Ética e Políticas Editoriais

RESEARCH AND PUBLICATION ETHICS

Manuscripts involving human subjects, animals, or genetic manipulation techniques must include, in the Materials and Methods section, a clear description of the ethical aspects of the research, including approval by an institutional Research Ethics Committee, where applicable.

Authors must provide the approval number or protocol identifier, as well as the name of the institution responsible for the ethical review. Manuscripts that fail to provide proof of ethical approval, when required, will not be considered for publication.

PUBLICATION ETHICS STATEMENT

The journal adopts rigorous ethical standards and editorial best practices to ensure the integrity, transparency, and quality of the scientific work it publishes.

All manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process, ensuring impartiality and confidentiality.

The journal does not tolerate unethical practices, including, but not limited to:

  • plagiarism in any form;
  • data fabrication or falsification;
  • inappropriate image manipulation;
  • improper authorship attribution or omission of authors;
  • redundant submission or publication.

Suspected cases of misconduct will be evaluated by the editorial team and may result in manuscript rejection, article retraction, or other appropriate editorial actions.

EDITORS AND EDITORIAL TEAM AS AUTHORS

Members of the Editorial Board or Scientific Committee must not be involved in the processing of their own manuscripts. Submissions authored by members of these bodies will be assigned to at least two independent external reviewers.

Editorial decisions in such cases will be made by Editorial Board members who have no conflict of interest with the authors.

PEER REVIEW OF MANUSCRIPTS

All manuscripts submitted to the journal will be evaluated by at least two reviewers from the Scientific Committee or external experts, whose identities will remain confidential.

In cases of conflicting reviews, a third reviewer will be consulted. Based on these evaluations, the Editorial Board will make the final decision.

When revisions are required, they will be communicated to the corresponding author, who must respond accordingly. The revised manuscript will then be returned to the reviewers to verify compliance with the requested changes.

Authors must follow all submission guidelines strictly. Final acceptance of a manuscript rests with the Editorial Board, and manuscripts that do not comply with the journal’s guidelines will be promptly rejected.

Any cases not covered by these guidelines will be decided by the Editorial Board of the Boletim Científico Agronômico do CCAAB/UFRB.

EDITORIAL PROCEDURES AND PEER REVIEW

PRE-SCREENING

Immediately after submission, the Editor-in-Chief will conduct a technical pre-screening to evaluate:

  • the manuscript’s overall suitability for the journal;
  • compliance with high-quality research and ethical standards;
  • the level of rigor required for further review.

In cases of conflict of interest, a member of the Editorial Board will be assigned to perform this evaluation.

During this stage, the editor assesses the manuscript’s alignment with the journal’s scope, its overall scientific soundness, including the relevance of references, and the appropriateness of the applied methodology.

The editor may decide to reject the manuscript, request revisions prior to peer review, or proceed with the peer review process and recommend suitable reviewers.

PEER REVIEW

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening will be sent to at least two independent experts for peer review.

A double-blind review process is applied, in which reviewers do not know the identity of the authors.

Reviewer comments are forwarded to the authors without disclosing reviewer identities.

EDITORIAL DECISION AND REVISION

All articles, reviews, and technical notes published in the journal undergo peer review and receive at least two evaluations.

The Editor-in-Chief will communicate one of the following decisions:

  • Accept after minor revisions: The manuscript is accepted in principle, pending minor revisions. Authors have five days to complete them.
  • Reconsider after major revisions: Acceptance depends on substantial revisions. Authors must provide a detailed, point-by-point response or justification where changes cannot be made. Typically, a maximum of two rounds of major revisions is allowed. Revised manuscripts will be returned to reviewers for further evaluation.
  • Reject and encourage resubmission: If additional experiments are required to support the conclusions, the manuscript will be rejected, and authors are encouraged to resubmit after completing the necessary work.
  • Reject: The manuscript has significant flaws and/or lacks sufficient originality. Resubmission is not encouraged.

All reviewer comments must be addressed point by point. If authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear justification.

AUTHOR APPEALS

Authors may appeal a rejection decision by submitting a detailed justification via email to the Editorial Board.

The appeal must include point-by-point responses to reviewer and/or editor comments.

Appeals are only considered following a “reject and decline resubmission” decision and must be submitted within three months of the decision date. Appeals that do not meet these criteria will not be considered.

The Editor-in-Chief will forward the manuscript and related materials (including reviewer identities) to a designated Editorial Board member for independent evaluation.

This editor may recommend acceptance, further peer review, or uphold the original rejection. The final decision will be confirmed by the Editor-in-Chief and is not subject to further appeal.

PRODUCTION AND PUBLICATION

Once accepted, manuscripts undergo professional proofreading, English editing, author review, final corrections, layout formatting, and publication on the journal’s website.

OPEN ACCESS POLICY AND COPYRIGHT

The journal provides immediate open access to its content, based on the principle of free dissemination of scientific knowledge.

Articles are published under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, which permits sharing, adaptation, and distribution, provided proper credit is given to the authors.

Copyright

Authors publishing in the Boletim Científico Agronômico do CCAAB/UFRB agree to the following terms:

  • Authors retain copyright of their work while granting the journal the right of first publication.
  • Articles are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (CC BY 4.0) license, allowing use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided proper credit is given.
  • Authors are permitted and encouraged to share their published articles in institutional repositories, personal websites, or other platforms, provided that the original publication in this journal is properly cited.

PRIVACY STATEMENT

All content published by the journal is openly accessible, based on the principle of free dissemination of research results, promoting broader knowledge exchange, increased readership, and citation of scientific work.

Names, postal addresses, and email addresses provided to the journal will be used exclusively for editorial purposes and will not be made available for any other use.

CONFLICT OF INTEREST POLICY

This journal adopts a double-blind peer review system, in which the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the editorial process.

Transparency, ethics, and scientific integrity guide all stages of evaluation. Authors, reviewers, and editors must disclose any potential conflicts of interest that could influence, or appear to influence, the manuscript, its evaluation, or editorial decisions.

For Authors

Authors must explicitly declare any conflict of interest that may have influenced the results or interpretations presented in the manuscript, including:

  • financial relationships (funding, grants, consulting, patents, honoraria);
  • personal, professional, or institutional affiliations;
  • any situation that could introduce bias or compromise objectivity.

Authors must also ensure that the submitted manuscript does not contain information that could reveal their identity, preserving the integrity of the double-blind review process.

In the absence of conflicts, the following statement must be included:

“The authors declare no conflict of interest.”

For Reviewers

Reviewers must disclose any conflicts of interest that could compromise their impartiality, including:

  • personal, academic, or professional relationships with the authors;
  • recent collaborations or institutional affiliations;
  • direct or indirect interest in the study results.

If a conflict exists, the reviewer must decline the invitation.

Reviewers must also:

  • strictly adhere to the double-blind review principle;
  • maintain full confidentiality of the manuscript;
  • not use any information from the manuscript for personal or third-party benefit.

For Editors

Editors are responsible for ensuring a fair, impartial, and confidential editorial process. They must declare and recuse themselves from decisions in cases of conflict of interest, such as:

  • personal or professional relationships with the authors;
  • direct involvement in the study;
  • institutional affiliations or interest in the results.

In such cases, the manuscript must be assigned to another editor without conflict.

Editors must ensure:

  • preservation of anonymity in the double-blind review process;
  • ethical and transparent management of the editorial process;
  • decisions based solely on scientific merit.