The Journal of Mycology and Truffle (MycoTruffle) follows the highest standards of publication ethics and takes all necessary measures to prevent publication misconduct. This statement is based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Our editorial board does not accept any form of plagiarism, including copying or replicating another author's work without proper acknowledgment. Submissions that include plagiarized content shall be immediately disqualified.
All authors submitting their manuscripts to MycoTruffle affirm that their work is original and has not been copied from other sources. If any paper is found to be extensively plagiarized or is a duplicate of a previously published work, a note of retraction will be published, and copies of correspondence will be sent to the head of the author's institution.
Each paper is reviewed anonymously by at least two independent reviewers to ensure the journal maintains its high standards of quality. The Editor-in-Chief, Editorial Board, and reviewers make the final decision on publication, considering factors such as adherence to scientific procedures, relevance to the mycology and truffle fields, originality, and language quality.
Unpublished papers will be returned to authors with a formal explanation justifying their rejection. During the review process, reviewers assist authors in refining their work to meet publication standards, ensuring the validity and clarity of the research findings. All manuscripts are treated with confidentiality.
The publication of articles in a peer-reviewed journal is fundamental to the mission of MycoTruffle. All parties involved, including authors, editors, peer reviewers, and publishers, must adhere to high standards of ethical conduct, in line with the Iraqi Mushroom and Truffle Platform (IQMT) guidelines.
The editorial board of MycoTruffle is responsible for deciding which manuscripts are suitable for publication. The Editor-in-Chief follows the policies set by the editorial board and legal requirements concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
The Editor-in-Chief and editorial staff must not disclose any details of submitted manuscripts to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, and the publisher, as necessary. Unpublished materials from submitted manuscripts must not be used for the editor's own research without the author's express consent.
Authors submitting original research reports should provide an accurate account of their work and an objective discussion of its significance. The data should be presented truthfully, and the paper should be detailed enough to allow others to replicate the research. Fraudulent or deliberately inaccurate statements are unethical and unacceptable.
Authors must ensure that their manuscripts are entirely original and that appropriate citations are made for any work or words borrowed from others. Submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously is considered unethical and is not permitted.
Authorship should be limited to those who have made substantial contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research. All those who meet these criteria should be listed as co-authors. The corresponding author must ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript.
If a significant error or inaccuracy is found in a published paper, authors must promptly notify the journal editor and work with them to correct or retract the paper.
Authors must disclose any financial or other conflicts of interest that could influence the research or its interpretation. All funding sources for the research must be disclosed.
Research involving human participants should include a statement confirming that informed consent was obtained from participants or their guardians. For animal studies, authors should ensure compliance with institutional and national guidelines for the care and use of laboratory animals.
After the initial editorial evaluation, manuscripts deemed suitable for publication will undergo a peer review process. At least two referees will review the manuscript and provide their feedback. Once the reviewers have completed their assessments, the editor will inform the author of the decision regarding the manuscript's acceptance or rejection.
Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on several criteria, including originality, scholarly relevance, completeness, clarity of writing, organization, and acknowledgment of prior works. Manuscripts are judged primarily on the substance of the research, but writing style, structure, and length are also considered.
Peer reviewers assist the editor in making publication decisions and may also help authors improve their papers. If a reviewer feels unqualified to review a manuscript or is unable to complete the review promptly, they should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the process.
All manuscripts received for review are confidential and must not be shared with others unless authorized by the editor. Reviews should be objective, and personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should present their feedback clearly with supporting arguments.
Reviewers should identify relevant publications not cited by the authors and point out any substantial similarities with other published works. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must remain confidential and not be used for personal gain.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts where they have conflicts of interest, whether due to competitive, collaborative, or personal relationships with the authors or institutions involved.