loading

Editorial Policies

EDITORIAL POLICIES

 PUBLICATION ETHICS, PLAGIARISM AND MALPRACTICE STATEMENTS

  1. Ethical and Animal Welfare Issues
  2. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements
  3. Plagiarism Policies
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources
  5. Statement on Hazards and human or animal subjects:
  6. Conflict of Interest
  7. Fundamental Error in Published Work:
  8. Licensing and Copy Right Policy
  9. Correction, Retraction and Withdrawal policies
  10. Roles and Responsibilities
  1. Ethical and Animal Welfare Issues:

Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications requires that the experimental conditions under which human and animal assays and tests are performed are as per standard protocols used worldwide. Studies on animals must comply with the prevailing standards of animal welfare according to Indian Council of Medical Research Guidelines in India and likewise following similar conditions elsewhere.

Authors must make it clear in writing that the procedures they used were as humane as possible and have been compiled with the guidelines for animal care of their institutions or with national/ international guidelines. Studies involving human subjects must be carried out with the formal approval of the relevant Ethical Committee and evidence of such approval must be provided as and when needed.

  1. Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statements 

To maintain fair practice we at, Society for Science & Nature, Bhopal India,  (SSN) the official publishers of Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications,  strongly believe in strictly following  international norms and guidelines of quality publication. We are committed to fair practice of this publication, with regard to plagiarism, collaboration, originality, fraud and conflict of interests. A flow chart is provided explaining the processing of all received manuscripts within a time bound transparent frame work.

  1. Plagiarism Policies

Biosciences, Biotechnology Research Communications follows a strong plagiarism policy. It ensures that none of the parts of the manuscript is plagiarized from other sources and proper reference is provided for all contents extracted from other sources. All the papers submitted have to pass through an initial screening and will be checked through the Advanced Plagiarism Detection Softwares (CrossCheck by iThenticate).

On Plagiarism and Retraction of Manuscript:

The authors of Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications should strictly ensure that they have written and submitted entirely original manuscripts to the journal. If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, it has been appropriately cited or quoted as per standard ethics and norms of publication.

Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical in Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications.

If any manuscript is found published with plagiarized material at any stage in Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications, it will be immediately retracted with information to authors. Also, authors who fail to submit plagiarism check documents and comply with the editors / reviewer’s comments in revising their manuscripts, will be informed about dropping their manuscripts from publication in Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication:

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

  1. Acknowledgement of Sources:

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the Paper:

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

  1. Statement on Hazards and Human or Animal subjects:

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that has any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee (s) has approved them.

Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

  1. Statement on Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

  1. Fundamental Errors in Published Work:

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

  1. Licensing and Copy Right Policy

The articles published in our journal are entirely under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license, The Journal grants all users a free, irrevocable, worldwide, perpetual right to access, copy, use, distribute, perform and display the work publicly subject to proper references as per international norms. ( https://creativecommons.org/).

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License

All authors must down load the copy right form, fill and submit along with statement of conflict of interest. Copyright form can be downloaded from Copyright Form www.bbrc.in This form duly completed and signed should be submitted online while submitting a manuscript.

  1. DUTIES OF AUTHORS, EDITORS, REVIEWERS AND PUBLISHER

Authors should present an objective discussion of the significance of research work as well as sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the experiments. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour, and are totally unacceptable. Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate accounts of the state of the art for general as well as specific readership. The authors should ensure that their work is entirely original, and if the work and/or words of others/collaboration have been used, this has been appropriately acknowledged and referred.

Editors and reviewers of  Biosc Biotec. Res.Comm will evaluate manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit. An editor/ reviewer must not use unpublished information in the editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Editors should take reasonable responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper. A flow chart is provided explaining the processing of all received manuscripts within a time bound transparent frame work.

Publication Decisions:

The Chief Editor along with his team of senior editors of Biosc Biotec. Res.Comm will be   responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant team members. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair play: Each editor will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. Biosc Biotec. Res.Comm. has a two tier peer review system for every manuscript received.

Confidentiality:

The editorial staff of BBRC including its geographical editors will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recues themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interests are revealed after publication. If needed, other appropriate action should be taken, such as the publication of a retraction or expression of concern. It should be ensured that the peer-review process for sponsored supplements is the same as that used for the journal. Items in sponsored supplements should be accepted solely on the basis of academic merit and interest to readers and not be influenced by commercial considerations.

Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations:

An editor will take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher or society/publisher. Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies, and if the complaint is upheld, the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant. Every reported act of unethical publishing behaviour must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication.

REVIEWERS/ REFEREES

Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential document. A flow chart is provided explaining the processing of all received manuscripts within a time bound transparent frame work.Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments, so that authors can use them for improving the paper. Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Reviewers:
Contribution to editorial decisions:

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the quality of the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher will share the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

Promptness, Confidentiality and Standards of Objectivity:

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process. Any manuscript received for review must be treated as confidential document. Manuscript (s) must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor. Reviews should be conducted objectively, the main purpose is to provide healthy criticisms for improving the quality of the manuscript. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgement of Sources:

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest:

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

PUBLISHER

Plagiarism and Ethics of Publication:

Society For Science & Nature Bhopal does not allow any form of plagiarism. Plagiarism is considered to be a serious breach of scientific ethics by the entire scientific community. Incidents of plagiarism in a manuscript or published paper whether detected or reported, will be dealt seriously. We constantly support/advise and take suggestions from our Editors/Editorial Board/Reviewers on avoiding any malpractice of publication ethics.

© All rights are reserved with Society For Science & Nature Bhopal, the official publisher of Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications.

Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications Copyright © 2016 BBRC | Powered by Dophinox  Cell : 9893360564