Policies

Open Access Policy and Copyright Guidelines

Biological Sciences provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public and supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Licensing

Creative Commons License
All articles published in Biological Sciences are licensed under the a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. This allows users to:

Share â€” copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format for any purpose, even commercially.

Adapt â€” remix, transform, and build upon the material for any purpose, even commercially.

*The licensor cannot revoke these freedoms as long as you follow the license terms.

Under the following terms

Attribution â€” You must give appropriate credit , provide a link to the license, and indicate if changes were made . You may do so in any reasonable manner, but not in any way that suggests the licensor endorses you or your use.

No additional restrictions â€” You may not apply legal terms or technological measures that legally restrict others from doing anything the license permits.

Accessibility

All content published in Biological Sciences is freely accessible to the public immediately upon publication. There are no subscription fees or access restrictions, ensuring that the research is available to a global audience without barriers.

Author Retention of Rights

Authors retain the copyright to their work published in Biological Sciences. They grant the journal the right to publish, distribute, and archive the work while retaining the right to reuse, reproduce, and distribute the article in other publications or formats.

Author's Moral Rights

The CC BY 4.0 license does not affect the moral rights of the authors. Authors retain the right to be properly attributed, and any use of the work that infringes on the author's moral rights is not permitted.

Exceptions

Any exceptions to the standard CC BY 4.0 license terms must be explicitly indicated for specific articles. Such exceptions will be clearly stated in the article's metadata or accompanying information.

Archiving and Preservation

The journal, Biological Sciences, is committed to archiving and preserving all published content. This includes ensuring that the CC BY 4.0 license terms remain attached to the work for perpetuity.

Compliance with CC BY 4.0 Standards

Biological Sciences adheres to the standards and requirements of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Authors are encouraged to familiarize themselves with the terms of the license and ensure compliance.

Reporting violation

Any privileges of copyright violation must be addressed to the Editor at info@irrespub.com with the subject line "Copyright violation ". The IR Research Publication board holds the sole right to choose the legitimacy of any such cases. After pondering, if the case is discovered and justified, the concerned publication will be taken out immediately from the archives of our website. The copyright violation is found by a recorded proof supporting a similar form as being published or copyrighted or patented before the date of distribution of the concerned Biological Sciences article then the author must provide an oral & written explanation in Infront of the original author and editorial board constituted by the chief editor Biological Science.

Review and Modification

These copyright terms are subject to periodic review and may be modified to align with changes in open access licensing standards. Authors and users will be notified of any changes.

Peer Review Policy

At IR Research Publication, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of editorial integrity, transparency, and scientific excellence. Our peer review process ensures that all manuscripts undergo a rigorous, fair, and unbiased evaluation by qualified experts.

Peer Review Model

All journals under IR Research Publication follow a double-blind peer review process, in which both authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other. This approach minimizes bias and promotes objective assessment based solely on scientific quality and originality.

Review Workflow

  1. Initial Editorial Screening:
    Each submission is first assessed by the Editor-in-Chief or an Associate Editor to ensure it fits the journal’s scope, meets ethical standards, and follows the author guidelines. Submissions that do not meet these criteria are returned to the authors without external review. This initial evaluation is typically completed within 2–3 days of submission.

  2. Reviewer Assignment:
    Manuscripts passing the initial check are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant subject area. Reviewers are selected based on their publication record and absence of any conflict of interest.

  3. Review Process:
    Reviewers are given two weeks to complete their assessment. On average, the peer review process (from reviewer invitation to receipt of all reports) takes approximately 3–4 weeks.

    Reviewers are asked to evaluate the manuscript on the following aspects:

    • Originality and novelty of the research

    • Scientific rigor and sound methodology

    • Clarity and quality of presentation

    • Relevance and contribution to the field

    • Adherence to ethical standards and reporting guidelines

  4. Decision Process:
    Based on the reviewers’ reports, the handling editor makes a decision to:

    • Accept

    • Request minor or major revisions

    • Decline
      The final decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief, ensuring consistency and fairness.

Review Timeline

To maintain quality and transparency, the average review period is 3–4 weeks, and authors are notified of the first editorial decision (the outcome after peer review, not only desk screening) within 4–5 weeks of submission. Reviewers are typically given 14 days (2 weeks) to complete their evaluation and submit reports.

Ethical and Transparency Standards

  • Conflict of Interest: Reviewers and editors must declare any potential conflicts before accepting a manuscript for review.

  • Plagiarism Screening: All submissions undergo plagiarism detection before peer review.

