Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

The Annals of Plant protection Sciences (ISSN 0971-3573 for print and ISSN 0974-0163 for online) is published by the “Society of Plant Protection Sciences”, New Delhi, India and the website is  www.indianjournal.com

The Annals of Plant protection Sciences (APPS) strictly adheres to a publication ethics and malpractice statement as given below. It is largely based on the standard guidelines for journal editors developed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Society of Plant protection Sciences (SPPS), as a long standing published is committed to meeting high standards of ethical behaviour at all stages of the publication process. The guidelines given herein define the responsibilities of authors, peer reviewers and editors, and are impending by default. Anyone who believes that research published in the APPS is not in line with these principles should raise their concerns with the Chief Editor at email- society.plantprotection.sciences@gmail.com

Manuscripts submitted to APPS are evaluated entirely on the basis of their scientific content. All possible measures are taken to uphold the highest standards of publication ethics and to prevent malpractices. Authors who submit papers to APPS attest that their work is original and unpublished and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. In addition, authors confirm that their paper is their own original work that has not been copied or plagiarized, in whole or in part, from other works and if the authors have used the works of others the same has been appropriately cited or quoted. The submission platform has a statement that requires confirmation by authors that their submissions subscribe to the above requirements, and all authors by default confirm that these are adhered to while submitting a manuscript. Instructions to authors given in the indianjournal.com.

2. The APPS has an Editorial Board supervised/ governed by an Executive Committee of the SPPS, who are experienced Plant protection scientists who are holding/ held positions in Plant pathology, Entomology, Nematology, Ag. chemical and weed Sciences and its academics/ professions, and are recognized experts. The details of these Executive Committee and the Editorial Board are available in the indianjournal.com

Duties / Responsibilities of Editors

The Editorial Team of the APPS, comprising the Editorial Advisory Committee (EAC) for Publications is responsible for taking a decision as to which of the manuscripts submitted to the APPS are to be published. The members of the EAC have complete discretion to reject/accept an manuscript. The EAC may confer/deliberate with other reviewers/members in arriving at its decisions. The evaluation of manuscripts is made on the basis of their scholarly and intellectual content without having regard to the nature of the authors or the institution including gender, race, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors. The APPS follows a policy of fair play in its editorial evaluation. The editors are expected to exercise caution and ensure that they have no conflict of interest with respect to the manuscripts they accept/ reject. The members of the EAC follow strict confidentiality and are required not to disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers and the SPPS. Authors are encouraged to correct the errors which are found during the process of review while preserving the anonymity of the reviewers.

Duties/ Responsibilities of EAC/ Reviewers

Editorial decisions are based on peer review. The reviewers are expected to maintain absolute confidentiality with regard to the contents of manuscripts. The reviews are conducted objectively and the referees are expected to express their views clearly with supporting reasons. The reviewers should have no conflict of interest with the authors and the subject matter of the research. The reviewers are required to identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any observation or argument which has been previously reported should also be accompanied along with the relevant citation. Similarities or overlaps between the manuscript under review and any other published paper of which the reviewer may have personal knowledge, may also be brought to be attention of the members of the EAC. The information or ideas obtained through peer review are of a privileged nature and these are kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers are informed not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative or other relationship with any of authors or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties/ Responsibilities of the Authors

Authors are required to present an accurate account of the original research work and also an objective discussion of its significance. Authors are instructed to note that the manuscript should contain sufficient details of the literature and references. It is expected that all the authors have significantly contributed to the research. Fraudulent and knowingly made inaccurate statement constitutes unethical behaviour and would be unacceptable. Authors are required to ensure that the submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere, and if the authors have used the work of others the same has been appropriately cited or quoted. It is ensured that the applicable copyright laws and conventions are followed. Copyright materials are reproduced only with permission and due acknowledgement. Authors are not expected to submit manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is considered unethical practice and is not unacceptable. It is ensured that proper acknowledgement of the work of others is always made. The format and style to be followed is given in indianjournal.com.

Authors are made to know that authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the paper which is submitted for publication, and those who have made significant contributions are listed as co-authors; and others who have participated in certain substantive aspects in the development of the paper are acknowledged. The corresponding author is directed to ensure that all co-authors are included in the paper, and that the co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication. Authors are suggested to enlist all sources of financial support. Upon discovery of any significant error in the published work, authors are informed that it is their responsibility to promptly notify the editors and cooperate in the retraction or correction of the paper.

