Editorial Board and the editorial staff of the periodical «Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture» carry out the activity within the current legislation of the Russian Federation, are guided by a set of rules «Code of Ethics of Scientific Publications», developed and approved by the Committee on Ethics of Scientific Publications, which is based on VINITI by Russian Academy of Science. Ethical standards and regulations are required for all stakeholders of publishing scientific papers: authors, reviewers, and editorial board members of the editorial staff.
The right of authorship belongs to authors of the articles. All copyrights to use the materials of the periodical «Sovremennoe sadovodstvo - Contemporary horticulture» belong to All Russian Research Institute of Fruit Crop Breeding - the founder and publisher. Reprinting in whole or in part is possible only with a reference to the site and the name of the periodical with the obligatory indication of the copyright holder and the names of authors of articles.
While writing new creatively independent works based on articles published in the periodical new creatively, quoting or translating fragments of articles for the purpose of their citation, the original source materials must be referred to according to the rules of citation.
Editorial Code of Ethics
The editorial staff assists authors in improving manuscripts submitted to the editorial office by reviewing scientific and literary editing articles.
The editorial staff is obliged to respect the author to conduct a conversation with him only in a favorable tone, to use correct phrases in the correspondence.
The editorial staff should not disclose submitted manuscript to anyone else, except the author, reviewers.
It is not allowed to inform anyone but the author of the content of the negative reviews of the author’s work.
Confidential information obtained in the course of correspondence with the author and / or reviewers will not be divulged.
Ethical Code of the Author
Authorship should be limited to those individuals who have made significant contributions to the conception, planning, performance or interpretation of the described research. If a person has participated in the performance of a substantial part of the project, he should be commended, or he should be included in the list of coauthors.
The authors are responsible for the originality and authenticity of the presented material. This material mustn’t have been published previously or have been sent for parallel publication to other editions, and must not contain plagiarism.
Editors may reject the article if it violates the intellectual property rights of third parties, the rules of scientific ethics or contains information with limited access, and notify the authors and the organization that sent the article.
In the presented manuscript a source of financial support relevant research can be specified, unless otherwise it is required by the current legislation or agreed with the sponsors.
The criticism of previous researches containing in the article should not have a personal character.
Authors have the right to freely dispose of published material and republish it in any other media, but they must indicate the place of the first publication of the material.
Publication under his own name of someone else’s manuscript (or its part), quoting or paraphrasing of its content without reference to the source of borrowing , as well as other forms of misappropriation of another’s research results are considered as plagiarism .
Plagiarism in any form contradicts to scientific ethics and is unacceptable.
In case of acceptance to publication an article is placed in open access, copyright reserved by the authors.
Ethical Code of the Editor-in-Chief
The editor-in-Chief decides to publish an article based on peer review by independent reviewers and the opinions of the editorial board. Assessment of works has to be based solely on the validation results, the relevance of the theme and its significance for researchers and readers.
The editor-in-Chief should not disclose information on presented manuscript to anyone else, except the author, reviewers. He/ or she cannot use unpublished data contained in the article submitted for consideration without the written consent of the author.
Confidential information obtained in the review process, shall not be disclosed or used for personal gain.
It is a duty of Editor-in-chief to waive the consideration of the presented article in a conflict of interest.
Having received the complaint of ethical character on the presented manuscript or published article the editor-in-chief has to accept reasonable countermeasures. These measures typically include: notification of the author, discussion of a complaint and, in case of need, publication of corrections. Each case of violations of scientific ethics should be investigated, even if it was discovered many years after publication.
Code of Ethics of the editorial board
The Editorial Board should consider all submitted manuscripts for publication without prejudice to their respective authors (national or religious affiliation, social status, etc.).
When making a decision on publication the Editorial Board is guided by expert evaluation of the reviewers, reliability of the data and the scientific significance of the work in question.
If the author is a member of the editorial board of the manuscript, he should delegate his rights to another qualified person with respect to the consideration of this manuscript.
The Editorial Board reserves the selection of anonymous reviewers and their number in order to ensure an impartial review of the manuscript. No one, except for persons involved in the professional assessment of the manuscript has access to its contents.
In case of rejection of the manuscript or its sending in for revision, the Editorial Board must submit a satisfactory evidence of such a decision to the authors.
The information contained in an unpublished manuscript, can be used only with the consent of its authors.
The Editorial Board does not disclose the information on received manuscripts to anyone except for the reviewers and editorial staff.
If there is sufficient evidence against the published materials the Editorial Board must publish an error message, signed by persons who found it.
Complaints about the examination of manuscripts or published materials cannot be left unanswered by the Editorial Board. On identifying the conflict the Editorial Board should take all necessary measures to restore the violated copyrights.
Ethical Code of the Reviewer
The scientific examination of author’s materials which is carried out by the reviewer has to be objective and consider the compliance of the performed work with scientific, ethical (lack of plagiarism) and literary standards.
The reviewer assessment of a manuscript has to contain justification of his /or her conclusions. If the reviewer claims that data containing in the manuscript were published earlier, he has to confirm it with the corresponding links.
The personal criticism of authors and use of slanderous arguments discrediting authors are inadmissible in the review.
In the presence of the conflict of interests, discrepancy of research containing in the manuscript to the sphere of the scientific competence, existence of professional communications with authors which can affect the objectivity of the review, or if the work cannot be done within a deadline, the reviewer is obliged to inform the Editorial Board and refuse to assess the manuscript
The reviewer has to keep strictly to the requirements of confidentiality, not to use unpublished materials in own researches.
The reviewer can hand on the manuscript for consultation to another person with the consent of the Editorial Board.