Commagene Journal of Biology is committed to ensuring ethics in publication and quality of articles. The editorial board of Commagene Journal of Biology is responsible for preventing publication malpractices. Unethical behavior is unacceptable and plagiarism is not tolerated in any form. Authors, reviewers, and editors are to be fully committed to good publication practice and take charge of fulfilling the following responsibilities. In order to avoid any type of publication malpractice, each submission must be accomplished by our journal sample “Cover Letter” signed by all of the authors. Until to sign the “Cover Letter” please read carefully the “Declaration” section at the end of the letter (above the signatures).

- All submitted manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer-review process by at least two international reviewers that are experts in the subject matter of the submitted manuscript. The factors that consider in review are relevance, significance, originality, readability and language. The editors will prepare a review version of the submitted manuscript by deleting the title page to ensure the anonymity. The authors must avoid self-referencing like "In a previous work we (Author et al. 2018) ......". The third person should be used to refer to work the Authors have previously undertaken. Acknowledgments part will also be removed during the review process if includes any information that can risk the anonymity.

- The editors of the Commagene Journal of Biology reserve the right to reject manuscripts without peer-review if they do not comply the author’s guidelines or are beyond the aim and scope of the journal. Each paper will be sent to at least two independent reviewers. If there are inconsistencies between the reviewers, a third reviewer will be asked to review the manuscript. The editor will decide the acceptance or rejection of the manuscripts according to these reviews.

- Authors can suggest five potential reviewers - experts in the subject matter of the article - but the editorial board of Commagene Journal of Biology can accept or reject suggested referees.

- The accepted articles may subject to further editing by journal editorial staff before they appear in print.

- The possible decisions include acceptance, acceptance with revisions, or rejection based on reviewers comments or editorial board decision. If authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a manuscript, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted. Rejected manuscripts will not be considered for further reviewing process.

- Commagene Journal of Biologyis committed to complete reviewing process, if there is no response from any requested potential reviews. The editorial board can assign the manuscript to section editor to make final decision or reject the manuscript.

- Review articles should also be objective, comprehensive, and accurate.

- No research can be included in more than one publication.

- Authors should certify that their manuscripts are their original work and not previously been published elsewhere (except thesis) and not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Submitting your paper for evaluation concomitant to other journals is unacceptable. In such cases, the manuscript will be rejected automatically and all of the authors lose the right to submit and publish manuscript to/in the Commagene Journal of Biology.

- All authors listed in the manuscript need to meet the authorship criteria and all of them participated in the work in a substantive way and are prepared to take public responsibility for the work. All authors have contributed to the manuscript and that common agreement has been reached before submission. In other cases the manuscript can’t be accepted for evaluation in order to be published in the Commagene Journal of Biology.

- If the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that should be appropriately cited or quoted.

- Authors are obliged to provide accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance.

- Authors must provide corrections of mistakes.

- All Authors mentioned in the paper must have significantly contributed to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study.

- Authors must state that all data in the paper are real and authentic. The authors need to ensure that the original data in their manuscript can be clearly distinguished by the one published in other scientific papers. The authors of the manuscript need to ensure that the text, illustrations, and any other materials included in the manuscript do not infringe upon any existing copyright or other rights of anyone.

- Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.

- Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work.

- Authors must notify the journal editor of any errors or inaccuracy in their published work, when they discover in their published paper.

- When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.

- Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access as well.

- Acknowledgment of the work of others must be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

- Reviewers should keep all information regarding manuscript confidential and treat them as privileged information.

- Reviews should be conducted objectively, with no personal criticism of the author.

- Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

- Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.

- Reviewers should also call to the Editor-in-Chief or Managing editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

- Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

- Editors have complete responsibility and authority to reject/accept a submitted manuscript.

- Editors are responsible for the contents and overall quality of the publication.

- Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.

- Editors should have a clear picture of a research's funding sources.

- Editors should base their decisions solely one the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication's scope.

- Editors should not reverse their decisions nor overturn the ones of previous editors without serious reason.

- Editors should preserve the anonymity of reviewers.

- Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.

- Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.

- Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between staff, authors, reviewers and board members.

- Editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

It is good practice for journals to adopt publication policies to ensure that ethical and responsible research is published, and that all necessary consents and approvals have been obtained from authors to publish their work. Ethics committee approval must be obtained for the clinical and experimental studies that are conducted on people and animals and this approval must be specified and documented in the article These publication policies might include the items presented in the sections below.