  • Confidentiality: All materials under review are treated as confidential and are not shared outside the editorial process.

  • Reviewer Recognition: We maintain a database of active reviewers, and contributions are acknowledged annually.

This structured process ensures the integrity, reliability, and transparency of all published research.

Data and Reproducibility Policy

At IR Research Publication, we are committed to promoting transparency, reproducibility, and the highest standards of research integrity. In line with this commitment, we have established the following Data and Reproducibility Policy

Data Availability

Authors are required to provide access to the raw data underlying their research findings. This may include datasets, code, and any other relevant materials necessary for the replication of the study. Authors should clearly specify how and where the data can be accessed (“Data Availability Statement"). Preferred options include public repositories, institutional databases, or other recognized platforms.

Reporting Guidelines

Authors are strongly encouraged to adhere to established reporting guidelines relevant to their specific research domain. These guidelines can enhance the clarity and completeness of reporting, contributing to the reproducibility of the study. The submission process will include a checklist to ensure that reporting guidelines have been followed appropriately. Compliance with these guidelines will be considered during the peer review process. For clinical trials and other study designs, authors must register their research protocols in recognized registries before commencing the study. This includes but is not limited to clinical trial registration in platforms like ClinicalTrials.gov. The registration information, including protocol details and any subsequent updates, should be referenced in the manuscript.

Exceptions and Confidentiality

In exceptional cases where data sharing is not possible due to legal, ethical, or other constraints, authors must provide a detailed justification during the submission process.

Editors will handle such cases with sensitivity, ensuring that confidentiality is maintained to the extent allowed by ethical standards.

Editorial Responsibility

The editorial team is committed to upholding the principles of this policy and will work collaboratively with authors to address any concerns or challenges related to data sharing and reproducibility.

Authorship and Contributorship Policy

Authors submitting to the Biological Sciences journal published by IR Research Publication must ensure that their manuscripts are ethically sound and meet industry-recognized standards. The following guidelines are adapted to ensure ethical practices in publishing:

General Principles

Accurate Presentation: Authors must accurately present their research findings and include an objective discussion of the significance of their findings.

Authorship: Authorship should be accurately reflected, including all and only those who qualify for authorship and clearly stating their contributions.

Conflict of Interest: Any potential conflict of interest must be disclosed at the time of submission.

Transparency in Data and Methods: Data and methods used in the research must be presented in sufficient detail to allow replication by other researchers. Raw data must be made publicly available unless there is a compelling reason otherwise (e.g., patient confidentiality).

Exclusive Submission: Simultaneous submission of manuscripts to more than one journal is not permitted.

Originality: Research results must be original and not previously published. Any translations must adhere to the journal's policy on translations.

Permission for Previously Published Content: Authors must obtain permission from the copyright holder for any previously published content (including quotations, figures, or tables).

Corrections Post-Publication: Errors and inaccuracies found after publication must be communicated promptly.

Authorship Criteria

The journal follows the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines which state that to qualify for authorship, authors must meet all four criteria:

Contribution: Substantial contributions to the conception, design, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data.

Drafting and Reviewing: Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content.

Approval: Final approval of the version to be published.

Accountability: Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Contributors who do not meet these criteria should be acknowledged.

Author Contributions

All submitted manuscripts should include an author contributorship statement specifying each author's work. For review articles, specify who was responsible for ideation, literature search, data analysis, drafting, and revising the work. For student dissertation-based articles, the student should be listed as the principal author.

Consortium/Group Authorship

If authorship is retained by a consortium or group, it should be listed as an author. Individual members must qualify for authorship according to ICMJE guidelines. The consortium/group members will be listed in Acknowledgments, Appendix, or Supplementary Materials.

Use of AI or AI-Assisted Technologies

The journal adheres to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines regarding AI and AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation. AI tools do not meet authorship criteria and must be appropriately declared if used.

Deceased Authors

If an author passes away during peer review, the corresponding author should inform the editorial office and confirm the deceased author’s contribution and potential conflicts of interest. Upon publication, a note will be added under the author list.

Changes to Authorship

Any changes to the author list must be made during the editorial process and approved by all authors, including those removed. Requests after acceptance will delay publication and require a completed authorship change form signed by all authors.

Authorship Disputes

The journal follows COPE guidelines to resolve authorship disputes. Disputes that cannot be resolved by the parties involved will be referred to an appropriate institution or governing body. The journal reserves the right to amend authorship lists based on their recommendations.

Transparency and Compliance

The journal Biological Sciences adheres to these policies to ensure transparency and fairness. Authors are required to disclose their contributions, and the editorial board reserves the right to verify and enforce these policies.

This policy is subject to periodic review to align with evolving best practices in academic publishing.

Policy and guidelines for Reviewers

The peer-review process is a cornerstone of scientific integrity and quality. Reviewers for the Biological Sciences journal, published by IR Research Publication, are expected to uphold the highest ethical standards. The following guidelines outline the responsibilities and expectations for reviewers to ensure the integrity of the review process.

General Responsibilities

Integrity and Objectivity: Reviewers must provide objective and constructive feedback, free from personal bias. They should evaluate manuscripts based on their scientific merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope.

Confidentiality: All manuscript details, including the abstract, must remain confidential. Reviewers should not disclose any information about the manuscript to anyone outside the review process without prior permission from the Editorial Office.

Timeliness: Reviewers should complete their reviews within the agreed timeframe. If a delay is unavoidable, reviewers should inform the Editorial Office as soon as possible.

Reporting Ethical Concerns: If a reviewer identifies any ethical issues with a manuscript, such as potential plagiarism, duplicate publication, or concerns about research involving human or animal subjects, they must report these to the Editorial Office immediately.

Conflict of Interest

Disclosure: Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could affect their impartiality. This includes personal relationships, financial interests, or professional connections with the authors or the subject matter of the manuscript.

Types of Conflicts:

Personal or Collaborative: Reviewers should not review manuscripts from authors affiliated with their institution, research collaborators, personal friends, family members, or those with whom they have had recent collaborations (within the last three years).

Financial or Professional: Reviewers should not review manuscripts if they have financial interests or professional relationships with the authors or the content of the manuscript. This includes receiving benefits, holding patents, or being part of a company with interests in the manuscript.

Other Conflicts: Any other conflicts that could be perceived as influencing the review process must be disclosed.

Action: If a conflict of interest is identified, the reviewer should recuse themselves from the review process, and the Editorial Office will assign an alternative reviewer.

Ethical Standards

Research Integrity: Reviewers should ensure that the research presented in manuscripts is conducted ethically and in accordance with relevant guidelines. This includes verifying that studies involving human subjects, animals, or cell lines have received appropriate ethical approval and permissions.

Plagiarism and Duplicate Publication: Reviewers should be vigilant about potential plagiarism and duplicate publication. Any suspicions should be reported to the Editorial Office.

Clinical Trials Registration: Reviewers should check for the registration of clinical trials and ensure that this is referenced in the manuscript’s Methods section.

Data Transparency: Manuscripts should include sufficient detail about the data and methods used in the research to allow for replication by other researchers.

Confidentiality and Anonymity

Maintaining Confidentiality: Reviewers must keep the content of the manuscript confidential. If a reviewer wishes to involve a colleague or student in the review, they must first seek permission from the Editorial Office.

Reviewer Anonymity: The Biological Sciences journal employs a double-blind peer review process. Reviewers should avoid revealing their identity to the authors, both in their comments and in any attached files.

Open Peer-Review Option: Reviewers have the option to sign their review reports if the authors choose to publish the reviews with their paper. Reviewers' names will not be revealed until publication and only with their explicit consent.

By adhering to these guidelines, reviewers help maintain the high standards and integrity of the Biological Sciences journal. Their diligence and ethical commitment are crucial to the advancement of scientific knowledge.

Policy and guidelines for Editors

Integrity and Responsibility

All participants in the peer-review process, including Editors-in-Chief, Editorial Board Members, Guest Editors, and Reviewers, share the responsibility of overseeing the integrity of the editorial process for Biological Sciences. This includes ensuring that the journal’s content maintains the highest standards of quality, transparency, and ethics.

*Editorial Board members must maintain a clean record of publication ethics. The publisher reserves the right to remove editors whose publication record involves retraction(s) or misconduct

Reporting Ethical Concerns

If any participant has ethical concerns about a manuscript sent for review or receives information about a possible ethical issue after publication, they must contact the Editorial Office immediately. The Editorial Office will then conduct an investigation in accordance with the Comments and Complaints Policy and COPE guidelines.

Pre-Peer Review Checks

Before and during peer review, Managing Editors and Assistant Editors in the Editorial Office perform the following checks. However, concerns from Reviewers and Editors should still be reported:

Ethics approval and permissions for research involving human subjects, animals, or cell lines.

Plagiarism, duplicate publication, and necessary permissions from copyright holders for already-published figures or images.

Clinical Trials Registration and reference to the registration in the Methods Section.

Other compliance, ethics, and research integrity checks per journal policies and guidelines.

Reviewer and Editor Recommendations

When making a recommendation or final decision on a manuscript, Reviewers and Editors should consider:

Any facts that might be perceived as a possible conflict of interest must be disclosed. Authors must disclose conflicts of interest related to their manuscript or study prior to submission.

Authors must accurately present their research findings and include an objective discussion of the significance of their findings.

Data and methods used in the research must be presented in sufficient detail to allow other researchers to replicate the work.

Whether the submission fits the scope of the journal.

Whether Reviewers provided sufficient feedback and were suitable for reviewing the submission.

Potential Conflicts of Interest

Transparency is essential, and all those involved in the peer-review process must carefully consider and declare any conflicts of interest. Any associations that interfere with, or could be potentially perceived as interfering with, the full and objective assessment, peer review, and decision-making process must be declared.

Personal or Collaborative Conflicts: Reviewers and Editors should not review manuscripts submitted by authors affiliated with their institution, research collaborators, or personal connections, including friends, family, or spouses. They should also avoid reviewing manuscripts from authors who have been mentors, mentees, or collaborators in the past three years.

Financial or Professional Conflicts: Financial conflicts include professional or business relationships, financial interests, or other competing interests that may introduce bias. Reviewers and Editors should not receive any personal benefits, salary, board membership, funding, honoraria, or other interests in a company related to the manuscript. They should avoid reviewing manuscripts where these conflicts are present.

Other Conflicts: Any other conflicts of interest, whether real or perceived, should be declared. Reviewers and Editors must disclose personal biases that may affect peer review. Discrimination based on race, color, sex, gender identity, sexual orientation, age, religion, country of origin, physical ability, or socio-economic status has no place in the journal.

In the event of a conflict of interest, alternative Reviewers and/or Editors will be assigned. If an Editor submits a manuscript to the journal, their submission will be handled by other Editors without conflicts of interest.

Confidentiality and Anonymity

Reviewers and Editors must keep the content of the manuscript, including the abstract, confidential. Reviewers must inform the Editorial Office if they wish a student or colleague to complete the review on their behalf.

Biological Sciences performs double-blind peer review. Reviewers should avoid revealing their identity to the authors. The journal offers the option to publish review reports with the paper and for Reviewers to sign their open peer review reports. However, reviewer names will not be revealed until publication and only with their explicit agreement.

For more details, please refer to the Open Peer-Review Option provided by the journal.

Plagiarism Policy

At IR Research Publication, we uphold the highest standards of academic integrity and originality. Plagiarism and redundant/overlapping publication undermine the essence of scholarly work and compromise the integrity of the research process. To maintain the credibility and reputation of our publications, we have established a comprehensive plagiarism policy.

Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the act of presenting someone else's work, ideas, or intellectual property as one's own, without proper attribution. This includes, but is not limited to, copying text, data, figures, tables, or any other form of content without appropriate citation. Plagiarism can be of different types, such as Copy-Paste Plagiarism: directly copying and pasting text without proper citation; Paraphrasing Plagiarism: rewriting someone else's work without proper attribution; and Self-Plagiarism: Reproducing one's own previously published work without proper acknowledgment.

Redundant/Overlapping Publication

Authors are expected to submit original and previously unpublished work. Redundant or overlapping publication, also known as dual submission, is the submission of substantially similar work to more than one publication. Authors should disclose any related work that might overlap with the submission at the time of submission.

Detection of Plagiarism

IR Research Publication employs advanced plagiarism detection tools to ensure the originality of submitted manuscripts. Authors are encouraged to use proper citation and referencing methods to avoid plagiarism.

Consequences of Plagiarism

If plagiarism or redundant/overlapping publication is detected, the manuscript will be rejected or retracted, depending on the stage of the publication process. The authors may also face restrictions on future submissions to IR Research Publication.

Author Responsibility

Authors are solely responsible for ensuring the originality of their work. Proper citation and acknowledgment of sources are crucial in maintaining academic integrity.

Reporting Plagiarism

Readers, reviewers, and fellow researchers are encouraged to report any suspected cases of plagiarism to the editorial office. All reports will be thoroughly investigated, and appropriate actions will be taken.

By submitting a manuscript to IR Research Publication, authors agree to adhere to this plagiarism policy. We believe in fostering a scholarly environment where originality is celebrated, and ethical research practices are upheld.

Policy for Conflicts of Interest

At IR Research Publication, we are committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and ethical conduct in all aspects of our publishing activities. This Conflicts of Interest Policy is designed to provide clear definitions of conflicts of interest and establish robust processes for handling such conflicts. This policy applies to authors, reviewers, editors, journals, and publishers associated with IR Research Publication.

