To strengthen the academic integrity, standardize the process of writing, editing, and publishing, fight academic misconduct, and provide guidelines for dealing with academic misconducts, this journal specifies the ethics statements for authors, reviewers, and editors, according to the copyright law, publication ethics, CY/T 174—2019 Academic Publishing Specification-Definition of Academic Misconduct for Journals, and other relevant provisions, for the reference of contributors. For more details, please refer to the official website of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (http://www.publicationethics.org/) and publication ethics standards formulated by European Association of Science Editors (EASE), National News Publication Bureau, and other institutions.

1. Publication Ethics for Authors

The author is obliged to state that the paper does not involve state secrets or any  infringement related to intellectual property.

The author should abide by the principle of “Five Prohibitions”: the paper shall not be written by a third party; the paper shall not be submitted by a third party; the content of the paper shall not be modified by a third party; false peer reviewer information is not allowed; and the non-substantial academic contributor shall be listed as a co-author.

The citing sources are indicated in the cited references, and a list is made in the form of bibliographic references. The units and individuals that provide scientific support and consultation for this paper are listed in the acknowledgements. The author shall respect the suggestions and comments of reviewers and editors, and agree that the property right, including the use right of various media and media publications, exclusive right to use, and exclusive agency of the copyright of the paper are granted to Acta Botanica Boreali-Occidentalia Sinica after the paper is published.

The author must put an end to the following academic misconducts:

(1)  Duplicate submissions

It is the author’s duty to ensure the originality of the submitted paper, without any forgery, deception, or plagiarism. The author shall ensure that the paper is not submitted more than once, that its content has not been published in any other journals or media in any other language, and that such paper will not be submitted to other journals before receiving a rejection notice from the Editorial Office.

(2)  Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the most common violation of publication ethics. It refers to the intentional use of other’s works by the author without the consent of the original author and in the form of reference or acknowledgement. Plagiarism includes direct copying and rewriting of other’s works, including opinions, data, pictures, audios, methods, words, and unpublished achievements or works. No plagiarism is allowed.

(3)  Authorships

Authorship is limited to those who have made significant contributions to the research work. The significant contributors shall be listed as the co-authors or corresponding authors, while the people participating in the research work shall be listed in the acknowledgements. Those individuals who do not make substantial academic contributions to the study are not allowed to be listed as a co-author. A copyright authorization letter signed by all the authors shall be submitted to the office.

(4)  Repeated publication

The author shall not intentionally republish the published paper, or submit the published data as original materials again, unless the author states it explicitly or quotes it appropriately.

(5)  Forgery or falsification

Forgery or falsification is data or conclusions not obtained from experiments or studies, and funding, review opinions, and relevant information not obtained from experiments, but forged and falsified by the author. In any case, forgery is not permitted.

2. Publication Ethics for Peer Reviewers

(1)  Reviewers should adhere to the principles of fairness, justice, confidentiality, and timeliness, and use their own professional knowledge to evaluate the manuscripts for originality, academic significance, and values in agricultural or industrial applications. Reviewers shall give a fair evaluation on whether the research methods are appropriate, research design is reasonable, and results and conclusions are accurate and appropriate, to help editors make decisions as well as provide suggestions to help the author improve the manuscripts.

(2)  Reviewers shall give an academic evaluation of the manuscripts, instead of personal evaluation and personal attack. The selection of manuscripts is not affected by the ethnicity, gender, religion, belief, or social status of the author. Reviewers shall clarify their views with sufficient arguments and facts.

(3)  Reviewers shall complete the review comments on time and send them back to the Editorial Office within the specified time. If the reviewer cannot complete the review on time, he/she shall explain the reasons to the office and return the manuscript shortly. The author may suggest reviewers. Without the consent of the Editorial Office, the reviewers shall not ask their students or colleagues to review the manuscripts on their behalf.

(4)  All review opinions and information shall be kept confidential and shall not be used for personal purposes, or circulated or discussed with others. The data, opinions, and conclusions in the manuscript shall not be used or published. If needed, the consent of the author shall be obtained.

(5)  During the review process, if the reviewer finds same or similar contents between the reviewed paper and a published one, he/she shall report it to the office.

(6)  Reviewers shall not review articles with conflict(s) of interest to avoid competition with the author, unit, and enterprise.

(7)  If the reviewer finds that the manuscript is similar to his/her own ongoing studies, he/she shall not suppress or disparage the author’s paper.

3. Publication Ethics for Editors

Strictly implement the national laws and regulations, and abide by the publication ethics and norms. Handle all manuscripts in a timely and fair manner, and respect the author’s research results as well as the reviewers’ opinions. Keep the information of authors and reviewers confidential.

(1)  Editors shall be responsible for all editing links of the journal, including continuously promoting the development of the journal and ensuring the high-quality and on-time publication of manuscripts. Editors shall abide by the relevant policies formulated by the Editorial Board and follow the relevant laws and regulations concerning defamation, infringement, and plagiarism to select articles.

(2)  Editors shall maintain the authenticity of the review records and keep confidential the materials in each link of review and revision. Except to provide necessary information for corresponding authors, reviewers, and board members, editors shall not disclose any information related to the submitted paper to others.

(3)  Selection of manuscripts and acceptance or rejection of articles can only be based on the originality, importance, clarity, and conformity with the purpose and scope of the journal.

(4)  Editors shall respect the author’s point of view and writing style, and shall obtain the consent of the author for key amendments.

(5)  Editors shall put an end to interest exchanges that are detrimental to academic ethics.

(6)  Editors are obliged to make a survey on academic misconduct. Once an academic moral appeal occurs, the editor must take effective measures. If necessary, corrections, clarifications, withdrawals, or apologies shall be published in public in a timely manner. Editors are obliged to hold authors and reviewers responsible for their improper behaviors.

(7)  Editors shall ensure that the information submitted by the author shall not be used for the editor’s research or for other’s research; ensure that the identity of the reviewer and other relevant personnel of the Editorial Office is protected during the blind review process.

(8)  Editors shall encourage academic controversy and have the obligation to respond to the author’s opinions that differ from those of the reviewers. Editors shall consider the publication of negative results obtained to avoid repeated unnecessary research by other scholars.

(9)  Editors are responsible for avoiding academic misconducts such as duplicate submission and repeated publication and shall check and review the newly submitted papers and the papers to be published.

(10) Editors are obliged to remind the author of possible copyright and intellectual property problems after the change of signature, unit, and order.

(11) Editors shall ensure that the evaluation of papers is fair and reasonable. In case of any conflict of interest or cooperative relationship with the relevant author, unit, or enterprise due to competition or cooperation, the editor must propose to replace the reviewer, and the editor-in-chief or other members of the Editorial Board shall be responsible for the review of papers.