For manuscripts reporting medical studies involving human participants, it is suggested that journals require authors to provide a statement identifying the ethics committee that approved the study, and that the study conforms to recognized standards, for example:

• Declaration of Helsinki

• US Federal Policy for the Protection of Human Subjects

• European Medicines Agency Guidelines for Good Clinical Practice

These standards encourage authors to conduct studies in a way that ensures adequate steps have been taken to minimize harm to participants, to avoid coercion or exploitation, to protect confidentiality, and to minimize the risk of physical and psychological harm.

Across the scholarly disciplines there are variations in practice around privacy and confidentiality, relative to the risks of participation and the reasonable expectations of participants.

In the biomedical sciences, editors should consider only publishing information and images from individual participants where the authors have obtained the individual's free prior informed consent. The International Committee of Medical Journal Editors guidance says:

"Non-essential identifying details should be omitted. Informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt that anonymity can be maintained. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity."

The best policy is for journals to require that authors confirm whether explicit written consent to publish has been received from any people described (for example, in case reports), shown in still or moving images, or whose voices are recorded. In the case of technical images (for example, radiographs or micrographs), editors should also ensure that all information that could identify the subject has been removed from the image. For voices or images of any human subject, permission according to applicable national laws must be sought from research participants before recording. In many jurisdictions it is a requirement that formal copyright clearance is obtained to publish any video or audio recordings. When publishing genetic sequences or family genograms editors may need consent from more than just the index case. The CARE guidelines are useful for editors who publish case reports.

In the social sciences and humanities, there are numerous ethical guidelines for researchers working with human participants. Social science and humanities researchers regularly work with audio and video materials gathered in public places where there is no reasonable expectation of privacy. They also use materials derived from broadcast sources, as in some political science or cultural studies work, where copyright must be addressed but where consent issues do not arise. However, wherever appropriate, social scientists are also responsible for protecting the confidentiality of human participants, and obtaining informed consent from all participants by openly communicating any and all information that is likely to influence their willingness to participate (for example, sponsorship, purpose and anticipated outcomes, and possible consequences that publication of the research may have for participants). International Society of Ethnobiology.

For social research data the Association of Social Anthropologists of the UK and the Commonwealth suggests in its "Ethical Guidelines for Good Research Practice" that it is not always possible or necessary to gain written consent to publish, particularly when researchers are working with people with limited literacy or in cultures where formal bureaucratic procedures are problematic. However, it remains prudent for journals to ask authors to provide evidence that they have obtained informed consent.

Exceptional cases might arise where gaining an individual's free prior informed consent is not possible but where publishing an individual's information or image can be demonstrated to have a genuine public health interest or to serve an important public need. In cases like this, before taking any action editors should seek and follow counsel from the journal owner, the publisher, and/or legal professionals.

Research involving animals should be conducted with the same rigor as research in humans. Journals can encourage authors to implement the 4Rs principles:

"The 3Rs are a widely accepted ethical framework for conducting scientific experiments using animals humanely: Replacement - use of non-animal methods; Reduction - methods which reduce the number of animals used; Refinement - methods which improve animal welfare."

The International Council for Laboratory Animal Science has published ethical guidelines for editors and reviewers.

Journals should encourage authors to adhere to animal research reporting standards, for example, the ARRIVE reporting guidelines, which describe the details journals should require from authors regarding:

- Study design and statistical analysis.

- Experimental procedures.

- Experimental animals.

- Housing and husbandry.

Journals should ask authors to confirm that ethical and legal approval was obtained prior to the start of the study, and state the name of the body giving the approval. Authors should also state whether experiments were performed in accordance with relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations.

The authors should conform to Directive 2010/63/EU.

Editors may ask authors to describe in their articles how discomfort, distress, and pain were avoided and minimized, and to confirm that animals did not suffer unnecessarily at any stage of an experiment. The authors of articles that are based on experiments that caused injuries or death of animals should explain and justify the grounds of the study and state that the scientific results of the study are at least in the trade-off with the sufferings caused. When available, references should be added to justify that the techniques used were not invasive. When alternative non-harming techniques exist but were not used, the manuscripts may not be considered for publication.

Editors may request that reviewers comment on the standard of experimental reporting, experimental design, or any other aspects of the study reported that may cause concern. If concerns are raised or clarifications are needed, they may need to request evidence of ethical research approval or question authors

Commagene Journal of Biology accepts unpublished original research. Review articles may be accepted after they have been evaluated by the editors in limited numbers in each issue. Manuscripts can be accepted after being reviewed by two peer reviewers. Articles submitted to CJB are decided within an average of 6 weeks and a maximum of 12 weeks. Accepted articles are available on our website until the next issue is published with a DOI number. The journal accepts articles from all areas of biology due to its mission to integrate all of its fields. It is published electronically twice a year (December and June). CJB is an open-access journal and there is no charge for the printing and evaluation process.