Manuscripts published in the APPS report the results of research done by the authors and this is made aware to the authors. Mention of a proprietary product/ commercial formulation/ pesticide does not constitute recommendations/ endorsement by the SPPS/ EAC for its use in any form. Use of registered trade names/ trademarks etc., in the manuscripts even without specific indications thereof, unless otherwise stated and solely reflect the individual views of the authors and not necessarily any official view of the APPS/ SPPS. The APPS/ SPPS assumes no responsibility for the contents/ completeness/ views/ other items/ accuracy of the conclusion reported in the manuscripts by the authors. Any submissions made is subject to the above statement and authors submitting manuscripts are taken as endorsing these.

Any fees or charges that are required for manuscript processing and/or publishing materials in the journal is stated under Instructions to authors/ Article Processing Charges in the indianjournal.com. Before authors begin preparing their manuscript for submission, authors are instructed to peruse these. The authors are obliged to participate in peer review process. While submitting authors are also made to note that all authors have significantly contributed to the research; are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes; provide details of list of references, financial support; and are forbidden to publish same research in more than one journal.

Peer-Review Process

The manuscripts published in the APPS are subjected to peer-review through obtaining advice on individual manuscripts from reviewers/ experts in the relevant fields of plant protection, in additions to by the subject editors as described. As stated under Duties/ Responsibilities of EAC/ Reviewers (column 4 above), decision made are objective, with requirements of reviewers filling up a prescribed manuscript review format; reviewers have no conflict of interest; and it is informed that reviewers should point out relevant published work which is not yet cited, and the reviewed manuscripts are to be treated confidentially.

Publication Ethics

Publishers, the SPPS/ executive committee/ EAC/ editors take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of manuscripts where research misconduct has occurred; in no case encourage such misconduct, or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place. In the event that the publisher SPPS/ executive committee/ EAC/ Chief Editors/ Subject Editors are made aware of any allegation of research misconduct, deal with allegations appropriately; also in the event of such allegation follow guidelines for retracting or correcting articles when needed; also always willing to publish corrections, clarifications, retractions and apologies when needed.

Copyright and Access

The copyright of the APPS is with SPPS and this information is clearly described. The way(s) in which the Journal and individual articles are available to readers and associated subscriptions, or pay-per-view fees are stated in the Journal/ website prominently.

Archiving

The APPS is having its electronic backup in its online platform www.indianjournals.com, and access to the journal content in the event a journal is no longer published shall be clearly indicated in the form of archive therein/ relevant websites.

Principles of transparency and best practice in terms of ownership and management. The owner of the Journal is SPPS and these ownership and/or management details are clearly indicated. This website, including the text that it contains, takes care to demonstrate the high ethical and professional standards, and the periodicity of the Journal i.e. it is quarterly. SPPS does not use organizational names that would mislead potential authors and editors about the nature of the journal's owner. The name of the Journal i.e., Annals of Plant Protection Sciences is unique and it is in publication from 1993 onwards, it is unique (ISSN 0971-3573 for print and ISSN 0974-0163 for online), and there exists no confusion with another journal. The Journal's origin is depicted in the indianjournal.com.

Peer Review Policy

The “peer review process” involves the following

• The author/s write/s a research/ review manuscript and submits it adhering to/ following the INSTRUCTIONS covered above.
• The Chief Editor does the initial screening (includes plagiarism check) and forwards it to the Reviewers after due consultations with the Sr. chief editor and subject editors
• Reviewers review the manuscript according to the guidelines provided and verify the quality of research/ review following a proforma of review format
• The article is returned to the Chief Editor along with a recommendation to either reject the article, revise it or accept it.
• The Chief Editor drafts a decision to be sent to the Author with due consultations of the Sr. chief editor and subject editor.
• The article is returned to the Author along with the reviewer's feedback
• The Editor receives the updated article, and send it to the Production Unit for Publication
• Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript following guidelines/ checklist as given in the proforma of review format. This format includes columns on material, methods, presentation, details of references to previous relevant work etc. Reviewers provide comments following the guidelines/ checklist, and suggest revisions/ corrections along with specific recommendations.
• Reviewers conclude the proforma with recommendations on acceptance/ minor revisions/ major revisions/ rejections and advice on whether or not the manuscript to be published. This whole process is done within 4-6 weeks as given above.
• The final decision on the “peer review process” is conveyed to the authors within this time. Recommendations made by the reviewers, with verbatim comments are conveyed in this final decision.
• Revised manuscripts are usually sought from authors within 3-4 weeks. The Chief Editor solicits further advice from the Subject Editors, if required within 1-2 weeks. This process may demand more than one revision of a manuscript.
• Special Issues / Conference Proceedings will have almost similar peer review procedures with slight modifications.
• Chief Editor's Decision is final in all the above, and reserves the right in all decisions/ actions.