Definitions

Conflict of Interest: Any situation where an individual's personal, financial, or professional interests may compromise or appear to compromise their objectivity, integrity, or impartiality in the context of their role in the publication process.

Author: The individual(s) or entity responsible for the creation and submission of a manuscript to IR Research Publication journals.

Reviewer: An expert in the field who evaluates the scholarly merit and validity of a manuscript during the peer review process.

Editor: The individual responsible for overseeing the review process, making publication decisions, and ensuring the integrity and quality of the published content.

Journal: A specific publication under the umbrella of IR Research Publication.

Publisher: IR Research Publication as an entity responsible for overseeing the publication process, maintaining ethical standards, and ensuring the integrity of its publications.

Identification and Disclosure

Authors are required to disclose all potential conflicts of interest that could influence the interpretation or presentation of their research. This includes financial interests, affiliations, and other relevant relationships.

Reviewers must promptly disclose any conflicts of interest that may compromise their ability to provide an unbiased and objective review of a manuscript.

Editors should declare any conflicts of interest that may affect their ability to handle a manuscript impartially.

IR Research Publication, as a publisher, is committed to transparency regarding any conflicts of interest that may arise at the organizational level.

Handling Conflicts of Interest

Conflicts of interest identified before publication will be addressed transparently, and appropriate actions will be taken, including but not limited to reassessment of the review process, additional peer reviews, or editorial decisions. If conflicts of interest are identified after publication, IR Research Publication will promptly investigate the matter and take corrective actions as necessary, which may include corrections, retractions, or other editorial measures.

Reporting and Enforcement

IR Research Publication encourages individuals involved in the publication process to report any conflicts of interest promptly. The publisher will investigate such reports thoroughly and take appropriate actions to maintain the integrity of its publications.

This policy will be periodically reviewed and updated as needed to ensure its effectiveness and alignment with evolving standards in research publication ethics.

Policy for Complaints and Appeals

At IR Research Publication we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity, transparency, and fairness. We recognize the importance of providing a clear and effective process for handling complaints against the journal, its staff, editorial board, or publisher.

This policy covers complaints and appeals related to the editorial process, publication decisions, ethical concerns, and any other issues related to the operations of the Journal Biological Sciences

Complaints or appeals should be submitted in writing to the journal's editorial office via email at eic@irrespub.com. The complainant should provide detailed information about the nature of the complaint or appeal, including relevant documentation and evidence. All complaints and appeals will be treated with the utmost confidentiality. Information related to the complaint will only be disclosed to those directly involved in the investigation and resolution process. Upon receiving a complaint or appeal, the editorial office will conduct an initial review to determine the validity and nature of the concerns raised. This may involve consulting relevant parties, such as authors, reviewers, or editorial board members. If the initial review suggests that further investigation is required, the editorial office will appoint an independent committee to thoroughly examine the complaint or appeal. The committee may include members of the editorial board or external experts, ensuring an unbiased and fair assessment.

Once the investigation is complete, the journal will take appropriate measures to address the concerns raised. This may include corrections, retractions, clarifications, or other actions as deemed necessary. The outcome of the investigation will be communicated to the complainant in writing.

If the complainant is dissatisfied with the outcome, they may submit an appeal within 30 days of receiving the resolution. The appeal will be reviewed by an independent appeals committee, and their decision will be final.

Documentation and Transparency

A record of all complaints, investigations, and resolutions will be maintained for transparency and accountability purposes. Periodically, the journal may provide summaries or reports on the number and types of complaints received and their outcomes.

We are dedicated to continuously improving our processes and ensuring a fair and transparent environment for all stakeholders involved in the publication process at IR Research Publication.

Ethical Oversight

At IR Research Publication, we are committed to upholding the highest ethical standards in all aspects of our publishing activities. Our Ethical Oversight Policy encompasses a comprehensive set of guidelines to ensure the integrity and ethical conduct of research, publication, and business practices.

Consent to Publication

Authors must provide explicit consent for the publication of their work, affirming that their contributions are original and have not been submitted elsewhere. Proper attribution and acknowledgment of co-authors and contributors must be ensured.

Researchers and authors must exercise particular care and sensitivity when conducting studies involving vulnerable populations. Transparent reporting of the ethical considerations and safeguards implemented to protect the rights and well-being of vulnerable participants is mandatory.

Ethical Conduct of Research Using Animals

Studies involving animals must adhere to ethical standards, including obtaining approval from appropriate institutional review boards or ethics committees. Authors must provide details on the ethical treatment, care, and use of animals in their research.

