Journal Policies

Peer review

Submissions are screened by the editorial office and normally reviewed using a double-anonymous process. Editors assess relevance, originality, methodological quality, ethical conduct and clarity. Reviewers should provide constructive, evidence-based comments and declare any conflict of interest.

Research integrity and ethics

Authors are responsible for obtaining all required approvals for work involving animals, people, personal data or protected locations. Manuscripts must describe relevant approvals, consent and welfare safeguards. Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, duplicate publication and manipulation of the review process are not acceptable.

Originality, authorship and conflicts

A manuscript must not be under consideration elsewhere. All listed authors must have made a substantial contribution, approved the submitted version and agreed to be accountable for the work. Funding and financial or personal conflicts must be disclosed.

Corrections and retractions

The journal may publish corrections, expressions of concern or retractions when material errors or integrity concerns are confirmed. The editorial record will explain the reason for any post-publication action.

Data and materials

Authors should make supporting data, code and materials available when appropriate, subject to privacy, safety, consent and legal restrictions. Any restrictions should be explained in the manuscript.

Complaints and appeals

Questions about editorial decisions or publication ethics should be sent to the editorial office with the manuscript identifier and a clear description of the concern. Appeals should address a specific factual or procedural issue and should not simply repeat the original submission.