Code of Ethics

Tropical Aquaculture is committed to good editorial practices, honesty, and the principles of transparency promoted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). The following describes the expected ethical conduct of authors, reviewers, and the editorial team involved in each publication.

For Authors

  • Authors must strictly follow the guidelines described in the Author Guidelines and respect the timelines assigned during the review process.
  • Submit original and unpublished manuscripts, without data manipulation or plagiarism, citing the original sources that support and substantiate their results.
  • Authors must specify each contributor’s role in the preparation of the final manuscript. Following the CRediT taxonomy is recommended. All co-authors must have reviewed and approved the final version of the manuscript.
  • Submit only papers that have not been published and are not under evaluation by another publication.
  • In the case of experimental animal use, authors are requested to adhere to the ARRIVE guidelines, Animal Research: Reporting In Vivo Experiments, developed by NC3Rs. In cases involving the handling of wild flora and fauna, as well as work in protected natural areas, the corresponding permits from the relevant authorities are required.
  • When participating in the peer-review process, authors must address the comments, corrections, and suggestions issued by reviewers and the editor. If authors disagree with the observations, they must provide a detailed justification explaining why the observations are not accepted.
  • Authors must declare any potential conflicts of interest related to the subject addressed in the manuscript, as well as possess authorization for the use of all protected material included in the paper.
  • If an author disagrees with the rejection of their article by Tropical Aquaculture, an appeal may be submitted. This appeal must be sent through the journal’s OJS platform and must include detailed arguments refuting the reasons provided in the rejection decision. The journal’s Editorial Board will review the case and, if justified, the manuscript will be sent for peer review again. The appeal process may take several weeks to be resolved.
  • The information contained in each article is the sole responsibility of the authors. The journal reserves the right to reject an article if plagiarism or self-plagiarism is detected at any stage of the review process, or to withdraw it if it has already been published, in accordance with the retraction policy.

For Reviewers

  • Reviewers are committed to evaluating manuscripts objectively and impartially, without discrimination of any kind. When issuing their evaluation, they must do so in a reasoned and precise manner, using respectful language and providing recommendations that contribute to improving the manuscript.
  • Reviewers are required to ensure the confidentiality of the reviewed article and must not use the ideas and data contained in the manuscript before its publication.
  • Reviewers must complete the evaluation form in the journal’s OJS system within the established deadlines.
  • Reviewers must notify the editorial team of any unethical conduct detected in the manuscript and point out any information that may constitute grounds for rejecting the manuscript.
  • In the event that the review process places the reviewer in a conflict of interest, they must inform the editorial team and refrain from conducting the review.

For the Editorial Team

  • The editorial team must promote a policy of transparency in the reception, review, selection, and publication of submitted manuscripts, as well as continuously improve the quality standards followed throughout the entire process.
  • The editorial team shall ensure compliance with editorial deadlines, monitor the process through the OJS platform, and maintain respectful and timely communication with all involved parties.
  • The editorial team must respect freedom of expression and promote respect for copyright.
  • The editorial team must guarantee the confidentiality of the information provided by authors and reviewers during the editorial process.
  • The editorial team must strive for an efficient evaluation, review, and editorial decision-making process, in accordance with the available resources, to facilitate the dissemination of papers.
  • The editorial team must ensure that no conflicts of interest arise among authors, reviewers, and editors at any stage of the review process.
  • The editorial team must guarantee that submissions from both internal and external authors to the Universidad Juárez Autónoma de Tabasco are reviewed under the same conditions.
  • The editorial team shall monitor the occurrence of grounds for retraction, as established in this journal’s retraction policy.