Publication Ethics

Following is an outline of our commitment to publication ethics and transparency in accordance with the principles of the Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE).


An editor (Chief editors, managing editors, editorials) Should provide impartial consideration to all manuscripts offered for publication, judging each on its particular feature without regard to race, religion, nationality, sex, seniority, or institutional affiliation of the author(s). An editor should review and treat a manuscript submitted for publication with all reasonable speed. An editor takes sole responsibility for accepting or rejecting a manuscript for publication. An editor may seek assistance on a manuscript from specialists chosen for their expertise and fair judgment. An editor should not reveal any information about the manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author and designated reviewers until after the evaluation process is complete. An editor should respect the intellectual independence of authors.


Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation considers an author who was responsible for a part of the work at least. The authors should be able to explain in deep the problem in the study. For Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation, all authors are responsible for the content they submitted. The corresponding author is responsible for the agreement of all the authors and to keep them informed about the submission process since the first submission of their manuscript. He is responsible for providing the license to publish, in case of acceptance, on behalf of all the authors. Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation assumes that submitting the paper implies in total agreement from all the authors.

It is not acceptable for Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation to consider for publication anything that was previously published, neither entirely nor in parts in other journals. Anything sent to Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation must not be under analysis anywhere else. Simultaneous submissions to Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation and any other journal, is considered a major conduct flaw, and all the authors will be definitively banned. Multiple manuscripts, dealing with closely related subjects and/or variables are discouraged as long as they could figure in a single paper.


The Editorial Board of our journal will immediately screen all articles submitted for publication in that journal. Plagiarism is not limited to the Results and Discussion sections; it can involve any part of the manuscript, including figures and tables, in which material is copied from another publication without attestation, reference or permission. Note that wording does not have to be exact to be copyright infringement; use of very similar words in almost the same sequence can also be infringement. Any suspected misconduct ends up with a quick rejection. In any case, if the submitted original manuscript is 20% plagiarised, then the article will be rejected, and the same will be notified to the author.


Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation invites peers to review its submissions, relying on their expertise, curricula, and their will to review them as volunteers. By accepting to review a manuscript, the reviewer commits himself to do so in due time. Delays are extremely negative to the review process and make it last much more than it should. When a reviewer is requested, he is gently asked to answer the invitation e-mail, informing if he is or not willing to review the manuscript. It is a gesture of politeness and it avoids delays too. By accepting to review a manuscript, the reviewer declares that no conflicts of interest exist, and he is doing his revision for the wealth and progress of science. Those reviewers who answer our requests, agreeing or not, and those who respect the deadlines, are scored positively, and eventual submissions they could send to Journal of Biodiversity and Conservation will be treated with priority.