Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

All parties involved in the act of publishing must agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior. The ethics statements for the Zoodiversity are based mainly on the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

Duties of Editors

Fair play. Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit and its relevance to the journal’s scope. The Editor-in-Chief has full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content.

Confidentiality. Editors and editorial staff 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. Editors and editorial board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Publication decisions. The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo peer-review by at least two reviewers who are expert in the field. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. If manuscript is not accepted for publication the editors will promptly and clearly inform authors about this decision.

Involvement in investigations. Editors will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to editorial decisions. Peer review assists editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.

Promptness. Any invited referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.

Confidentiality. Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor-in-Chief.

Standards of objectivity. Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate.

Acknowledgement of sources. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Any invited referee who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare their conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors.

Duties of Authors

The International Code of Zoological Nomenclature should be followed. If new species or subspecies is described the authors are required to deposit the type materials in the public natural history collections of the recognized institutions.

Nature conservation and animal welfare. To prevent harm to the populations of the threatened species and to respect biodiversity resources of the country where specimens are collected, the authors should comply with the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora. If data collection involves the killing of an organism, the number of specimens collected should be limited to the minimum necessary to conduct the research. The techniques used to capture or handle animals should conform to the highest standards of animal welfare. Studies should be performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines.

Reporting standards. Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

Data access. Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. 

Plagiarism. Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works, and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited.

Multiple submission/publication. Papers describing essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Hence, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unacceptable.

Authorship. Only persons who meet the authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content. All co-authors must be aware of and agree to the contents of the submission.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest. Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. 

Acknowledgement of sources. Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others, and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. 

Peer review. Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, and proof of ethics approval and copyright permissions.

Fundamental errors in published works. When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors and cooperate with them to either correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper.