Policies

The Sultan Qaboos University Journal for Science (SQUJS) is committed to upholding the highest standards of research and publication integrity. The journal strictly adheres to the Core Practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and operates in full alignment with the Principles of Transparency and Best Practice in Scholarly Publishing (supported by COPE, DOAJ, OASPA, and WAME).

Advertising Policy

The Sultan Qaboos University Journal for Science (SQUJS) does not accept, host, or publish commercial advertisements from third parties on its website or within its published articles. The journal is fully supported by Sultan Qaboos University; therefore, all editorial processes, peer-review outcomes, and publication decisions are based strictly on scientific merit and remain completely independent of commercial or financial interests.

Author Affiliations

Authors must accurately list all relevant affiliations to properly attribute where the research or scholarly work was approved, supported, and conducted.

Primary Affiliation: The primary affiliation for each author must be the institution where the majority of the research was actually performed. Affiliations should be as detailed as possible, including the department, faculty/college, university, city, postal code, and country.
Change of Affiliation: If an author moves to a different institution before the article is published, the primary affiliation must remain the location where the work was conducted. The current address may be included as an additional note or in the Acknowledgments. Change of affiliation alone is not a valid reason to remove an author from a publication.
Non-Research Articles: For non-research articles (e.g., Editorials, Reviews), authors should list their current institutional affiliation at the time of submission.
Independent Researchers: Authors without a current, relevant institutional affiliation should explicitly state their independent status.
Post-Publication Updates: Author addresses and affiliations are considered a permanent part of the scholarly record and will not be updated or changed after the final publication of the article.
Integrity and Neutrality: Misrepresentation of affiliation is a severe form of misconduct; the journal investigates all such cases in accordance with COPE guidelines. Furthermore, SQUJS remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published institutional affiliations.

Appeals and Complaints

SQUJS adheres strictly to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding appeals against editorial decisions and complaints concerning the peer review process or publication ethics. To ensure fair and transparent handling, we distinguish between appeals and complaints as follows:

1. Appeals Against Editorial Decisions

Authors have the right to appeal against a rejection decision if they believe a serious factual error was made during peer review or editorial assessment.

Process: Appeals must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief. The appeal letter must provide detailed, evidence-based justification for reconsideration (e.g., demonstrating reviewer error or providing critical new data).
Resolution: Appeals will be reviewed by an independent Editor or Editorial Board member who was not involved in the original decision. The decision following an appeal is final.

2. Complaints About Editorial Processes or Publication Ethics

Complaints regarding the journal's processes (e.g., excessive delays), editorial conduct, or suspected publication misconduct (e.g., bias, reviewer misconduct) should be addressed to the Editor-in-Chief.

Process: The Editor-in-Chief will acknowledge receipt and investigate the complaint according to appropriate COPE flowcharts.
Escalation: If the Editor-in-Chief is the subject of the complaint, or if the complainant remains dissatisfied with handling of the case, the complaint will be assigned to the most senior independent member of the Editorial Board and, ultimately, to the Publisher for review.

3. Authorship Disputes

Please note that journal editors cannot investigate or adjudicate authorship disputes (e.g., disagreements over who qualifies as an author or the sequence of authors).

Process: If an authorship dispute arises during peer review or after publication, the editorial process for that manuscript will be immediately halted. Authors will be asked to resolve the dispute themselves. If they are unable to do so, the journal will refer the matter to the relevant authors' institutions for formal adjudication, in accordance with COPE guidelines. The journal will not proceed with publication or post-publication corrections until written agreement is received from all authors and/or their institutions.

Acknowledgments

Any individuals who contributed materially to the article but do not meet the criteria for authorship (e.g., general supervision, administrative support, data collection, technical assistance, language editing, or proofreading) should be listed by name and affiliation in the Acknowledgments section. Authors should specify the exact nature of each individual's contribution.

Permission: Because acknowledgment may imply endorsement of the study's data and conclusions, it is the responsibility of the corresponding author to obtain explicit written permission from all individuals before identifying them in this section.

AI-Assisted Technologies: Any use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools (e.g., Large Language Models such as ChatGPT) used solely for language editing or writing assistance must be transparently disclosed in this section, including the name of the tool and how it was applied.

(Note: Specific details regarding financial support or grants should be declared in the separate Funding Statement section.)

Authorship and Contributorship

Listing authors' names on an article is an important mechanism to give credit to those who have significantly contributed to the work and to ensure accountability for the published record.

1. Authorship Criteria

The journal strictly adheres to the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) guidelines for authorship. To qualify as an author, an individual must meet all four of the following criteria:

Substantial contributions to the conception or design of the work; or the acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data for the work; AND
Drafting the work or reviewing it critically for important intellectual content; AND
Final approval of the version to be published; AND
Agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work in ensuring that questions related to the accuracy or integrity of any part of the work are appropriately investigated and resolved.

Any individual who meets the first criterion should be given the opportunity to participate in the drafting, review, and final approval of the manuscript. The journal strictly prohibits guest, gift, and ghost authorship.

2. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Authorship

In accordance with COPE and ICMJE policies, Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools and Large Language Models (LLMs) do not meet the criteria for authorship because they cannot take responsibility for the submitted work. Therefore, AI tools must not be listed as an author or co-author. Any use of AI in drafting the manuscript or analyzing data must be transparently disclosed in the methodology or acknowledgments.

3. Contributor Details (CRediT)

To provide transparency regarding individual contributions, all submitting authors must provide a contribution statement utilizing the CRediT (Contributor Roles Taxonomy) framework. Individuals who contributed materially to the research but do not meet all four ICMJE authorship criteria (e.g., those who provided only funding acquisition, general supervision, or administrative support) should not be listed as authors. Instead, their contributions must be recognized in the Acknowledgments section, accompanied by their written permission to be named.

4. Changes to Authorship

Any changes to the author list (addition, deletion, or rearrangement of names) before or after publication must be agreed upon by all original and added/removed authors in writing. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to provide a clear justification for the change. If a change in authorship is approved after the publication of the article, it will be amended transparently via a formal post-publication notice (Corrigendum).

5. Authorship Disputes

The journal and its editors do not arbitrate or adjudicate authorship disputes. Any disagreements regarding authorship or the sequence of authors must be resolved by the authors themselves or referred to their respective affiliated institutions for investigation. Submissions may be halted in the review or publication process until such disputes are officially resolved.

Citation Policies and Guidelines

SQUJS expects authors to maintain the highest standards of academic integrity in their citations, ensuring that all claims are supported by relevant, timely, and verified peer-reviewed literature.

1. General Citation Principles

Accuracy and Originality: Authors must only cite sources they have personally read. Whenever possible, authors should cite the original primary research rather than derivative works or review articles that summarize the original findings.
Restricted Sources: In accordance with ICMJE recommendations, authors should carefully evaluate the integrity of their sources and avoid citing articles from predatory or pseudo-journals. Additionally, Artificial Intelligence (AI)–generated material must not be cited as a primary source.
Preprints: Preprints may be cited, but the citation must clearly indicate that the reference is a preprint and include a persistent identifier (e.g., DOI).

2. Prohibited Practices (Citation Manipulation)

SQUJS strictly prohibits citation manipulation in all forms, in alignment with COPE guidelines. Unacceptable practices include:

Excessive Self-Citation: Citing one's own work disproportionately without a strong scholarly rationale.
Citation Cartels: Pre-arrangements or coordinated efforts among author groups to inappropriately cite each other's work to artificially inflate citation metrics.
Gratuitous Citation: Unnecessarily citing articles published in SQUJS solely to boost the journal's impact factor.

