The articles submitted to Dicle University Journal of Faculty of Veterinary Medicine are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process and are published electronically with open access. Below are the ethical responsibilities, roles, and duties of authors, journal editors, referees, and publishers. The ethical principles and rules provided below have been prepared in accordance with the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) (https://publicationethics.org/). Additionally, information is provided on plagiarism and unethical behaviors considered as such in Dicle University Journal of Faculty of Veterinary Medicine.

Author(s)

The articles submitted to Dicle University Journal of Faculty of Veterinary Medicine should consist of original studies related to Veterinary Medicine: Basic Sciences (Anatomy, Biochemistry, Physiology, Histology and Embryology, Laboratory Animals, Veterinary Medicine History, and Deontology), Preclinical Sciences (Pharmacology and Toxicology, Microbiology, Parasitology, Pathology, Aquatic Animal Health, Virology), Clinical Sciences (Surgery, Internal Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Reproduction and Artificial Insemination), Animal Science and Nutrition (Animal Nutrition and Nutritional Diseases, Animal Husbandry, Animal Health Economics and Management, Biostatistics, Genetics), Food Hygiene and Technology, and taxonomy of biological diversity in animals, biology of animals in their natural habitats, and wildlife areas.

All sources (authors, online pages, thesis, etc.) utilized in the articles should be correctly and appropriately cited. It should be indicated that the articles submitted to the journal have not been sent to another journal, and the Copyright Transfer Form should be filled in.

Individuals who did not contribute to the article should not be listed as authors.

Conflicts of interest related to the submitted article should be disclosed, and the reason should be explained.

Authors may be asked to provide raw data related to their work to the editorial board during the peer review process, and in such cases, authors are expected to share their raw data with the editorial board.

Authors are obligated to retain data related to a published article for a period of 5 years.

Authors should inform the editor and editorial board if they identify an error in their work and should cooperate for the correction or retraction process.

Referees

All articles submitted to the Journal of Dicle University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine are evaluated through a double-blind peer review process. Double-blind peer review means that authors and referees are kept anonymous from each other to ensure an impartial, objective, and independent evaluation process. Articles are sent to referees for evaluation through the journal management system. Referees are required to fill out the form in the system, which includes their decisions on whether the article is suitable for publication and their justifications, regarding the following aspects of Veterinary Medicine: Basic Sciences (Anatomy, Biochemistry, Physiology, Histology and Embryology, Laboratory Animals, History and Ethics of Veterinary Medicine), Preclinical Sciences (Pharmacology and Toxicology, Microbiology, Parasitology, Pathology, Aquatic Animal Health, Virology), Clinical Sciences (Surgery, Internal Medicine, Obstetrics and Gynecology, Reproduction and Artificial Insemination), Animal Husbandry and Nutrition Sciences (Animal Nutrition and Nutritional Diseases, Animal Husbandry, Animal Health Economics and Management, Biostatistics, Genetics), Food Hygiene and Technology, and taxonomy of biological diversity in animals, their biology in natural habitats, and their contribution to wildlife areas. The ethical responsibilities and roles of referees for the Journal of Dicle University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine are as follows:

Referees are required to review articles only within their areas of expertise.

Referees are expected to accept to review articles without conflicts of interest.

Referees should inform the editor if they notice any conflicts of interest and should refuse to review the relevant article.

Referees must evaluate articles in an unbiased and objective manner.

Referees are required to fill out the Reviewer Evaluation Form for the articles they evaluate, and they are expected not to disclose their names on the forms to avoid compromising the double-blind peer review process.

Referees should also indicate their decision on the publishability of the evaluated article and provide reasons for their decision on this form.

The language used by referees in their recommendations should be polite, respectful, and scientific. Referees should avoid aggressive, disrespectful, and subjective personal comments. If referees are found to make such unscientific comments, they may be contacted by the editor or editorial board to review and correct their comments. Referees are required to complete their evaluations within the given time frame and adhere to the ethical responsibilities outlined here.

