Publication and Ethics Malpractice Statement
Publication and Ethics Malpractice Statement
For all parties involved in the act of publishing (the author, the journal editor(s), the peer reviewer and the publisher) it is necessary to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior.
Publication and authorship
1) Submissions must be original works, the contributions and its key elements should never been
published before;
2) No plagiarism, the bibliography information should be clearly annotated in the references;
3) The data should be true, non-deceptive, and no fudging or plagiarism as well as other academic
misconduct action;
4) Funds information should be indicated in the manuscript; Support or aid for the publication of
the work by persons having no author qualifications should be clearly stated in the
acknowledgement.
For Authors
1) All authors should be contributors to the work; There’s no dispute in the author order, the
correspondence author should ensure that publication of the paper be authorized by the other authors; Alteration of the author order before publication should be consented by all authors to ensure the accuracy of all authors’ rights;
2) Author obliged to participate in peer review process;
3) All authors should make statement that all data in article are real and authentic; Obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes;
4) The advice and information in Acta Horticulturae Sinica is believed to be true and accurate at the date of its publication, neither the authors, the editors, nor the publishers can accept any legal responsibility for any errors or omissions that may be made.
For Reviewers
1) Comments should be objective and fair, definitive opinions on the academic value and whether
the paper can meet the publication standards should be given, avoiding ambiguous comments;
2) Respect for diverse academic views, do not make rude, aggressive comments; Serious
scientific misconduct should be feedback to the editorial office faithfully;
3) Reviews should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited; reviewed articles
should be treated confidentially;
4) If the work or method is not so familiar to make a peer review, please inform the editorial
office to make adjustment; For paper with conflicts in interests or having shared benefits,
avoidance of peer review is required;
5) When a peer review invitation is accepted, the review comments should be presented within
the planning time; hinders or delays for completion of review should be notified to the
editorial office in time.
Editor Conscientiousness
1) Be responsible to ensure the justice of review and reduce bias; editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept an article;
2) Ensure the journal publication on time with schedule; Report novel and authentic researches,
give priority to publication of frontier and hot issues;
3) Academic misconducts, such as plagiarism, duplication, are definitely rejected; when erros are
found, promote publication of correction or retraction;
4) A suitable and competent reviewers’ database should be established and maintained; Quality of
reviewing tasks by reviews/editorial board members should be objectively recorded and
evaluated; preserve anonymity of reviews;
5) Feedback the experts’ review comments to the author timely; Coordinate academic discussions
and communications between the author and reviewer; Offensive or defamatory comments are rejected; The author’s appeal on the final decision is accepted.
Publishing ethics issues
1) Monitoring/safeguarding publishing ethics by editorial board;
2) Guidelines for retracting articles;
3) Maintain the integrity of the academic record;
4) Preclude business needs from compromising intellectual and ethical standards;
5) Always be willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed;
6) No plagiarism, no fraudulent data.