3. Review and Non-Research Articles

Authors of reviews, perspectives, or opinion pieces must ensure that their reference lists provide a fair, balanced, and comprehensive overview of the current state of research. References must not be unfairly biased toward a particular research group, organization, or region.

Authors who are unsure about the appropriateness of a citation should contact the editorial office prior to submission.

Conflicts of Interest and Competing Interests

1. Overview and Purpose

In accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and ICMJE recommendations, SQUJS requires all participants in the publication process — authors, peer reviewers, and editors — to disclose any relationships or activities that could bias, or be perceived to bias, their work. A conflict of interest exists when professional judgment concerning the validity of research is influenced by a secondary interest, such as financial gain or personal rivalry.

2. Author Disclosures

All submitting authors must declare any competing interests relevant to the submitted work. Disclosures must cover the past 36 months (3 years) prior to submission.

Financial Interests: Examples include employment, consultancies, stock or share ownership, honoraria, research grants, patent applications/registrations, and travel support from organizations with an interest in the research outcome.
Non-Financial Interests: Examples include unpaid advisory board memberships, personal or professional relationships, academic competition, or strong political/ideological beliefs relevant to the published content.

Authors must include a clear "Conflicts of Interest" statement in the manuscript before the reference list. If there are no competing interests to declare, the following standard statement must be used: "The authors declare that they have no relevant financial or non-financial conflicts of interest to disclose."

3. Reviewer and Editor Obligations

Our commitment to objectivity extends to our editorial team and peer reviewers:

Peer Reviewers: Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest to the editor before agreeing to review a manuscript. Reviewers must withdraw themselves from evaluating manuscripts where they have a recent collaborative, competitive, or personal relationship with the authors or institutions involved.
Editors and Journal Staff: Editors must withdraw themselves from the editorial and decision-making process for any manuscript where a competing interest exists (e.g., papers authored by colleagues at their own institution). Such submissions will be reassigned to an independent, un-conflicted editor to ensure fair, single-blind peer review.

4. Undisclosed Conflicts

Failure to declare relevant conflicts of interest is considered a form of misconduct. If an undisclosed conflict is discovered post-publication, the journal will investigate according to COPE guidelines, which may result in the publication of a formal Correction or Retraction.

Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retractions

SQUJS recognizes the importance of maintaining the integrity, completeness, and transparency of the scholarly record. Articles that have been formally published will remain intact as far as possible. However, when the scientific record requires correction, the Editor-in-Chief will take appropriate action in strict accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Retraction Guidelines and the National Information Standards Organization-Communication of Retractions, Removals, and Expressions of Concern (NISO CREC) standards.

Any necessary changes will be accompanied by a permanent, freely accessible post-publication notice that is bi-directionally linked to the original article and indexed in scholarly databases. The journal issues the following types of amendments:

1. Corrections (Corrigendum / Erratum)

A Correction is issued if an error or omission affects the accuracy of the publication, but does not substantially invalidate the core results and conclusions.

Corrigendum: Issued to correct significant errors introduced by the author(s).
Erratum: Issued to correct significant errors introduced by the journal or publisher during the editing or production process.

2. Editorial Expressions of Concern (EEoC)

An Expression of Concern may be published if the editors receive credible allegations of research or publication misconduct, but conclusive evidence is not yet available, or if an institutional investigation is ongoing and will take considerable time to resolve. An EEoC serves to alert readers to potential risks in the data or conclusions while the investigation concludes.

3. Retractions

A Retraction is issued when the interpretation or conclusion of an article is substantially undermined. This includes clear evidence of major methodological errors, data fabrication or falsification, plagiarism, redundant publication, unethical research, or a compromised peer review process.

The original article will remain accessible in the public domain but will be distinctly and digitally watermarked as "RETRACTED" across all pages of the PDF and HTML versions. The Retraction notice will transparently state the reasons for the retraction and who requested it.

4. Article Removal

In extremely rare circumstances, it may be necessary to completely remove the content of a published article from the journal's online archives. This action is strictly limited to cases where the article is clearly defamatory or infringes upon a third party's legal right, is the subject of a court order, or poses a severe and immediate risk to public health or the environment if acted upon. In such cases, the bibliographic metadata (title and authors) will be retained, accompanied by a removal notice explaining the legal or safety rationale for the removal.

Consent for Publication

1. General Requirement

For all manuscripts that include identifiable case details, personal information, or images relating to an individual, explicit written informed consent for publication must be obtained from that person (or their parent/legal guardian in the case of minors). If the individual is deceased, consent for publication must be obtained from their legally authorized representative or next of kin.

2. Open Access Awareness

The consent obtained must explicitly state that the details and/or images will be published under a Creative Commons Attribution–NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-ND 4.0), meaning the content will be freely available on the internet, accessible to the general public, and may be reused or distributed globally.

3. Anonymity and Privacy

Authors must omit all nonessential identifying details. If there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained, written informed consent must be obtained. Please note that superficial alterations, such as masking the eye region in photographs, are inadequate for protecting anonymity. (Note: Formal consent is generally not required for entirely anonymized technical images — such as X-rays, ultrasound images, or pathology slides — provided they do not contain any identifying marks or accompanying identifiable text. The final decision on whether consent is required lies with the Editor.)

4. Declaration and Form Retention

The manuscript must include a formal statement declaring: "Written informed consent was obtained from the participant(s) or their legal guardian(s) for the publication of this report and any accompanying images/details." To comply with international data protection regulations and ICMJE guidelines, authors must not upload signed patient consent forms with their manuscript submission. Authors must securely archive the signed forms at their own institution. However, authors must be prepared to provide these forms to the Editor confidentially upon request.

Confidentiality of the Editorial and Peer Review Process

SQUJS treats all submitted manuscripts as privileged, confidential documents. We strictly adhere to COPE and ICMJE guidelines regarding the confidentiality of the editorial and peer-review process to protect the intellectual property and data privacy of our authors.

1. Shared Responsibilities

Reviewers: Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and the review process. Reviewers must not use information, data, or ideas obtained during peer review for their own or any other person's advantage. Reviewers must destroy all copies of the manuscript after submitting their report.
Authors: Authors must treat all communications with the journal, including editorial decisions and peer-review reports, as confidential. Reports must not be published or shared publicly without prior written consent from the journal and the reviewers.
Editors: Editors will not disclose information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and editorial staff.

2. Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Confidentiality

Under no circumstances may reviewers or editors upload a submitted manuscript, or any part of it, into Generative AI tools or Large Language Models (e.g., ChatGPT). Doing so is a direct violation of the authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights, as these tools may retain and use the input data for training purposes.

3. Involving Colleagues or Co-Reviewers

If a reviewer wishes to seek assistance from a colleague or trainee in completing a review, they must obtain explicit prior permission from the handling editor before sharing the manuscript. Once approved, the names, affiliations, and any competing interests of the co-reviewers must be formally recorded in the reviewer's report to ensure appropriate recognition and accountability.

4. Confidentiality During Ethical Investigations

In the event of an allegation of publication misconduct, the journal will handle the investigation with the utmost confidentiality, protecting the identities of whistleblowers, authors, and reviewers to the extent possible. However, in accordance with COPE guidelines, if the Editor identifies a serious ethical breach, the journal reserves the right to share necessary confidential information with third parties, such as the authors' affiliated institutions, funding bodies, or regulatory authorities, to facilitate a formal investigation.

Copyright Policy

Upon acceptance for publication, authors transfer copyright of their articles to Sultan Qaboos University Journal for Science (SQUJS). SQUJS holds copyright in the published Version of Record. All published articles remain fully open access and are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-ND 4.0). Under this licence, users may copy and redistribute the published article in any medium or format, including for commercial purposes, provided that proper attribution is given to the author(s) and to SQUJS as the copyright holder and publisher, and provided that the material is not altered, transformed, or built upon. Authors retain moral rights and the right to use their published work in teaching, research, presentations, institutional repositories, personal websites, and funder repositories, provided that the published version in SQUJS is properly cited.

Under the terms of the CC BY-ND 4.0 license, users are free to share (copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format) for any purpose, even commercially, provided the original work is properly attributed to the author(s) and SQUJS as the original publisher, and the material is not altered, transformed, or built upon.

Authors are permitted and encouraged to deposit their published articles in institutional or subject repositories, on their personal websites, or on funder websites, provided full citation to the version published in SQUJS is included. Authors also retain the right to transmit, print, and share the first submitted copies (pre-prints) and accepted versions (post-prints) with colleagues, for professional positions, and in their career portfolios, with proper citation to the SQUJS publication.

Data Fabrication and Falsification

SQUJS considers data fabrication and falsification to be severe breaches of publication ethics that undermine the integrity of the scholarly record. In accordance with COPE and ICMJE guidelines, we define these practices as follows:

Data Fabrication: The intentional creation, making up, or recording of fictitious data or research findings.
Data Falsification: The manipulation of research materials, equipment, or processes. This includes the deceptive alteration, omission, or suppression of inconvenient data, as well as the inappropriate manipulation of digital images, such that the research is not accurately represented in the official record.

Data Accuracy and Retention: Authors must ensure that all data within their manuscript is accurate, objectively presented, and verifiable. In alignment with ICMJE recommendations, authors are required to retain all original, unprocessed raw data and metadata underlying their findings for a minimum of 10 years post-publication.

Investigation and Sanctions: During the peer-review process or after publication, the Editor-in-Chief may request access to the original, unprocessed data (including raw image files) for verification. If the requested original data cannot be produced, the manuscript will be rejected or, if already published, retracted. If the journal finds credible evidence of deliberate data fabrication or falsification, we will adhere to COPE flowcharts. This includes issuing a formal post-publication notice (such as an Expression of Concern or Retraction) and reporting the suspected misconduct to the authors' affiliated institutions and funding bodies for a formal investigation.

Duplicate and Redundant Publication

1. General Policy

SQUJS only considers original manuscripts that have not been previously published in any language and are not currently under consideration by any other journal. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is a serious breach of publication ethics. Authors are required to formally declare the originality of their work and confirm that it is not under concurrent review upon submission.

2. Acceptable Prior Dissemination

In alignment with standard academic practices and ICMJE recommendations, SQUJS does not consider the following to be duplicate publication:

Abstracts or posters presented at scientific conferences.
Academic theses or dissertations published in institutional archives.
Manuscripts posted on recognized preprint servers. However, authors must disclose preprint postings upon submission and, if accepted, link the preprint to the final published article.

3. Secondary Publication and Translations

In accordance with ICMJE guidelines, acceptable secondary publication (such as a translation of an article previously published in another language) may be considered under strict conditions. Authors must obtain explicit written permission from the publisher and copyright holder of the original article, fully disclose the publication history to the Editor-in-Chief at the time of submission, and ensure that the secondary manuscript clearly states that it is a translated or secondary version and provides full citation to the original primary publication.

4. Detection and Sanctions

The journal utilizes text-matching software (e.g., Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate) to verify originality. If duplicate or redundant publication is detected during peer review or after publication, the editorial office will investigate the matter in strict accordance with COPE flowcharts. Confirmed violations will result in the immediate rejection of the manuscript or retraction of the published article, and may involve formal notification of the authors' affiliated institutions.

Funding and Financial Support

1. General Requirement

Authors must fully disclose all sources of funding and financial support received for the conduct of the research and/or preparation of the article. This includes direct research grants, as well as indirect support such as the provision of equipment, study materials, medical writing assistance, or Article Processing Charges (APCs).

2. Role of the Funder

Authors must explicitly describe the role of the study sponsor(s) or funder(s) in the study design; in the collection, analysis, and interpretation of data; in the writing of the report; and in the decision to submit the article for publication. If the funder had no such involvement, authors must use the following standard statement: "The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript."

3. Formatting and Standard Statements

To facilitate accurate indexing with Crossref and funder databases, authors should carefully check the standard spelling of funding agency names and format their declarations as follows:

If the research was funded: "This work was supported by the [Name of Funder] [grant number xxxx]; and the [Name of Funder] [grant number yyyy]."
If the research was not funded: "This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors."

Informed Consent for Publication

1. General Principles of Patient Privacy

Patients have a fundamental right to privacy that must not be violated. Identifying information — including names, initials, hospital numbers, or dates of birth — must not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is absolutely essential for scientific purposes and the patient gives explicit written informed consent for publication.

2. Obtaining Informed Consent

When consent for publication is required, the identifiable patient must be shown the manuscript and any accompanying images prior to publication.

Proxy Consent: If the patient is a minor, consent must be obtained from their parent or legal guardian. If the patient is deceased, consent must be obtained from their legally authorized representative or next of kin. If the patient lacks the capacity to consent (e.g., unconscious patients), proxy consent must be obtained appropriately.
Open Access Awareness: Authors must explicitly disclose to the patient that the manuscript and images will be published under an Open Access license (e.g., Creative Commons), meaning the materials will be freely available on the Internet to the general public. Patients must also be informed that while they may revoke consent prior to publication, it cannot be revoked once the article is published.

3. Anonymity and De-identification

All nonessential identifying details must be omitted. If there is any doubt that complete anonymity can be maintained, written informed consent must be obtained. Superficial alterations, such as placing black bars over the eye region in photographs, are inadequate for protecting anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity (such as in genetic pedigrees), authors must assure the Editors that such alterations do not distort the scientific meaning.

4. Handling of Consent Forms (Data Protection)

To comply with strict data protection regulations and COPE recommendations, authors must not upload signed patient consent forms to the journal's submission system or send them via email to the editorial office. Authors must securely archive the original signed forms at their treating institution. The Editor-in-Chief reserves the right to request a blank copy of the form used or a confidential attestation from the institution if needed.

5. Manuscript Declaration

All manuscripts reporting on human subjects or identifiable cases must include a "Consent to Publish" statement in the Declarations section. If consent was obtained, use a statement such as: "Written informed consent was obtained from the patient(s) [or their legal guardian/next of kin] for the publication of this report and any accompanying images."

Initial Screening and Desk Rejection Policy

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial evaluation by the Editorial Office and the Managing Editor to ensure that they meet the journal's minimum standards before being sent for external peer review. A manuscript may be desk-rejected (declined without peer review) if it meets one or more of the following criteria:

Out of Scope: The topic is not relevant to the aims and scope of the journal.
Lack of Originality or Significance: The manuscript lacks sufficient novelty, scientific impact, or fails to contribute significant new knowledge to the field.
Methodological Flaws: The study design is fundamentally flawed, lacks scientific rigor, or the research objectives are poorly defined.
Ethical and Integrity Violations: The manuscript presents publication ethics concerns (e.g., data fabrication, image manipulation, undisclosed conflicts of interest) or fails to provide required ethical declarations (e.g., institutional ethics approval or informed consent).
Plagiarism: The manuscript contains unacceptable text overlapping with previously published works. (Note: The journal uses Crossref Similarity Check to screen all submissions. Plagiarism is evaluated based on the nature and context of the copied text, not a strict percentage threshold.)
Non-Compliance with Reporting Standards: The manuscript fails to adhere to recognized international reporting guidelines appropriate for the study design (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, STROBE).
Inadequate Language Quality: The English language is of poor quality or contains severe grammatical errors, making it difficult for editors and reviewers to comprehend the scientific content.
Formatting and Submission Non-Compliance: The manuscript is incomplete, poorly organized, or strictly fails to follow the journal's Instructions for Authors.

Images, Figures, and Third-Party Material

1. Scientific Relevance and Image Integrity

Authors should include images and figures only when they are essential to the scientific narrative and provide direct value to the reported work. Purely illustrative or decorative content should be omitted.

Furthermore, all digital images (e.g., micrographs, radiological images, gels, and blots) must accurately represent the original data. Inappropriate manipulation is considered a serious breach of publication ethics.

Specific features within an image must not be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced.
Minor adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable only if they are applied uniformly to the entire image and do not eliminate or misrepresent information present in the original capture.
Authors must retain their raw, unprocessed image data and be prepared to provide these files to the Editorial Office upon request during peer review or post-publication.

2. Copyright and Re-use of Third-Party Material

If authors include any material in their manuscript that is owned or held in copyright by a third party (including, but not limited to, proprietary text, illustrations, photographs, tables, data, audio, video, film stills, or screenshots), they must obtain explicit written permission from the original copyright holder to reproduce the material across all formats and media prior to submission, and provide full and proper attribution by citing the original source directly in the figure legend or relevant text, alongside the statement of permission.

By submitting to the journal, authors legally warrant that they have secured all necessary permissions and have not infringed upon any existing copyrights.

Open Access and Licensing Policy

1. Open Access Statement

SQUJS is a fully Open Access journal. All published articles are immediately and permanently free for everyone to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to without subscription barriers or paywalls. Furthermore, the journal does not charge any submission fees or Article Processing Charges (APCs) to authors.

2. Copyright Retention

Authors publishing with the Sultan Qaboos University Journal for Science (SQUJS) retain the full copyright to their articles without restrictions. Authors grant SQUJS a non-exclusive license to publish the article and to identify itself as the original publisher. All published articles in SQUJS are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-ND 4.0).

Authors are permitted and encouraged to deposit their published articles in institutional or subject repositories, on their personal websites, or on funders' websites, provided full citation to the version published in SQUJS is included. Authors also retain the right to transmit, print, and share the first submitted copies (pre-prints) and accepted versions (post-prints) with colleagues, for professional positions, and in their career portfolios, with proper citation to the SQUJS publication.

3. User License (CC BY-ND 4.0)

All articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License (CC BY-ND 4.0). Under this license, readers and users are granted the right to copy and redistribute the material in any medium or format, provided they adhere to the following terms:

Attribution: Users must give appropriate credit to the original author(s), provide a full citation to the primary publication in SQUJS, and provide a link to the Creative Commons license.
No Derivatives: If users remix, transform, build upon, or alter the material in any way, they may not distribute the modified material.

4. Self-Archiving Policy

Authors are fully entitled and encouraged to self-archive the final, publisher-formatted PDF version of their article in institutional or discipline-specific repositories, or on their personal websites, immediately upon publication. When archiving, authors must include a permanent link (DOI) to the published version of the article on the journal's website.

Publication Ethics

The journal and its Editorial Board fully adhere to and comply with the policies and principles of the COPE.

Responsibilities of the Editors

1. Publication Decisions and Editorial Independence

The Editor-in-Chief holds ultimate responsibility for deciding which submitted articles should be published, guided by the journal's Editorial Board and peer reviewer recommendations. SQUJS strictly upholds the principle of editorial independence. All editorial decisions are based solely on the manuscript's academic merit, originality, clarity, and relevance to the journal's scope, completely free from commercial, financial, or political influence. Furthermore, decisions are not affected by the origins of the manuscript, including the nationality, ethnicity, gender, political beliefs, or religion of the authors.

2. Confidentiality and Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Editors and editorial staff must treat all submitted manuscripts as privileged, confidential communications. Information regarding a submission must not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher.

AI Tools: Editors must not upload submitted manuscripts, or any part of them, into Generative AI tools or Large Language Models (LLMs), as doing so violates the authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights.
Privileged Information: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the written consent of the author.

3. Conflicts of Interest and Recusal

Editors must recuse themselves from participating in the editorial or decision-making process for any manuscript where they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, personal, or financial relationships with any of the authors or institutions connected to the paper. In such cases, the manuscript will be reassigned to an independent co-editor or board member.

4. Quality Assurance and Vigilance over the Published Record

Editors must take all reasonable steps to ensure the quality and ethical integrity of the material they publish. Editors will rigorously assess the ethical conduct of studies (e.g., ensuring appropriate research ethics committee approval).

Handling Misconduct: Editors have a duty to act if they suspect misconduct in published or unpublished papers. The editorial team will actively investigate all allegations of research or publication misconduct (e.g., plagiarism, data fabrication, citation manipulation) in strict accordance with COPE Flowcharts.
Correcting the Record: If genuine errors or ethical breaches are identified post-publication, the editors will promptly issue the appropriate Correction, Expression of Concern, or Retraction, with due prominence.

5. Relations with Authors and Reviewers

Authors: Editors strive to ensure that the peer-review process is fair, unbiased, and timely. The journal provides a transparent mechanism for authors to appeal against editorial decisions.
Reviewers: Editors provide reviewers with clear guidance regarding their expectations. Reviewers are encouraged to comment on ethical concerns and study limitations. Reviewers' comments will be sent to authors in their entirety unless they contain offensive or libelous remarks. The journal continually monitors reviewer performance and will cease using reviewers who consistently produce discourteous, poor-quality, or late reviews.

Responsibilities of Peer Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions and Objectivity

Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication. Reviewers assist the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and help authors improve their manuscripts. Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly, supported by appropriate arguments and references.

2. Qualifications and Timeliness

Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to assess the research reported in a manuscript, or who knows that a prompt review will be impossible, must immediately notify the editor and decline the invitation to review.

3. Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must decline to review manuscripts in which they have a conflict of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, personal, or financial relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the work. If a potential conflict arises or is discovered during the review process, the reviewer must immediately declare it to the handling editor.

4. Confidentiality and Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI)

Manuscripts received for review are privileged, confidential documents.

Reviewers must not discuss the manuscript or share it with anyone (including colleagues or trainees) without explicit prior permission from the editor. If a co-reviewer is approved, their name must be declared in the final report.
AI Technologies: Reviewers must not upload the submitted manuscript, any part of it, or their peer review reports into Generative AI tools or Large Language Models. Doing so violates the authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights.
Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept strictly confidential and not used for the reviewer's personal advantage.

5. Acknowledgment of Sources and Citation Manipulation

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. However, reviewers must not request that authors cite the reviewer's own papers (or those of their associates) unless there is a strong, genuine scholarly rationale for doing so. Requests for citations designed solely to increase the reviewer's citation count are strictly prohibited.

6. Suspected Ethics Violations

A reviewer should immediately and confidentially call the editor's attention to any suspected ethical issues. This includes identifying any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper, as well as suspicions of data fabrication, falsification, or undisclosed conflicts of interest. Reviewers should report these concerns to the editor and must not attempt to investigate the matter independently.

Author Responsibilities and Ethical Obligations

1. Reporting Standards and Data Retention

Authors of original research must present an accurate, objective, and comprehensive account of the work performed and its scientific significance. Underlying data must be represented accurately without fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate manipulation. In accordance with ICMJE recommendations, authors must be prepared to provide public access to raw data during the review process and are required to retain all primary data and analytic procedures underpinning their published results for a minimum of 10 years post-publication.

2. Originality, Plagiarism, and Concurrent Publication

Authors must ensure that their submitted work is entirely original. If the work and/or words of others are used, they must be appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism in all its forms — including self-plagiarism (text-recycling) — is unacceptable. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently is strictly prohibited. However, posting manuscripts on recognized non-peer-reviewed preprint servers prior to submission is acceptable, provided the authors disclose this upon submission and link the preprint to the final published article. Acceptable secondary publication (e.g., translations) must be fully disclosed and agreed upon by the editors of both journals.

3. Authorship and Contributorship

The journal strictly adheres to the ICMJE criteria for authorship. The corresponding author must ensure that all individuals listed as authors meet all four of the following criteria: (1) substantial contributions to the conception, design, or data acquisition/analysis; (2) drafting or critically revising the work; (3) final approval of the version to be published; and (4) agreement to be accountable for all aspects of the work.

Artificial Intelligence (AI): AI-assisted technologies (e.g., ChatGPT) cannot be listed as authors, as they cannot take legal or ethical responsibility for the work.
Acknowledgments: Individuals who contributed to the study but do not meet all four criteria must be listed in the Acknowledgments section with their written permission.

4. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

Authors must transparently disclose any financial or non-financial relationships and activities that could bias, or be perceived to bias, their work. Disclosures must encompass the past 36 months prior to submission. All sources of financial support for the project must be explicitly stated in the manuscript.

5. Fundamental Errors in Published Works

If an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their ethical obligation to promptly notify the journal's Editor-in-Chief. The author must cooperate fully with the Editorial Office to issue a formal Correction (Corrigendum) or Retract the paper if the errors invalidate the core results and conclusions.

Peer Review Process and Policy

SQUJS is committed to a rigorous, fair, and transparent peer-review system to ensure that all published articles meet the highest standards of scientific and academic excellence.

1. Peer Review Model

The journal operates a single-anonymized peer review process (formerly known as single-blind). Under this model, the identities of the reviewers are kept strictly confidential from the authors, while the reviewers are aware of the authors' identities.

2. Reviewer Selection and Conduct

Following an initial editorial screening, manuscripts deemed suitable for consideration are sent to a minimum of two independent, external peer reviewers.

Selection: Reviewers are selected based on their objective expertise. While authors may suggest potential reviewers during submission, the Editor-in-Chief retains the final authority on reviewer invitations. The journal rigorously vets the identities and institutional email addresses of all invited reviewers to prevent peer review manipulation.
Expectations: Reviewers are expected to evaluate manuscripts objectively, provide constructive feedback, and maintain strict confidentiality regarding the manuscript and the review process. Reviewers must declare any potential conflicts of interest prior to accepting an invitation.
Artificial Intelligence (AI): Reviewers are strictly prohibited from uploading the submitted manuscript, or any part of it, into Generative AI tools or Large Language Models. Doing so is a breach of confidentiality and intellectual property rights.

3. Editorial Decision-Making

The handling editor and/or Editor-in-Chief make the final decision regarding the acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript. While editorial decisions are heavily informed by peer reviewer reports, editors are not strictly bound by reviewer recommendations. A single serious concern raised by a reviewer or editor regarding scientific validity or ethics may result in the manuscript's rejection.

4. Specialized and Integrity Review

The journal reserves the right to seek advice outside the standard peer review process. Our Research Integrity team or the Editor-in-Chief may consult external experts regarding submissions with serious ethical, security, biosecurity (dual-use research of concern), or societal implications. Based on this specialized assessment, the journal may recruit reviewers with specific technical expertise, mandate further assessment by additional editors, or decline to further consider the submission.

Submissions by Editors and Editorial Board Members (Editor-as-Author Policy)

SQUJS welcomes submissions from its own Editorial Board. However, to ensure rigorous objectivity and compliance with COPE guidelines, any submission authored or co-authored by an Editor or Board Member is subject to a strict, independent evaluation process.

1. Initial Submission and Disclosure

Mandatory Declaration: The submitting editor-author must explicitly declare their editorial role within the journal in both the Cover Letter and the manuscript's Conflict of Interest section at the time of submission.
Conflict Flagging: The Editorial Office will flag the submission upon receipt in the journal's manuscript tracking system to ensure that standard handling workflows are not bypassed.

2. Editorial Assignment and Recusal

Independent Handling: The manuscript will be immediately reassigned to an independent Senior Editor or Guest Editor who has no personal, professional, or academic ties to the submitting author.
System Restriction: The submitting editor-author will be completely recused from the decision-making process. Their administrative access to the manuscript within the editorial management system will be restricted, ensuring they cannot view reviewer identities, confidential editor notes, or the progress of the peer review.

3. Peer Review Process

Single-Anonymized Review: The manuscript will undergo the journal's standard rigorous single-anonymized peer review process, evaluated by a minimum of two independent, external reviewers.
Reviewer Vetting: All invited reviewers will be thoroughly vetted for potential conflicts of interest with the editor-author and must complete a COI declaration prior to accepting the review invitation.

4. Decision and Acceptance

Independent Decision: The final decision (Accept, Revise, Reject) rests solely with the assigned independent Handling Editor. The editor-author will have zero input or influence over the final outcome.
Final Integrity Check: Prior to any acceptance, the Editorial Office will conduct a final screening to verify the originality (plagiarism check) and ethical compliance of the manuscript.

5. Post-Publication Transparency

Published Disclosure: To ensure full transparency for our readers, any accepted article authored by an editor will include a formal disclosure statement (e.g., "Conflict of Interest: [Author Name] is an [Editorial Role] for SQUJS. They were fully recused from the peer-review process and editorial decision-making for this manuscript. The peer review was managed independently by [Handling Editor Name].").

Plagiarism and Text Recycling

1. General Policy on Plagiarism

SQUJS maintains a zero-tolerance policy toward plagiarism. In accordance with COPE and ICMJE guidelines, plagiarism is defined as the unacknowledged copying or misappropriation of another person's ideas, words, data, images, or research processes without proper attribution or permission. All information extracted from other sources must be appropriately cited, and verbatim text must be placed in quotation marks.

2. Text Recycling (Self-Plagiarism)

Text recycling occurs when an author reuses substantial parts of their own previously published work without providing appropriate references. While minor reuse of background information or standard methodological descriptions may be justifiable, the inappropriate reuse of core data, results, or extensive text without clear citation misrepresents the manuscript as entirely novel and constitutes publishing misconduct.

3. Detection and Evaluation

To safeguard the originality of the scholarly record, SQUJS screens all submitted manuscripts using professional text-matching software (Crossref Similarity Check powered by iThenticate). The editorial team does not rely on an arbitrary similarity percentage; rather, every report is manually evaluated based on the nature, context, and extent of the overlapping text.

4. Investigation and Sanctions

All authors share collective responsibility for the originality and integrity of the submitted work. If plagiarism or unacceptable text recycling is detected during the peer-review process or after publication, the journal will investigate the case in strict accordance with COPE flowcharts.

Authors will be contacted and given the opportunity to provide a satisfactory explanation for the overlapping material.
If the explanation is unsatisfactory or intentional misconduct is confirmed, the manuscript will be immediately rejected (or retracted, if published).
In severe cases, the journal reserves the right to formally notify the authors' affiliated institutions and funding bodies.

(Note: Policies regarding concurrent submissions, redundant publication, and the acceptability of preprints are detailed separately under the Duplicate and Redundant Publication section.)

Preprints Policy

SQUJS supports the early sharing of research and encourages the posting of preprints. We define a preprint as an author's original version of a research manuscript prior to formal peer review in a journal, typically deposited on a public, recognized preprint server (e.g., arXiv, bioRxiv, medRxiv).

1. Prior Publication

Posting a manuscript on a preprint server is not considered prior or duplicate publication and will not jeopardize consideration for peer review and publication in SQUJS.

2. Disclosure Upon Submission

Authors must explicitly disclose the existence of a preprint at the time of manuscript submission. This disclosure must be included in the cover letter and must provide a permanent link or Digital Object Identifier (DOI) to the preprint.