Ethical Conduct of Research Using Human Subjects

Research involving human subjects must be conducted ethically and in compliance with relevant guidelines and regulations. Authors are required to provide evidence of obtaining informed consent from participants and demonstrate adherence to ethical review processes.

Handling Confidential Data

Authors must ensure the secure handling of confidential data, protecting the privacy and confidentiality of research participants. Adequate measures should be taken to store, process, and share data responsibly and in accordance with relevant data protection regulations.

Ethical Business/Marketing Practices

IR Research Publication is committed to fair and ethical business and marketing practices. Editors, reviewers, and authors should disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may influence the publication process. Adherence to transparent and honest communication in all interactions with stakeholders, including authors, reviewers, and readers.

Enforcement and Compliance

Non-compliance with this Ethical Oversight Policy may result in corrective actions, including retraction of published articles or suspension of publishing privileges. Allegations of ethical misconduct will be thoroughly investigated, and appropriate actions will be taken based on the findings.

IR Research Publication is dedicated to regularly reviewing and updating its Ethical Oversight Policy to align with evolving ethical standards and industry best practices.

By adhering to these ethical guidelines, we aim to foster a research and publication environment that prioritizes integrity, respect, and responsible conduct across all stakeholders involved in the scholarly publishing process.

Policy for handling Allegations of misconduct

At IR Research Publication, we are committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity and ethical conduct in the field of international relations research. To uphold this commitment, we have established a comprehensive Allegations of Misconduct Policy to address allegations of misconduct both pre-publication and post-publication.

This policy applies to all individuals involved in the publication process, including authors, reviewers, editors, and any other stakeholders. It encompasses various forms of misconduct, including but not limited to plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, and unethical research practices.

Reporting Allegations

We encourage all stakeholders, including whistleblowers, to come forward with any allegations of misconduct. Allegations can be reported to the editorial office through a dedicated email address info@irrespub.com.

Handling Allegations

Upon receiving an allegation, the following steps will be taken:

  • The editorial office will conduct a preliminary assessment of the allegation to determine its credibility and seriousness. This may involve consulting experts in the field.
  • The identity of whistleblowers and individuals involved in the investigation will be kept confidential to the extent possible, while still conducting a thorough and fair review.
  • If the allegation is deemed credible, the relevant parties, including authors and reviewers, will be notified of the investigation. All relevant documentation and evidence will be collected for further review.

Investigation Process

  • Formation of an Investigation Committee: An independent committee, comprising experts in the field, will be appointed to conduct a detailed investigation.
  • The investigation will adhere to principles of fairness, transparency, and impartiality. All parties involved will be given an opportunity to present their case and provide evidence.
  • The investigation will be conducted promptly, and a reasonable timeframe will be established for the completion of the process.

Outcomes of Investigation

Based on the findings of the investigation, the following outcomes may occur:

No Misconduct Found: If the investigation determines that no misconduct occurred, the matter will be considered resolved, and relevant parties will be informed.

Misconduct Confirmed: If misconduct is confirmed, appropriate actions will be taken, ranging from corrections and retractions to sanctions against the responsible parties.

Appeals Process

A transparent appeals process will be in place for individuals dissatisfied with the outcome of the investigation.

Continuous Improvement

We are committed to regularly reviewing and updating our Allegations of Misconduct Policy to ensure its effectiveness and compliance with evolving ethical standards in research publication.

Post Publication Discussions and Corrections

Discussion

IR Research Publications encourages vibrant post-publication debates and discussions as a means of enriching scientific discourse. We value the diverse perspectives and insights of the scientific community. To facilitate constructive discussions, we have outlined the following guidelines.

Authors, readers, and the scientific community are invited to engage in discussions on our journal's website, utilizing designated sections for post-publication debates.

Letters to the editor that contribute to the ongoing discussion are also welcomed and should be submitted through the specified channels.

Recognizing the importance of external moderated platforms, authors are encouraged to participate in discussions on platforms such as PubPeer. These platforms provide an additional avenue for open dialogue and peer engagement.

All participants in post-publication discussions are expected to maintain a respectful and constructive tone. Critique should focus on the scientific content and ideas presented rather than personal attacks.

Avoid inflammatory language or statements that could hinder a productive exchange of ideas.

Clearly articulate points of disagreement or areas that merit further exploration. Provide evidence and references to support arguments and viewpoints.

Disclose any potential conflicts of interest that may influence the discussion.

The editorial team will moderate discussions to ensure they remain focused on scientific content and adhere to ethical standards.

