Publication Ethics Code of Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences
· In order to strengthen the construction of academic integrity of Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences, standardize the process of writing, reviewing, editing and publishing papers, and resist academic misconduct, and in accordance with the Copyright Law of the People's Republic of China, the Press and Publication Industry Standard of the People's Republic of China, the Definition of Academic Misconduct in Journals Regulating Academic Publication (CY/T 174-2019), the Code of Ethics for Publishing Scientific and Technological Journals, and other relevant provisions, combined with the actual situation of the journal, we formulate the code of ethics for authors, reviewers, editors and publishers of Xinjiang Agricultural Sciences.
1. "Publishing ethics" in this Code refers to the code of ethics and code of conduct that should be followed by all parties in the publishing of academic journals.
2. Academic misconduct refers to behaviors that violate academic norms and academic ethics, which includes misconduct as defined by Copyright Law and the Definition of Academic Misconduct in Journals in Academic Publication Standards (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, between secondary interests (such as economic interests, friendship, family, etc.) and the primary interests represented by their duties (such as ensuring the objectivity of research results, etc.).
4. This journal adopts CNKI's "Scientific Journals Article Multi-Label Classification (AMLC)" to detect the academic misconduct of the submitted papers. It is required that the coincidence degree between the manuscript and other studies should not exceed 20%, and the following considerations should be taken into account: (1) whether the duplicate part is the main result and opinion. If they are, they will not be published; (2) If the duplicate content is expressed in references after deletion, whether the remaining part of the manuscript can support a paper. If not, the paper will not be published.
· I. The author ethics
The author shall be responsible for the authenticity of the paper and, if necessary, cooperate with the editorial department to provide original pictures, original data, fund project contract and project name and other supporting materials.
2. When submitting papers, authors must submit the Copyright License Agreement signed and confirmed by all authors to ensure that no manuscript is submitted to other publishers, no confidentiality issues are involved, and the attribution is free from controversy.
3. The author should abide by the principle of "five nos" : No third party is allowed to write the paper; No third party is allowed to submit the paper; No third party is allowed to modify the content of the paper; Do not provide false peer reviewer information; Do not violate the code of attribution of papers (see Articles 4 to 7 below), and resolutely resist the attribution of papers by non-substantive academic contributors.
4. The signed author is a substantial contributor to the paper, including:
－ a significant contributor to the idea or design of the research work, or to the acquisition, analysis or interpretation of the research data;
-- who drafted the research paper, or made intellectually significant changes to the paper;
-- who finalizes the version to be published;
-- who agrees to take responsibility for all aspects of the research work to ensure that issues relating 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, such as those who only provided technical assistance to the paper, or who provided financial and material support, and may thank those who provided assistance in the acknowledgments.
5. In principle, the author's signature should be sorted according to the size of the contribution, which should be jointly agreed by the authors of the paper and determined at the time of submission. The author and the unit signature generally cannot be changed (including changing the order and adding the signature). If it is necessary to make changes for some reason, the main person in charge of the paper (the first author and corresponding author or corresponding author) should submit a written application for change to the editorial department, state the reasons, provide relevant proof, and be signed by all the signed authors, and the editorial department will handle it carefully after verifying the facts. The author may not change the order of attribution or add attribution in the revised draft without authorization.
6. In principle, the first author and corresponding author or corresponding author may not be changed after submission; If more than one co-corresponding author or corresponding author is added, the content of the manuscript must be the core research results funded by national or provincial or ministerial projects.
7. The author should indicate the author's name and organization when submitting the paper. The author's institution should be related to the research content of the paper.
8. If the institutional unit affiliated to the author is inconsistent with the institutional unit that completes the topic selection, research program design, research work and research conditions (such as graduate students leaving the training unit, students, visiting scholars, cooperative research, etc.), the institution that provides the research conditions and completed the research work shall be the first signed unit.
9. If the author has any objection to the review opinions and results, s/he may submit a written statement to the editorial department with a detailed explanation and explanation for each review opinion.
10. When the major achievements of master's or doctor's degree graduates are published, try to ensure that the submitted thesis and the graduation thesis are independent of each other. If the dissertation is published in the journal database, it is necessary to notify the editorial department in time and take preventive measures for academic misconduct detection.
11. After the publication of the paper, if the author finds that the paper has obvious errors or needs to be revised, please inform the editorial department to coordinate and deal with it, and publish the error or withdraw the manuscript.
II. Reviewers ethics
Reviewers should love the work of the journal ethics, understand the publication cycle of the journal, and adhere to the principles of fairness, impartiality, confidentiality and timeliness to make responsible professional review opinions on the manuscript. They should not prejudice or discriminate against the author's scientific research institution, region, qualifications, ethnicity, etc., and should not disclose the author's research content. The inventory of reviewers is dynamically managed.