3. Updating the Preprint Record

In strict accordance with ICMJE guidelines, authors must not post the final peer-reviewed accepted manuscript or the published version of the article on the preprint archive. Instead, once the article is published in SQUJS, it is the authors' responsibility to update the preprint record to point readers to the final published article by adding the publication reference and DOI.

4. Citing Preprints

Preprints may be cited in the reference list of articles submitted to SQUJS. However, authors must clearly indicate that the reference is a preprint (e.g., by including the word "Preprint" following the citation information) and provide the DOI or permanent link.

5. Media and Public Communication

If researchers are approached by the media or discuss their preprint publicly prior to formal journal publication, they must explicitly state that the paper has not yet undergone peer review, that the findings are provisional, and that the conclusions may change following the editorial process.

Protection of Patients' Rights to Privacy and Informed Consent

Patients have a fundamental right to privacy that must not be violated without informed consent. In accordance with ICMJE guidelines, SQUJS enforces strict standards for maintaining patient confidentiality:

1. Anonymization and Identifying Information

All nonessential identifying details — including patient names, initials, dates of birth, or hospital numbers — must be omitted from written descriptions, photographs, sonograms, CT scans, and pedigrees.

If identifying characteristics are de-identified or altered to protect anonymity, authors must ensure that such changes do not distort the scientific meaning of the data.
Superficial attempts at anonymization, such as placing black bars over the eye region in photographs, are inadequate and unacceptable.

2. Informed Consent for Publication

If the inclusion of identifiable information or images is absolutely essential for scientific purposes, the corresponding author must obtain explicit written informed consent for publication from the patient (or their parent/legal guardian/next of kin). When obtaining consent, authors must fully disclose to the patient that the potentially identifiable material will be published in an Open Access journal and will be freely available globally via the Internet. Informed consent requires that the identifiable patient be shown the manuscript (including images) prior to publication.

3. Archiving Consent Forms

To comply with data protection regulations and preserve patient confidentiality, authors must not upload signed patient consent forms with their manuscript submission or email them to the Editorial Office. Authors must securely archive the original signed consent forms at their affiliated or treating institution. The manuscript must instead include a formal declaration statement (e.g., "Written informed consent was obtained from the patient for the publication of this report and any accompanying images, and the forms are securely archived by the authors.").

Research Data Sharing Policy and Data Availability

1. Research Data Policy (FAIR Principles)

SQUJS is committed to fostering transparency, reproducibility, and the advancement of knowledge. We strongly encourage authors to adhere to the FAIR Guiding Principles for scientific data management, ensuring that research data is Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable. Authors are expected to deposit the data supporting their published claims in community-recognized, publicly accessible repositories, except where privacy, confidentiality, or legal constraints apply. For certain data types (e.g., DNA/RNA sequences, protein sequences, macromolecular structures), mandatory deposition in discipline-specific repositories (such as GenBank or wwPDB) is required prior to submission.

2. Data Citation

In alignment with the FORCE11 Data Citation Principles, SQUJS treats data as a legitimate, citable product of research. All publicly available datasets used or generated in the study must be formally cited in the manuscript's Reference list, including the author(s), dataset title, repository name, version, and a persistent identifier (e.g., DOI).

3. Data Availability Statement (DAS)

All submitted manuscripts must include a Data Availability Statement preceding the Reference list. This statement must clearly outline where the data supporting the study can be accessed. If data cannot be shared openly, the statement must explicitly explain the restrictions.

Below are acceptable templates for the Data Availability Statement:

Data Available in a Public Repository: "The datasets generated and/or analyzed during the current study are available in the [NAME OF REPOSITORY] repository, [PROVIDE PERSISTENT WEBLINK/DOI]."
Data Included in Supplementary Material: "All data generated or analyzed during this study are included in this published article and its supplementary information files."
Data Subject to Restricted Access (Ethical/Legal constraints): "The data that support the findings of this study are not publicly available due to [EXPLAIN REASON, e.g., privacy regulations, proprietary restrictions]. However, data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request and with permission of [NAME OF INSTITUTION/ETHICS COMMITTEE]."
Data Available on Request (Must be justified): "The raw data supporting the conclusions of this article will be made available by the authors, without undue reservation, to any qualified researcher. Requests should be directed to the corresponding author."
No Data Generated (e.g., Reviews or Theoretical articles): "No new datasets were generated or analyzed during the current study."

Research Ethics and Consent

SQUJS expects all research to be conducted in an ethical and responsible manner, in full compliance with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines. All original research papers involving humans, animals, plants, biological materials, or protected datasets must include an "Ethics Approval" section detailing the following:

1. Studies Involving Human Participants

Ethical Standards: All research involving human participants, human material, or human data must be performed in accordance with the ethical principles of the WMA Declaration of Helsinki.
Approval: Authors must provide the name of the approving institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee, along with the approval number/ID. If the study was granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, this must be explicitly stated along with the reasons for the exemption. Note: Retrospective ethics approval cannot usually be obtained and may result in manuscript rejection.
Informed Consent: A statement must be included confirming that freely given, written informed consent to participate in the study was obtained from all participants (or their parents/legal guardians for minors).

2. Studies Involving Animal Subjects

Ethical Standards: SQUJS supports the 3Rs principles (Replacement, Reduction, and Refinement) for animal research. Research involving vertebrates or regulated invertebrates must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines (e.g., EU Directive 2010/63/EU or the US Public Health Service Policy).
Approval: Authors must state the name of the ethical review committee (e.g., IACUC) that approved the study and provide the permit/approval number.
Reporting (ARRIVE) and Euthanasia: Authors are strongly encouraged to adhere to the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines for reporting animal research, detailing study design, housing, and steps taken to minimize suffering. Methods of anesthesia and euthanasia must comply with veterinary best practices, such as the AVMA Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. Manuscripts detailing procedures inconsistent with these norms will be rejected.

3. Studies Involving Plants

Experimental research and field studies on plants (cultivated or wild) must comply with relevant institutional and national legislation.
Authors must state the appropriate permissions and/or licenses obtained for the collection of plant specimens, adhering to the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction and CITES (Convention on the International Trade in Endangered Species).
To support scientific reproducibility, voucher specimens of all wild plants described must be deposited in a recognized public herbarium, and the voucher number/information must be included in the manuscript.

4. Studies Involving Cell Lines

The origin and source of all cell lines must be clearly stated. For human-derived cell lines, authors must confirm that appropriate ethical approval and informed consent were obtained. Authors should verify cell line authentication and report any mycoplasma testing conducted.

Research Involving Human Participants

1. Ethical Standards and Approvals

For all research involving human participants, their data, or their biological material, authors must ensure that the study was conducted in strict accordance with the World Medical Association (WMA) Declaration of Helsinki (as revised in 2024). Prior to commencing the research, authors must obtain approval from an independent local, regional, or national ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB). The manuscript must include an "Ethics Approval" statement detailing the name of the approving committee and the specific reference/permit number.

2. Retrospective Approval and Exemptions

Ethics approval must be obtained prospectively. Retrospective ethics approval cannot be granted, and studies lacking prior approval will generally be rejected.

Exemptions: If a study was formally deemed exempt from requiring ethics approval by an IRB (e.g., research on fully anonymized, publicly available secondary data), this must be explicitly detailed in the manuscript, including the name of the committee that granted the exemption and the legal or ethical rationale.

3. Informed Consent and Vulnerable Populations

Authors must include a clear statement in the manuscript confirming that freely given, written informed consent to participate in the research was obtained from all participants (or their legally authorized representatives/guardians in the case of minors). Special ethical consideration and safeguards must be applied, and documented, when conducting research involving vulnerable populations who may be susceptible to coercion or who lack the capacity to consent. The privacy and confidentiality of all participants must be rigorously protected.

