Publication Ethic

Jurnal Agrium (Journal of Agricultural Research) is committed to the highest standards of publication ethics. All parties—editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher—must adhere to the policies outlined below. The journal aligns its practices with widely recognized international guidelines (e.g., COPE).

Last updated: 14 October 2025 · Contact: agrium@unimal.ac.id

Duties of Editors

Editors evaluate manuscripts for originality, scholarly quality, methodological soundness, and relevance without discrimination based on gender, ethnicity, religion, nationality, seniority, or institutional affiliation. Editorial decisions are based solely on academic merit and reviewer feedback. Editors and editorial staff treat all manuscript information as confidential and do not use unpublished materials for personal research. Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where they have competing interests (for example, recent collaboration, shared grants, institutional ties, or personal relationships), and the Editor-in-Chief assigns the submission to a qualified editor with no conflict. Ethical concerns and allegations—such as plagiarism, fabrication or falsification, duplicate publication, authorship disputes, image manipulation, unethical research, and undisclosed conflicts—are handled using transparent, COPE-aligned procedures; where appropriate, the journal may contact institutions or funders and issue corrections, expressions of concern, or retractions. The journal clearly discloses its peer-review model (double-blind), policies, fees (if any), and archiving practices on the website.

Duties of Authors

Submissions must be original, not previously published, and not under consideration elsewhere except for abstracts or theses with disclosure. The journal uses similarity checks; plagiarism, self-plagiarism, and redundant or duplicate publication are prohibited.

Authors ensure the accuracy of data, the appropriateness of statistical analysis, and transparent reporting of methods and limitations; image or data manipulation that could mislead is unacceptable. Authors provide a Data Availability Statement and, where legally and ethically permissible, share data, code, and materials in trusted repositories or upon reasonable request, citing datasets and software appropriately. Authorship is limited to individuals who made substantial contributions to conception or design; acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data; drafting or critical revision of the article; final approval of the version to be published; and agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work. Contributions should be declared using the CRediT taxonomy. All authors approve the final manuscript and consent to submission; guest, gift, or ghost authorship is not permitted.

Authors acknowledge contributors who do not meet authorship criteria and disclose all funding sources and grant numbers. All financial and non-financial competing interests (such as consultancies, stock ownership, patents, or advocacy roles) must be declared at submission. For studies involving humans, animals, or biohazards, authors provide ethics approvals and compliance statements (including informed consent, confidentiality, and welfare standards) and register clinical trials when applicable. Generative AI tools cannot be authors; if used for language polishing, code, or figure drafting, authors must disclose the tool name and version, describe the scope of use, validate all outputs, and avoid exposing confidential or proprietary information. Simultaneous submission of the same or substantially similar work to multiple journals is not allowed; related manuscripts and preprints should be disclosed. Authors who discover significant errors after publication must promptly notify the editor and cooperate with corrections or, when necessary, retractions.

Duties of Reviewers

Reviewers provide constructive, evidence-based evaluations that assist editorial decision-making and help authors improve their work. They accept review invitations only when they have the requisite expertise and can meet the deadline; otherwise, they decline promptly. Manuscripts are treated as confidential and are not discussed or shared without permission. Reviews focus on scholarly content, methodology, interpretation, and clarity, avoiding personal criticism. Reviewers identify relevant prior work that has not been cited and alert editors to potential overlap, plagiarism, or data or image manipulation. Any competing interests—such as recent collaborations, institutional ties, or financial interests—must be declared, and the reviewer should recuse themselves when appropriate.

Publisher Responsibilities

The publisher maintains editorial independence; decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board. The publisher provides resources for ethical oversight, plagiarism screening, archiving, and corrections, and ensures the permanent availability of published content through appropriate indexing and archiving arrangements.

Misconduct: Screening, Investigation, and Outcomes

All submissions undergo similarity screening and may be examined with image forensics where appropriate. When credible concerns arise, the journal secures the record, requests explanations and supporting evidence from authors, seeks expert input as needed, consults institutions or funders where appropriate, and issues transparent decisions with documented procedures. Depending on severity, outcomes may include requests for revision, rejection, publication of corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, time-limited submission bans, and notifications to institutions or funders.

Post-Publication Updates

Corrections (errata or corrigenda) are issued for honest errors that do not invalidate the findings. Retractions are issued when findings are unreliable due to fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, unethical research, undeclared conflicts that materially affect conclusions, or duplicate publication; retracted articles remain accessible with clear notices. Expressions of concern are used when credible issues exist but investigations are inconclusive or ongoing. The journal maintains clear records of article versions, dates, and reasons for changes.

Transparency, Open Science, and Preprints

The journal accepts preprints; authors should disclose the preprint server and DOI or identifier at submission. Open data, code, and materials are encouraged where ethically and legally possible, and datasets, software, and preprints should be cited appropriately.

Ethical Statements—Templates for Authors

Ethics Approval and Consent: “This study was approved by the [Committee, Institution, Approval No.]. Written informed consent was obtained from all participants (or guardians).”

Animal Welfare: “All procedures complied with [Institutional/National] guidelines for the care and use of animals (Approval No. …).”

Data Availability: “Data are available at [repository name/DOI] or from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.”

Author Contributions (CRediT): “Conceptualization: A; Methodology: A, B; Investigation: B, C; Formal analysis: B; Writing—original draft: A; Writing—review and editing: A, B, C; Supervision: D; Funding acquisition: D.”

Competing Interests: “The authors declare no competing interests,” or specify any that exist.

Funding: “Supported by [Funder] under grant [number].”

AI Use Disclosure: “Generative AI tool(s) [name, version] were used for [language editing / code / figure drafting]; all outputs were verified by the authors.”

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by writing to the Editor-in-Chief with a detailed rationale and supporting evidence. Complaints about process or ethics are reviewed by the journal’s Ethics Editor or Committee; unresolved cases may be referred to the authors’ institutions or other appropriate oversight bodies. For queries or appeals, contact agrium@unimal.ac.id.