In cases where discussions veer off-topic or violate community guidelines, the editorial team reserves the right to intervene and, if necessary, close or moderate the discussion.

Authors are encouraged to actively participate in post-publication discussions related to their work. This engagement can include responding to queries, providing clarifications, and acknowledging valid points raised by other contributors.

The author's participation contributes to the collaborative and iterative nature of scientific inquiry.

Post-publication discussions will be regularly monitored by the editorial team. Valuable insights or corrections identified through these discussions may be considered for further editorial review and potential updates to the published content.

When referencing or citing specific points from post-publication discussions, provide proper attribution to the original contributors. This ensures that credit is given where it is due and fosters a culture of academic integrity.

Corrections

At IR Research Publications, we understand that the scientific landscape is dynamic, and new information or insights may emerge after the publication of an article. To ensure the accuracy and reliability of our published content, we have established the following guidelines for authors seeking corrections and revisions post-publication.

Submission Process

Authors intending to submit corrections should upload the corrected manuscript using an online submission system. Authors need to keep the title same as originally published. It is important to select "Corrections" in article type" The corrected manuscript should be approved by all authors.

Timeliness

Authors are encouraged to submit correction requests in a timely manner after the identification of errors or the need for revisions.

The editorial team will prioritize the prompt review and processing of correction submissions to ensure the timely dissemination of accurate information.

Correction Types

Corrections may include factual errors, typographical mistakes, or clarifications. Authors should clearly specify the type of correction needed.

Revisions may involve updates to methodologies, additional data, or other substantive changes. The reasons for revisions should be clearly articulated in the submission.

Transparency

Authors must prioritize transparency when submitting corrections or revisions. Clearly communicate the changes made, providing context and ensuring that readers can understand the nature of the modifications.

If applicable, authors should acknowledge any contributors or collaborators who aided in identifying the need for corrections.

Editorial Review

The editorial team will thoroughly review all correction and revision submissions. This process may involve consultation with peer reviewers, subject matter experts, or additional editorial assessments.

The decision to accept or reject a correction or revision will be communicated to the authors along with feedback and recommendations for further improvements if necessary.

Correction Notices and Corrigendum

Upon acceptance of corrections, a formal correction notice will be issued. This notice will be prominently displayed alongside the original article to inform readers of the changes made.

Correction notices will be written in a clear and concise manner, providing a summary of the modifications and the reasons behind them.

Retractions

In cases where errors are significant or ethical concerns arise, authors may be advised to consider retracting the article. The decision to retract will be made in accordance with established ethical guidelines.

Article Retraction Guideline

IR Research Publication is committed to upholding the highest standards of integrity and accuracy in scientific research. In certain circumstances, it may become necessary to retract a fully published article due to identified errors, misconduct, or other significant issues. We have developed the following policy to guide authors, editors, and the journal in the article retraction process.

Grounds for Article Retraction
>Research Misconduct: When there is evidence of fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other forms of research misconduct that invalidate the findings presented in the article.

>Serious Errors: When significant errors are identified that materially affect the validity, reliability, or interpretation of the research findings, and cannot be adequately addressed through corrections or amendments.

>Ethical Concerns: When ethical issues arise, such as undisclosed conflicts of interest, ethical approval violations, or inadequate informed consent, which undermine the integrity of the research.

>Duplicate Publication: When substantial portions of the article have been published elsewhere without proper acknowledgment or justification.

>Legal or Regulatory Requirements: When legal or regulatory authorities mandate the retraction due to violations of applicable laws, regulations, or ethical guidelines.

Retraction Request

Authors who wish to withdraw a published article must submit a formal written request to the journal's editorial office. The request should include the article title, author names, manuscript identification number (if available), and a detailed explanation for the retraction. The retraction request should be signed by all co-authors, confirming their agreement to retract the article. If the article has multiple authors, the corresponding author should be responsible for coordinating the retraction process and communicating with the journal.

Editorial Assessment
Upon receipt of a retraction request, the journal's editorial office will evaluate the request and assess the grounds for retraction. The editorial office may seek additional information or clarification from the authors, reviewers, or other relevant parties to make an informed decision. If the retraction request is deemed reasonable and justified, the article will be considered for retraction. The decision to retract the article rests with the journal's editor-in-chief or the editorial board.

Publication Record

A retraction notice titled "Retraction: [article title]" will be published in a later issue of the journal, specifically in the section with page numbers, and will be listed in the contents list. In the online version, there will be a hyperlink directing readers to the original article. Prior to accessing the article itself, readers will be presented with a screen displaying the retraction notice. The original article will remain unchanged except for the addition of a watermark on each page indicating that it has been "retracted" in PDF format. The HTML version of the document will be deleted.