4. Reporting on Sex, Gender, and Demographics

SQUJS expects authors to report data comprehensively and inclusively. Authors should follow the SAGER (Sex and Gender Equity in Research) Guidelines. Authors must carefully distinguish between the terms sex (a biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances). Where applicable, data should be disaggregated by sex, gender, and other relevant demographic variables (e.g., age, race, ethnicity). If a study focuses exclusively on one sex or excludes a specific demographic, the authors must provide a clear scientific justification for this exclusion in the methodology.

Research Involving Animals

SQUJS expects all research involving vertebrates or regulated invertebrates to be conducted with the highest standards of animal welfare and scientific rigor.

1. General Ethical Compliance and The 3Rs

Authors must ensure that their studies comply with institutional, national, and international guidelines, such as the U.K. Animals (Scientific Procedures) Act 1986, EU Directive 2010/63/EU, or the U.S. National Research Council's Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals. Authors are expected to explicitly apply the 3Rs principles (Replacement, Reduction, Refinement) to minimize animal use and alleviate suffering.

2. Ethics Approval Statement

All manuscripts must include an "Ethics Approval" statement detailing the full name of the approving institutional review board or ethics committee and the relevant permit/approval number. If a study was granted an exemption from requiring ethics approval, the name of the committee granting the exemption and the precise reasons for it must be detailed.

3. Anesthesia, Euthanasia, and Veterinary Best Practice

The journal requires that all anesthesia and euthanasia procedures align with veterinary best practices, as outlined in the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) Guidelines for the Euthanasia of Animals. The Editor reserves the right to reject any manuscript that employs procedures inconsistent with commonly accepted norms of animal research. Manuscripts describing studies that used unacceptable anesthesia or euthanasia methods (e.g., chloral hydrate, ether, or chloroform) will not be considered for publication, regardless of prior local ethics committee approval.

4. Standardized Reporting (ARRIVE 2.0 and SAGER)

ARRIVE 2.0: Authors must follow the ARRIVE 2.0 guidelines for reporting in vivo experiments, ensuring that at minimum, the "Essential 10" criteria are thoroughly described in the manuscript's methodology.
SAGER Guidelines: In accordance with the Sex and Gender Equity in Research (SAGER) guidelines, authors must correctly report the sex (biological attribute) of the animals or cells used, and detail how sex was accounted for in the study design. If the study was done in an exclusive population (e.g., only one sex), authors must justify why.

5. Client-Owned Animals and Field Studies

Client-Owned Animals: For experimental studies involving client-owned animals (veterinary clinical research), authors must document adherence to a high standard of veterinary care and confirm that informed, written consent was obtained from the client or owner.
Field Studies: Field studies and non-experimental research on wild animals must comply with relevant licensing and the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction.

Research Involving Plants

1. General Guidelines and Permissions

Experimental research and field studies on plants (either cultivated or wild), including the collection of plant material, must comply with relevant institutional, national, and international guidelines and legislation. All submitted manuscripts must include a statement under the 'Ethics Approval' or 'Declarations' section specifying that the appropriate permissions and/or licenses were obtained for the collection of plant or seed specimens.

2. Endangered Species and Biodiversity

Authors must conduct their research in compliance with the Convention on Biological Diversity (including the Nagoya Protocol), the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), and the IUCN Policy Statement on Research Involving Species at Risk of Extinction.

3. Reproducibility and Voucher Specimens

To support scientific reproducibility and verify the identity of organisms studied, voucher specimens for all wild plants described in a manuscript must be deposited in a recognized public herbarium or other public collection that provides open access to deposited material. Information regarding the voucher specimen must be included in the manuscript, specifically detailing the genus and species name, the name of the person who identified the specimen, the year of collection, and the unique repository accession/catalogue numbers.

Research Misconduct and Unethical Publishing Practices

SQUJS takes all forms of research and publication misconduct seriously. We are committed to safeguarding the integrity of the scholarly record and strictly adhere to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) flowcharts and guidelines when investigating suspected ethical breaches.

1. Definitions of Misconduct

Misconduct includes, but is not limited to, the following unacceptable practices:

Data and Image Fabrication/Falsification: The intentional misrepresentation of research data by making up findings (fabrication) or manipulating research materials, equipment, images, or processes (falsification). Image Integrity: Specific features within an image must not be enhanced, obscured, moved, removed, or introduced. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are only acceptable if they are applied equally across the entire image (including controls) and do not misrepresent the original data. The grouping of images from different parts of gels, western blots, or microscope fields must be made explicit in the figure legend. Artificial Intelligence (AI) must not be used to generate or alter original research images.
Duplicate Submission and Publication: Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal simultaneously or publishing a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published without clear, visible reference to the previous publication.
Redundant Publication (Salami Slicing): The inappropriate and unjustified division of a single study's outcomes into multiple smaller articles to artificially increase the author's publication count.
Citation Manipulation: Practices intended solely to artificially inflate citation metrics. This includes excessive self-citation by authors, coordinated "citation cartels" among groups of researchers, and coercive citation (where peer reviewers or editors inappropriately demand authors cite their work as a condition of acceptance).
Authorship Misconduct: The inclusion of individuals who do not meet all four ICMJE criteria (Guest or Gift authorship) or the exclusion of individuals who do (Ghost authorship). Individuals who provided only technical assistance (e.g., laboratory technicians) or general supervision must be recognized in the Acknowledgments, not listed as authors.
Peer Review Manipulation: Deliberately compromising the peer review process, such as providing fake peer-reviewers' email addresses, impersonating reviewers, or utilizing paper mills.

2. Investigation and Resolution Process

If misconduct is suspected prior to or following publication, the Editor-in-Chief will initiate an investigation in accordance with COPE procedures:

Initial Inquiry: The corresponding author will be contacted, provided with the evidence of the concern, and given the opportunity to provide a satisfactory explanation or supply original, unedited raw data/images. Submissions will be halted in the review or publication process during this time.
Sanctions: If the original data cannot be produced, or if the explanation is unsatisfactory and misconduct is confirmed, the journal will immediately reject the manuscript (if unpublished) or issue a formal Retraction (if published).
Institutional Notification: In cases of severe or confirmed misconduct, SQUJS reserves the right to notify the authors' affiliated institutions, employers, or funding bodies to request a formal institutional investigation.

Special Issues and Guest-Edited Collections

SQUJS publishes three issues annually, typically consisting of two general issues (May and December) and one Special Issue (September). Special Issues offer a focused exploration of contemporary topics and emerging trends within the journal's scope. All submissions to Special Issues are subject to the exact same rigorous single-blind peer review process, ethical standards, and author guidelines as regular issues.

1. Appointment and Vetting of Guest Editors

Proposals for Special Issues can be nominated by the Editorial Board, existing editors, or through self-nomination. To safeguard the integrity of the scholarly record against peer review manipulation, all proposed Guest Editors undergo strict vetting by the Editorial Office. This includes verifying their identity, academic credentials, relevant subject expertise, and past publication record. Guest Editors must explicitly declare any potential financial or non-financial conflicts of interest before taking on the role.

2. Editorial Oversight and Final Decisions

Guest Editors are responsible for defining the collection's scope, soliciting appropriate manuscripts, and overseeing the initial stages of peer review by selecting independent, qualified experts. However, the Editor-in-Chief retains ultimate responsibility and final decision-making authority for all content published in the journal, including Special Issues. Guest Editors provide a recommendation (Accept, Revise, Reject) based on peer-reviewers' feedback, which is then thoroughly evaluated and approved by the Editor-in-Chief.

