Publication Ethics Statement for the Journal of Tropical Biology

The Journal of Tropical Biology adheres to recognized publication ethics and takes a firm stance against plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting manuscripts to this journal must confirm the originality of their work and ensure that the content has neither been fully nor partially published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication elsewhere.

Responsibilities of Editors, Authors, and Reviewers

1. Responsibilities of Editors

(1) Editors must not have conflicts of interest regarding manuscripts they reject or accept.

(2) Editors must ensure that all manuscripts undergo initial originality checks using appropriate software. Following this, manuscripts will be sent for single-blind peer review to two reviewers, who will provide specific recommendations on acceptance, rejection, or revision.

(3) Editors must ensure that all accepted manuscripts are evaluated based on their intellectual content, without regard to the authors' gender, race, religion, or nationality.

2. Responsibilities of Authors

(1) Authors must provide an accurate description of their original research and an objective discussion of its significance, in accordance with the journal’s submission guidelines.

(2) Authors must not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously or publish identical research in multiple journals.

(3) Authors must acknowledge all sources of data used in their research and cite all publications that have influenced their work.

(4) Authorship should be limited to those who have made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported research, and all significant contributors must be listed as co-authors.

3. Responsibilities of Reviewers

(1) Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research and must promptly inform the editor of any identified plagiarism or duplicate submission.

(2) Reviews must be conducted objectively, with opinions supported by arguments.

(3) Reviewers must not have conflicts of interest with the research, authors, or funding sources.

(4) Reviewers should identify any relevant published works that have not been cited.

(5) If a reviewer cannot complete the review within the specified time, they must inform the editor promptly to allow the manuscript to be sent to another reviewer.

4. Retraction and Correction

(1) Editors should consider retracting articles if there is clear evidence of unreliable results due to misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest errors (e.g., misjudgment or experimental error); if the results have been previously published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e., duplicate publication); if the article constitutes plagiarism; or if it reports unethical research.

(2) Retraction notices should link to the retracted article (i.e., all electronic versions), clearly identify the retracted article (e.g., include the title and authors in the notice), and be published promptly to minimize the harmful impact of misleading publications.

(3) Editors should consider issuing corrections if a small portion of a reliable publication is found to be misleading (especially due to honest errors) or if there are inaccuracies in the author/contributor list (e.g., omission of a qualified author or inclusion of an unqualified individual).