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 should declare the conflict of interest to the editorial department in time, and the editorial department will decide whether to withdraw.
3. When the reviewer finds that the author's research is similar to his/her own, he/she shall not use the convenience of review to suppress or belittle the author's paper.
4. Before the paper is published, without the consent of the author, the reviewer shall not use the useful information in the paper for his/her own research.
5. The reviewers should review the manuscript in time according to the agreement. If they fail to review the manuscript on time, they should inform the editorial department in time and withdraw the review, and can recommend reviewers. Without the consent of the editorial department, the reviewers shall not entrust their own students, colleagues, etc., to review the manuscripts.
6. Reviewers should not imply or directly ask authors to cite relevant papers published by them or their teams, unless the authors are negligent and the citations are directly related to the paper.
7. If the review experts are under the obligation to report the situation to the editorial department and fill in the review comments in accordance with the journal's inclusion standards, the editorial department will handle it carefully according to the actual situation.
8. Reviewers should make use of their professional knowledge and ability to review the innovation, science and practicability of manuscripts; they should make fair evaluation on whether the research method is appropriate, whether the research design is reasonable, whether the results and conclusions are accurate, whether there are ethical problems, and whether there are leaks, so as to help the editor judge the selection of the manuscript and put forward detailed revision suggestions on the problems existing in the article to help the author improve the quality of the paper.
III. Edit ethics
1. The editor(s) should treat each manuscript fairly, impartially and in a timely manner, and make acceptance or rejection decisions based on the importance, originality, scientificity, readability, authenticity of the research, and relevance to the coverage of the journal.
2. The editor(s) shall abide by the principle of confidentiality and shall not disclose the reviewer information to the author, disclose the author's paper information to anyone other than the editorial board and review experts, and shall not use the data information in the paper for his own research without authorization.
3. The editor(s) shall not be driven by interests to interfere with peer review, and shall ensure the independent review of peer experts to ensure the fairness and justice of peer review.
4. For the peer reviewers recommended by the author, the editor should verify whether the reviewer information is true, and decide whether to use the recommended reviewer according to the research field and expertise of the recommended reviewer and whether there is any conflict of interest between the reviewer and the author. If the author requests to recuse himself from the review of his manuscript by an expert, and this request is reasonable, the editor shall respect it.
5. The editor(s) should recuse himself from processing the manuscript if there is a conflict of interest between the editor and the author (such as kinship, teacher-student, alumni, colleague, competition).
6. The editor should treat the author's complaint with caution and organize a group discussion or invite review experts to review it again.
7. The editor(s) should consider publishing controversial results obtained through rigorous scientific research to fully demonstrate that "a hundred flowers bloom and a hundred schools of thought contend".
8. The editor(s) should b obliged to remind authors of copyright and intellectual property issues that may arise if they change their attribution, affiliation and order.
9. The editor(s) should obtain the consent of the authors for any critical changes to the papers involving academic opinions, and should ensure that the papers processed by the editors can clearly express the author's academic opinions.
10. It is the responsibility of the editor to check with the author in a timely manner any reader's problems, complaints or papers that may contain academic misconduct, and the final decision shall be made by the editorial department.
11. The editor, deputy editor, responsible editor and editor shall review the political, scientific, innovative and academic misconduct of the manuscript, and shall be responsible for editing, processing and optimizing the content, style, language, notes and references of the manuscript to ensure that the manuscript has a high content quality. Among them, the political review includes the description of relevant national policies, laws and regulations, the integrity of the map of China and other contents in the manuscript, which should be carefully reviewed and verified in accordance with relevant requirements and regulations.
IV、Publishers ethics
1. Following the principle of first publication, this journal only publishes academic papers with original research results.
2. The Journal has the responsibility to avoid academic misconduct such as multiple submission and repeated publication of a single paper, and conduct academic misconduct detection and review of the initial papers and the papers to be published respectively.
3. In case of doubt about the authenticity of a paper, if the author fails to provide the original pictures, original data, fund project contract, project name and other relevant supporting materials, the Journal has the right to reject or withdraw the manuscript.
4. If any academic misconduct is found in the accepted manuscript, the Journal has the right to reject the manuscript and notify the author unit and the relevant journal.
5. For published papers, if academic misconduct is found, the Journal will retract the papers, publish a retraction statement, and notify the authors and relevant journals.
6. Detailed guidelines (e.g. submission guidelines, paper samples, etc.) required by authors will be published and updated on http://www.xjnykx.com.