3. Submissions by Guest Editors (Endogeny)

To avoid real or perceived conflicts of interest, contributions from Guest Editors and their close colleagues must be limited to a small proportion of the total Special Issue content. If a Guest Editor submits a manuscript to their own Special Issue, the peer review and decision-making process will be handled entirely independently by the Editor-in-Chief or another assigned Editorial Board member. The Guest Editor will have no access to the confidential review records for their own submission.

4. Safeguarding Scientific Integrity

SQUJS actively monitors Special Issues for irregular patterns of behavior, including citation cartels, undisclosed conflicts of interest, and paper mill activity. If the Editor-in-Chief or Editorial Office suspects ethical irregularities or compromised peer review within a collection, the journal will immediately suspend the peer review and publication process for all content in the Special Issue while a formal investigation is conducted in accordance with COPE guidelines.

5. Externally Funded Special Issues

If a Special Issue is funded by external sources (e.g., a society, institution, or corporate sponsor), the journal adheres strictly to ICMJE guidelines. The Editor-in-Chief maintains complete, independent control over the selection of authors, peer reviewers, and content. The funding organization is not permitted to edit, review, or influence editorial decisions. The source of funding will be clearly stated in the introductory material of the issue.

Standards of Reporting and Reproducibility

SQUJS advocates for the complete and transparent reporting of research. Research must be communicated in a manner that supports verification and reproducibility.

1. Adherence to Reporting Guidelines

Authors are strongly encouraged to adhere to the minimum reporting guidelines hosted by the EQUATOR Network that are appropriate for their specific study design. Authors should submit the completed relevant checklist alongside their manuscript to facilitate thorough peer review. Key reporting guidelines include, but are not limited to:

Randomized controlled trials: CONSORT
Systematic reviews and meta-analyses: PRISMA
Observational studies (cohort, case-control, cross-sectional): STROBE
Diagnostic/prognostic studies: STARD and TRIPOD
Case reports: CARE
Pre-clinical animal studies: ARRIVE

2. Sex and Gender in Research (SAGER Guidelines)

Authors are expected to refer to the SAGER guidelines for the comprehensive reporting of sex and gender information in their study design, data analyses, results, and interpretation. Authors should use the terms sex (a biological attribute) and gender (shaped by social and cultural circumstances) carefully to avoid confusing both terms. Where appropriate, data should be provided disaggregated by sex and/or gender.

3. Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) and Cell Lines

To enable the effective tracking of key resources used to produce scientific findings, authors are encouraged to use unique Research Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) within their manuscript to accurately identify model organisms, antibodies, cell lines, and software tools. If human cell lines are used, authors must declare the source of the cell line, whether it has been recently authenticated, and whether it has been tested for mycoplasma contamination.

4. Statistical Methods

Authors must describe their statistical methods with enough detail to enable a knowledgeable reader with access to the original data to judge the study's appropriateness and independently verify the reported results.

Use of Third-Party Material and Copyright Permissions

1. General Requirement and Scope

Authors are strictly responsible for obtaining all necessary written permissions to reuse any third-party material in their manuscript prior to submission. Third-party material includes, but is not limited to, proprietary text, illustrations, photographs, tables, datasets, software, audio, video, or screenshots for which the authors do not hold the copyright.

2. Short Extracts and Fair Use

The use of short extracts of text is usually permitted for the purposes of criticism, review, or academic discussion without securing formal permission. However, to avoid allegations of plagiarism, any verbatim text must be placed in quotation marks and accompanied by a full and accurate citation to the original source.

3. Documentation and Submission of Proof

If authors include any copyrighted material that exceeds fair use, they must secure explicit written permission from the original copyright holder (usually the original publisher, not necessarily the author) to reproduce the material. Authors must provide documentary evidence of these granted permissions to the Editorial Office at the time of manuscript submission. Permissions must be broad enough to cover Open Access publication, allowing the material to be freely available on the internet.

4. Proper Attribution

Securing permission does not exempt authors from the obligation to cite the source. A clear statement of permission and full attribution must be included within the manuscript (e.g., within the figure legend or table footnote). The standard format should be used: "Reproduced with permission from [Author/Copyright Holder], [Year]."

(Note: For assistance or more information on requesting permission to reproduce copyrighted works, please contact the Editorial Office at .)

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-Assisted Technologies

SQUJS recognizes the rapid advancement of Artificial Intelligence (AI) and Large Language Models (LLMs). To maintain the integrity of the scholarly record, authors utilizing these technologies must adhere strictly to the following guidelines, which align with COPE and ICMJE standards.

1. Authorship and Accountability

AI-assisted technologies (such as ChatGPT, chatbots, or image creators) do not qualify for authorship. AI tools cannot take ethical or legal responsibility for the accuracy, integrity, or originality of a manuscript, nor can they hold or assign copyright. Human authors bear full and ultimate accountability for all content produced in their submissions, including any errors, biases, or plagiarism introduced by AI tools.

2. Permissible Use in Manuscript Preparation (Writing)

Authors may use generative AI tools during the writing process solely to improve language, grammar, and readability. AI must not be used to replace core researcher tasks, such as generating novel scientific insights, designing methodologies, drawing clinical or scientific conclusions, or drafting critical arguments.

3. Data Analysis and Image Generation

Generative AI tools must never be used to fabricate, alter, or manipulate original research data. Furthermore, the use of generative AI to create or manipulate scientific images, graphs, or figures is strictly prohibited, unless the AI itself is the direct subject of the research methodology.

4. Mandatory Disclosure and Placement

Authors must transparently disclose the use of any AI or AI-assisted technologies in both their Cover Letter and the Manuscript upon submission.

Writing Assistance: If AI was used to assist with language and writing, this must be explicitly declared in the Acknowledgments section, specifying the tool used and its purpose. (Note: Basic grammar-checking software does not require disclosure.)
Methodology and Analysis: If AI tools were used for data collection, coding, or statistical analysis, this must be detailed comprehensively in the Methods section. Authors must provide the name of the tool, the version, and the prompts or code used to enable replication.

5. Citations and References

AI can generate citations which may appear authoritative but are completely fabricated output ("hallucinations"). Therefore, authors must manually verify all citations and facts. Referencing AI-generated material as a primary source or citing an AI tool in the Reference list is entirely unacceptable.

Use of Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Peer Review

1. Confidentiality and Data Privacy

Submitted manuscripts are privileged, confidential documents. To protect authors' intellectual property and research confidentiality, SQUJS strictly prohibits peer reviewers and editors from uploading submitted manuscripts, or any parts of them (including figures and tables), into publicly available Generative AI tools or Large Language Models (e.g., ChatGPT). Doing so constitutes a direct breach of the authors' confidentiality and data privacy rights.

2. Human Accountability

Peer review is a vital component of the scientific ecosystem and is fundamentally a human endeavor. Evaluating a scientific manuscript requires original assessment, subject-matter expertise, and critical thinking that cannot be delegated to technology. Generative AI tools have considerable limitations and may produce incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions regarding a manuscript. Therefore, AI-assisted technologies must not be used by reviewers to evaluate the scientific merit of a paper or to generate the peer review report.

3. Peer Review Reports

The requirement for confidentiality extends to the peer review report itself, as it frequently contains sensitive information and proprietary ideas extracted from the manuscript. For this reason, reviewers must not upload their drafted peer review reports into AI tools, even for the sole purpose of improving language and readability. The invited reviewer remains fully responsible and personally accountable for the accuracy, integrity, and content of their submitted review report.

(Note: The journal continuously monitors developments in AI and is actively evaluating secure, in-house, or licensed AI technologies that comply with data privacy requirements. We may revise this policy in the future as compliant tools become available.)

This page was last updated on 29 June 2026.