous dissemination as an abstract, conference presentation, academic thesis, institutional repository deposit, or preprint must be disclosed where relevant. Authors must explain any substantial overlap with previously disseminated material.

Data, Results, and Image Integrity

Fabrication, falsification, selective omission, misleading presentation, inappropriate statistical manipulation, and alteration of data or results are prohibited.

Images must accurately represent the original observations. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, colour balance, or other image properties must be applied consistently and must not obscure, remove, introduce, or misrepresent scientific information.

Authors may be required to provide original data, unprocessed images, laboratory records, analysis files, code, protocols, or other supporting material during editorial evaluation or after publication.

Authors are encouraged to preserve research data and, where appropriate, make data, code, protocols, and materials available through recognized repositories or reasonable requests, subject to privacy, confidentiality, legal, ethical, and intellectual-property restrictions.

Authorship and Contributions

Authorship must be limited to individuals who made substantial intellectual contributions to the work, participated in drafting or critically revising the manuscript, approved the final version, and agreed to be accountable for the work.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged rather than listed as authors. Guest, honorary, gift, and ghost authorship are not permitted.

The manuscript must include an Authors’ Contributions statement. The journal encourages use of the CRediT taxonomy to describe individual contributions.

The contribution statement should conclude with:

Requests to add, remove, or reorder authors after submission require a clear explanation and written agreement from all authors. Such changes are normally not permitted after final acceptance except in exceptional and fully documented circumstances.

Conflicts of Interest

Authors, reviewers, editors, and Editorial Board members must disclose any actual, potential, or perceived conflict of interest that could affect, or reasonably appear to affect, the objectivity of the research, review, editorial decision, or publication process.

Conflicts may be financial, personal, professional, academic, institutional, intellectual, contractual, or competitive.

Where no conflict exists, authors may state:

Funding and Sponsor Involvement

Authors must identify all sources of funding, financial support, material support, sponsorship, and project support.

The role of funders or sponsors in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, and the decision to submit or publish must be described.

Where no specific funding was received, authors may use:

Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, human biological material, identifiable personal information, clinical records, surveys, interviews, or interventions must comply with applicable legal, institutional, and ethical requirements.

Authors must identify the approving ethics committee or institutional review body and provide the approval number, date, or other relevant identifier in the manuscript.

Research involving human participants should be conducted in accordance with the ethical principles of the Declaration of Helsinki and other applicable national or international requirements.

Authors must confirm that informed consent was obtained where required. Consent for participation and consent for publication of identifiable information or images must be distinguished where applicable.

Personally identifiable information must not be published unless it is scientifically necessary and appropriate consent has been obtained.

Clinical Studies and Reporting Standards

Clinical trials and other prospective interventional studies should be registered in a publicly accessible trial registry where required by applicable standards, regulations, or institutional policy.

Manuscripts should include the registry name, registration number, ethical approval information, and relevant reporting checklist where applicable.

Authors should follow recognized reporting guidelines appropriate to the study design, including CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, CARE, ARRIVE, or other relevant standards.

Research Involving Animals

Research involving animals must comply with applicable legislation, institutional requirements, internationally recognized animal-welfare standards, and the principles of replacement, reduction, and refinement.

Authors must identify the approving animal ethics committee or competent authority and provide the approval number or other relevant authorization.

The manuscript must describe animal species, source, housing, experimental procedures, anaesthesia, analgesia, humane endpoints, euthanasia methods, and measures taken to minimize pain and distress, where relevant.

Animal studies should be reported in accordance with ARRIVE or another appropriate reporting guideline.

Biological Material, Fieldwork, and Permits

Research involving biological specimens, microorganisms, genetic resources, protected species, field sampling, biodiversity resources, controlled materials, or restricted locations must comply with applicable permits, access requirements, biosafety provisions, and national or international regulations.

Authors must provide relevant collection permits, transfer agreements, biosafety approvals, institutional authorizations, or accession information where required.

