Guangdong Journal of Animal and Veterinary Science adheres to nationally and internationally recognized standards of publication ethics. The editorial office follows the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and, in combination with the journal's editorial practices, has established the following code of academic ethics. All authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to comply with these principles throughout the publication process.
1. Responsibilities of Authors
1) Authors must ensure that their submissions are original works that have not been published elsewhere in any form. The manuscript must be free from any form of academic misconduct, including data fabrication, plagiarism, or duplicate submission.
2) When citing the work of others, authors must provide accurate references in accordance with copyright laws. If the manuscript includes materials protected by copyright, authors must obtain the necessary permission.
3) For collaborative research, the order of authorship should reflect the extent of each author's contribution. All co-authors should review the manuscript before submission, and all listed authors share responsibility for the content of the research.
4) All listed authors must meet the journal's authorship criteria, which require substantial contributions to at least one of the following aspects: proposing the research concept and study design, data collection, data analysis and interpretation, drafting the manuscript, or making critical revisions to its important intellectual content. Merely providing laboratory space or funding does not qualify an individual for authorship.
5) At the time of submission, authors should disclose their specific contributions to the research and any potential conflicts of interest to the editorial office. A conflict of interest exists when an author (or their institution/employer) has financial, personal, or professional relationships that could influence the author's work or decisions, or the content of the manuscript. If the manuscript mentions specific products, authors should also disclose any conflicts related to competing products.
2. Responsibilities of Reviewers
1) Reviewers must conduct a comprehensive evaluation of each manuscript. They are expected to maintain objectivity and fairness, adhere to professional ethics, and refrain from seeking personal benefit from the review process.
2) If reviewers identify any potential conflict of interest with the author, they must decline the review to ensure fairness and impartiality in the evaluation process.
3) Reviewers must treat all manuscripts as confidential documents. Manuscript content and review results must not be disclosed to anyone outside the review process.
4) Review comments should be based on scientific facts, maintain objectivity, avoid bias, and provide constructive suggestions to address weaknesses in the research. If a manuscript is outside their area of expertise, reviewers have the responsibility to decline the review.
5) Reviewers should complete their evaluations within the requested timeframe. If unable to meet the deadline, they must promptly notify the editorial office.
3. Responsibilities of Editors
1) Editors should handle all submissions fairly and impartially. They must process manuscripts promptly within a reasonable timeframe, ensuring that research meeting the journal's requirements and quality standards is published in a timely manner.
2) Editors must adhere to the principle of confidentiality, strictly safeguarding the identities of reviewers and the content of authors' research. They are also responsible for ensuring the confidentiality of all review materials.
3) When authors request the exclusion of certain reviewers, editors should give due consideration to such requests. For reviewers recommended by authors, editors must verify the authenticity of their information and decide whether to invite them based on factors such as their research expertise and potential conflicts of interest with the authors.
4) Editors must not interfere with the peer review process, so as to preserve the independence of reviewers and ensure the fairness and impartiality of peer review.
5) Editors should respect the opinions of reviewers and provide authors with as detailed feedback as possible. If authors raise objections, editors should allow them to appeal the review results.
Author Login
Peer Review
Editor-in-Chief