Accepted by the decision of the Editorial Board of
the Marine Biological Journal
Protocol No. 9 dated August 02, 2017
on the publication ethics of the Marine Biological Journal
The Editorial Board of the Marine Biological Journal (hereinafter referred to as the MBJ) follows publication ethics principles adopted by the international community and reflected in the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) www.publicationethics.org, Publication Ethics Code of Conduct http://publicet.org, Declaration of Association of Science Editors and Publishers (ASEP) http://rasep.ru/sovet-po-etike/deklaratsiya, and recommendations of Elsevier, one of the biggest international academic publishers http://health.elsevier.ru/about/news/?id=990#4, as well as other international committees, journals and publishing houses.
Compliance with these rules is mandatory for authors, editors, reviewers and publishers of MBJ.
- 1. Responsibility of Authors of the Marine Biological Journal
1.1. When preparing and submitting a manuscript, an author or a group of authors (hereinafter referred to as Authors) bears the initial responsibility for the novelty, originality and reliability of the research results: the manuscript must contain objective research results, and wittingly erroneous or falsified statements are unacceptable.
1.2. When sending the original manuscript to the Editorial Board of the MBJ, Authors are obliged to state in free form any conflicts of interest that may affect evaluation of the manuscript by reviewers. Conflicts of interest can be caused by financial interest, personal relationship, academic rivalry and other factors. Authors are also obliged to mention all significant financial and personal connections that are relevant to the submitted work and can be a source of conflict of interest.
1.3. Excerpts or statements adopted by Authors must be accompanied by the indication of their authorship and source. Plagiarism in any form, including unmarked quotations, paraphrasing or assigning rights to the results of other workers’ research is unacceptable. Forged elevation of the citation indices, excessive self-citation and friendly citation, irrelevant references mislead readers and are treated by the Editorial Board of the MBJ as unacceptable.
1.4. Authors must present only true facts and data in the manuscript and provide enough information for other researchers to be able to verify and make similar experiments. They shall not use information obtained privately without open written permission or cite unpublished works. Authors mustn’t let data fabrication and falsification.
1.5. Coauthors of the article must be persons who made a significant contribution to writing the work, developing its concept, academic design, collection of materials, or analysis and interpretation of the study. All Authors must approve the final version of the work and agree to its publication. They are equally responsible for its content. Inclusion of persons in Authors list who did not make an intellectual contribution to the work is an infringement of copyright and ethical norms. It misinforms the readers and is considered as fraudulence.
1.6. The contribution of all persons who participated in the work or influenced it should be acknowledged in the publication. Authors should provide references to publications that were important for the formation and completing of the work.
1.7. By submitting a manuscript of an article to the MBJ, Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere and has not been previously published. Publication of articles of the same content in different journals is not allowed, except special cases (e.g., articles translated from another language) and after obtaining a consent of the authors and editors of the interested journals and MBJ to republishing. If separate parts of the manuscript have been previously published elsewhere, Author (Authors) must refer to the prior work and point out the differences of the new work from the previous one.
1.8. Authors must identify all funding sources for the project the results of which are presented in the article and persons contributing to the research. The Editorial Board of the MBJ encourages authors to disclose relationships with industrial and financial organizations that can lead to conflict of interest.
1.9. If Author finds a significant error or inaccuracy in his article which already been published, he/she must report to the Editors and cooperate with them on making corrections to the publication. If the editor or publisher finds out that the published work contains a significant error and informs the Author about it, the Author is obliged to promptly send corrections to the Editorial Office or provide evidence of correctness of the data presented in the article.
1.10. The Authors should respect the work of the Editorial Board and Reviewers and must eliminate the indicated shortcomings or submit a well-reasoned rebuttal to the points of the reviews.
1.11. The Authors must prepare and submit manuscripts and accompanying documents in accordance with the rules adopted in the MBJ.
- 2. Responsibility of Editors of the Marine Biological Journal
2.1. The Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ in their activity are guided by the principles of scientific rationalism, objectivity, professionalism, impartiality, and the right to freedom of opinion. They focus on modern legal requirements of the Russian legislation with respect to copyright, plagiarism, and ethical principles supported by the community of leading academic publishers. They bear responsibility for making decisions concerning manuscripts submitted for publication.
2.2. The cooperation of the Editorial Board and the editors of the MBJ with the Authors is based on the principles of fairness, courtesy, objectivity, honesty and transparency.