Sensitive information concerning endangered species, protected habitats, vulnerable communities, culturally sensitive resources, or restricted locations should not be disclosed where publication could create a significant risk.

Peer-Review Integrity and Confidentiality

The journal operates a double-blind peer-review process for scholarly manuscripts selected for external evaluation.

Reviewers must maintain confidentiality, assess manuscripts objectively, disclose conflicts of interest, avoid personal criticism, provide clear and constructive comments, and refrain from using unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

Reviewer recommendations submitted through OJS are advisory. The final decision is made by the handling Editor-in-Chief.

Use of Generative AI

Artificial intelligence tools cannot be listed as authors. Human authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, integrity, references, data, images, analyses, interpretations, and conclusions of submitted work.

AI tools must not be used to fabricate or manipulate data, references, images, reviewer identities, review reports, results, or scientific claims.

Substantive use of generative AI in manuscript preparation must be disclosed where required by the journal.

Reviewers and editors must not upload confidential manuscripts, supplementary files, review reports, or editorial correspondence to unauthorized external AI platforms. Editorial decisions must remain based on human scholarly judgment.

Detailed requirements are available in the Use of Generative AI policy.

Research Misconduct and Ethical Allegations

The journal takes credible allegations of research and publication misconduct seriously. Concerns may be raised by authors, reviewers, editors, readers, institutions, funders, or other interested parties.

Potential misconduct includes:

A handling Editor-in-Chief, or an independent editor where necessary, conducts an initial confidential assessment. The journal may request explanations, raw data, original images, ethical approvals, permits, authorship statements, funding information, institutional records, or other relevant evidence.

All parties are given a reasonable opportunity to respond. Where an institutional investigation is required, the journal may refer the matter to an institution, funder, ethics committee, regulatory body, or other competent authority.

Editorial Actions in Cases of Misconduct

Depending on the seriousness, evidence, and stage of the case, the journal may:

Corrections, Retractions, and Expressions of Concern

Post-publication notices are linked to the original article and explain the reason for the action. Published content is not altered silently in ways that affect scientific meaning.

Retracted articles normally remain accessible and are clearly marked as retracted, except where removal is required for legal, privacy, confidentiality, or safety reasons.

Complaints and Appeals

Authors, reviewers, readers, and other interested parties may submit complaints regarding editorial procedures, reviewer or editor conduct, conflicts of interest, ethical concerns, corrections, retractions, or published content.

Authors may appeal an editorial decision when they believe that it resulted from a significant factual error, substantive misunderstanding, procedural irregularity, undisclosed conflict of interest, or demonstrably incorrect interpretation of relevant evidence.

Appeals must be reasoned, specific, and supported by relevant information. Disagreement with the scientific judgment of reviewers or editors alone is not sufficient grounds for appeal.

Appeals are considered by an Editor-in-Chief who was not directly responsible for the original decision. Where all Editors-in-Chief have a relevant conflict of interest, the appeal is assigned to an independent senior editor or suitably qualified Editorial Board member.

Manuscripts Submitted by Editors or Editorial Board Members

Manuscripts submitted by an Editor-in-Chief, Section Editor, other editor, Editorial Board member, or person closely associated with the journal are subject to the same scientific, ethical, and peer-review standards as all other submissions.

The author-editor is excluded from the evaluation, reviewer selection, editorial correspondence, and decision-making process for that manuscript.

The manuscript is assigned to an independent editor who has no relevant conflict of interest.

Post-Publication Discussion

The journal welcomes responsible and evidence-based post-publication discussion. Readers may contact the Editorial Office regarding possible errors, methodological concerns, ethical issues, missing declarations, potential misconduct, or requests for clarification.

Concerns should be expressed professionally and supported by relevant evidence. The journal may request a response from the authors and may publish a correction, reply, expression of concern, or retraction where appropriate.

Related Policies