Article Withdrawal Guideline

At IR Research Publication, we understand that there may be circumstances where it becomes necessary to withdraw a published article. This applies solely to preliminary versions of articles that have been accepted for publication but have not undergone formal publishing processes. These early versions lack complete volume/issue/page information and may occasionally contain errors or unintentional duplicate submissions. We have developed the following policy to guide authors, editors, and the journal in the article withdrawal process.

Grounds for Article Withdrawal
>Significant errors or inaccuracies in the article that compromise the integrity of the research or its conclusions.

>Plagiarism, data fabrication, or any form of scientific misconduct.

>Ethical concerns, such as human or animal rights violations or failure to obtain appropriate consent.

>Legal issues, including copyright infringement or violation of intellectual property rights.

Withdrawal Request

Authors who wish to withdraw a published article must submit a formal written request to the journal's editorial office. The request should include the article title, author names, manuscript identification number (if available), and a detailed explanation for the withdrawal. The withdrawal request should be signed by all co-authors, confirming their agreement to withdraw the article. If the article has multiple authors, the corresponding author should be responsible for coordinating the withdrawal process and communicating with the journal.

Editorial Assessment

Upon receipt of a withdrawal request, the journal's editorial office will evaluate the request and assess the grounds for withdrawal. The editorial office may seek additional information or clarification from the authors, reviewers, or other relevant parties to make an informed decision. If the withdrawal request is deemed reasonable and justified, the article will be considered for withdrawal. The decision to withdraw the article rests with the journal's editor-in-chief or the editorial board.

Publication Record

If an article is withdrawn, the article will be marked with a prominent notice indicating the reason for withdrawal, ensuring transparency and maintaining the journal's credibility. The article's metadata, including the title, author names, and abstract, still be accessible in databases and search engines, but the full-text content will be removed or replaced with the withdrawal notice.

Policy on the Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

IR Research Publication recognizes the growing use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in scientific publishing. To ensure transparency, integrity, and accountability, we have established the following guidelines for authors, reviewers, and editors.

For Authors

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Scientific Writing

  • Authors may use generative AI and AI-assisted technologies solely to enhance the readability and language of their manuscripts.

  • AI-generated content should always be reviewed and edited by the authors to ensure accuracy and compliance with ethical and scientific standards.

  • Authors must disclose any use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools in their manuscript. A statement regarding such use will appear in the published article.

  • AI and AI-assisted tools cannot be credited as an author or co-author.

  • Authors are fully responsible for the originality, accuracy, and integrity of their submitted work and must comply with our Ethics in Publishing policies.

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Tools in Figures, Images, and Artwork

  • The use of AI-generated or AI-modified images in submitted manuscripts is not permitted. This includes enhancements, modifications, or introductions of specific features within an image or figure.

  • Basic adjustments such as brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable as long as they do not obscure or eliminate essential information.

  • If AI tools are integral to the research (e.g., AI-assisted biomedical imaging), their application must be clearly documented in the Methods section, specifying the tool's name, version, and manufacturer.

  • Generative AI is not allowed for producing graphical abstracts or cover art unless prior permission is obtained from the journal editor and publisher.

*The IR Research Publication uses image duplication detection and/or AI‑image detection tools to screen for manipulated figures

For Reviewers

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Peer Review

  • Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential and must not upload them to any AI tool, as this may violate author confidentiality and proprietary rights.

  • Reviewers must not use AI tools to generate peer review reports, as AI lacks the critical thinking required for evaluating scientific manuscripts.

  • The reviewer remains fully responsible and accountable for the content of their review reports.

  • AI-generated content must not be used in any manner that could lead to biased, incomplete, or misleading peer reviews.

For Editors

Use of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in the Editorial Process

  • Editors must maintain strict confidentiality and must not upload manuscripts or editorial communications into AI tools.

  • Generative AI must not be used in the decision-making process, as AI-generated assessments may be inaccurate or biased.

  • Editors are responsible and accountable for all editorial decisions and communications with authors and reviewers.

  • If an editor suspects a violation of this AI policy by an author or reviewer, they should report it to the publisher.

General Considerations

IR Research Publication acknowledges the role of AI-driven technologies in research. We will continue to evaluate developments in this field and may revise our policies as necessary to maintain scientific integrity, transparency, and trust.

For any clarifications or concerns regarding this policy, please contact the editorial office of Biological Sciences.