2.3. The main evaluation criteria by which the Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ is guided when deciding whether to accept or reject a manuscript are
- - fitting the journal scope and meeting the requirements for manuscripts;
- - novelty, relevance and originality of the research;
- - reliability of results obtained and scientific significance of the work performed;
- - recognazing the contribution of other researchers working on the subject matter of the article and mandatory bibliographic references to the studies used in writing the manuscript;
- - co-authorship of all participants who have made a significant contribution to the research, and approval of the work submitted to the publication by all co-authors;
- - taking immediate measures to correct the mistakes and inaccuracies found by the Author or revealed by the Editors;
- - granting the Author of the peer-reviewed material the opportunity to substantiate his/her research position.
The Editorial Board is responsible for making publication decisions for submitted manuscripts.
2.4. Unpublished data obtained from the manuscripts submitted for consideration should not be used by the Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ for personal purposes or transferred to third parties without a written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during editing must be kept confidential and shall not be used for personal gain.
2.5. Having received the manuscript of an article, the Editorial Board and the Editors of the MBJ can check the material for plagiarism using the Antiplagiat or a similar system. In case of finding out numerous incorrect adoptions, the Editorial Board (Editors) will act in accordance with COPE rules. The Editorial Board (Editors) have the right to reject the manuscript if during its consideration they discover falsification, plagiarism, submission by the Author of works of the same content to more than one journal, multiple copying of similar information in different articles, and false and misrepresented authorship of the scientific research.
2.6. The Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ should not leave unanswered claims concerning considered manuscripts or published materials and complaints about violation of ethical standards in estimating, editing and publication manuscripts. If a conflict situation is identified, they must take all necessary measures to restore the violated rights and then inform the authors and all interested parties of the decisions taken.
2.7. The Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ should evaluate articles solely on their scientific content, regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship and political views of authors.
2.8. The Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ do not have the right to disclose information on manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Office, besides persons who are directly related to the manuscript and the process of preparing it for publication.
2.9. Before considering the manuscript, the Editorial Board and the Editors of the MBJ must refuse to work with it in the event of a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation or other relations with any of the Authors, companies and institutions associated with the manuscript.
2.10. The Editorial Board (Editors) of the MBJ must agree with the Authors on the final version of the article.
- 3. Reviewers’ responsibility
By the decision of the Editorial Board of the MBJ, all manuscripts submitted to the Editorial Office of the MBJ are sent to a mandatory double-blind review of two independent anonymous experts: the Authors are not informed of the personal data of the Reviewers, and the Reviewers are not informed on the personal data of the Authors. 3.1. Reviewing is performed by experts in those fields of science which include the subject matter of the peer-reviewed manuscripts. The Reviewer must notify the Editorial Board if he/she does not have sufficient competence to evaluate the manuscript or cannot be objective, for example, in the event of a conflict of interest with the Author or organization.
3.2. The Reviewer should evaluate the manuscript within the timeframe established by the Editorial Board of the MBJ. If, for any reason, the Reviewer cannot review the manuscript within the specified period, he/she must inform the Editorial Office about it.
3.3. The manuscripts sent to the Reviewer are the intellectual property of the Authors and are the information that cannot be disclosed. The Reviewer shall not disclose to outsiders the information about manuscripts he/she received for review, or transfer manuscripts for review or discussion to third parties who do not have the authority of the Editorial Board of the MBJ. The Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of manuscripts for their own needs.
3.4. When reviewing articles, Reviewers should strive for maximum objectivity and reasonably state their point of view. The comments and suggestions of the Reviewer should be objective and principled aiming at increasing the scientific level of the manuscript. The Reviewer must make a decision on the basis of specific facts and substantiate his/her decision. Personal criticism of the Authors is not allowed in reviews. The Reviewer must give an objective and reasoned assessment of the results of the research and well-grounded recommendations. The Reviewer must refrain from reviewing if, for any reason, he/she cannot honestly and impartially evaluate the manuscript.
3.5. If the material in the manuscript is found unaccompanied by references to the original source or if the manuscript is lacking references to provisions, conclusions or arguments previously published in other works of this or other authors, as well as in case of its considerable or partial resemblance to another manuscript or previously published article, the Reviewer must notify the Editorial Board of the MBJ.
3.6. Until the publication of the article, the Reviewer shall not use the information obtained during the review process for personal purposes. In the event of a conflict of interest arising from competition, cooperation or any other relationship with any of the Authors, companies and institutions associated with the manuscript, the Reviewer must notify the Editorial Board and refuse to review the manuscript.
3.7. When reviewing a manuscript, the Reviewers must notify the Editorial Board of the MBJ of a conflict of interest if they know that it exists.