Editor

The editor is required to adhere to the ethical responsibilities listed below, as outlined in the 'COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for journal Editors' (https://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf) and the 'COPE Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors' (https://publicationethics.org/files/u2/Best_Practice.pdf) published by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The editor is responsible for all articles published in the journal. The ethical duties and responsibilities of the editor are as follows:

General Responsibilities

Editor is obligated to make efforts to enhance the quality and development of the journal. It is the Editor's responsibility to support authors' freedom of expression.

Relations with Readers

The Editor must ensure that sections of the journal where peer review is not required (such as editorials, invited articles, conference announcements, etc.) are clearly indicated. The Editor should make efforts to ensure that published articles are in line with the knowledge and skills of the journal's readership.

Relations with Referees

The Editor should request referees to evaluate articles that are appropriate to their knowledge and expertise, thus ensuring that articles are reviewed by experts in the field. The Editor is responsible for requesting referees to disclose any conflicts of interest before evaluating an article. The Editor must provide referees with all necessary information about the peer review process and what is expected of them.

The Editor must ensure that the peer review process is conducted through double-blind peer review, and should not disclose the identities of authors to referees or referees to authors. The Editor should evaluate referees based on their timeliness and performance. The Editor should establish a database for referees and update it based on their performance. Referees who provide rude or unprofessional comments, or who submit reviews late, should be removed from the list of referees. The Editor should continuously refresh and expand the list of referees based on their areas of expertise.

Relations with Authors

The Editor should continuously update publication and writing guidelines, along with sample templates, to inform authors of what is expected of them. The Editor should evaluate submitted manuscripts based on journal writing guidelines, the significance of the study, and its originality. If the Editor decides to reject a manuscript during the initial submission process, they should communicate the reasons for rejection to the authors clearly and impartially. If it is determined that the manuscript needs to be revised for grammar, punctuation, and/or formatting (such as margins, proper referencing, etc.), authors should be informed and given time to make the necessary corrections.
Submission and acceptance dates should be included in the articles. When authors request information about the status of their articles, they should be provided with information about the status of their articles in a manner that does not compromise the double-blind peer review process.

Relations with Editorial Board

The Editor should communicate publication and writing guidelines to new editorial board members and clarify what is expected of them. The Editor should provide the most up-to-date version of publication and writing guidelines to editorial board members. The Editor should evaluate editorial board members and select members who will actively contribute to the development of the journal to serve on the editorial board. The Editor should inform editorial board members of the following roles and responsibilities:

-Supporting the development of the journal

-Writing reviews on their areas of expertise when requested

-Reviewing and improving publication and writing guidelines

-Fulfilling necessary responsibilities in the operation of the journal

Publisher

Dicle University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine is published by the Dean's Office of Dicle University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine. The ethical responsibilities of the publisher are as follows:
The publisher acknowledges that the decision-making authority and the editorial process, including peer review, are the responsibility of the editor in the publication process of the Dicle University Journal of Faculty of Veterinary Medicine.

The publisher ensures the open, electronic, and free access of the journal on the journal's website.

Plagiarism and Unethical Publishing Behavior

Manuscripts submitted to Dicle University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Journal are scanned with Intihal.Net plagiarism detection system, IThenticate or Turnitin  software program before publishing process. Manuscripts with a similarity rate of 20% (excluding References) and below are accepted for publication. Articles exceeding this rate are examined in detail and, if necessary, sent back to the authors for review or correction. If plagiarism or unethical publishing behavior is detected, the publication is rejected.

Some unethical publishing behaviors are listed below:

• Indicating individuals who did not contribute to the study as authors.

• Not stating the individuals who contributed to the study as authors.

• Not stating if the article was produced from the author's master's/doctoral thesis or a project.

• Salamization, that is, publishing more than one article from a single study.

• Failure to declare conflicts of interest regarding submitted articles. Deciphering the double-blind referee process.

Explanations regarding the application of the articles of the TR Index criteria regarding ethical rules are given below.

The articles related to the Code of Ethics, which were included in the criteria in previous years, were detailed with explanations in 2020, and assuming that permissions were obtained for studies requiring ethics committee permission in the field of research, the issue of "included information about the permission in the article" was added to the criteria. However, as understood from the feedback, detailed information regarding Ethics Committee Permissions is needed. For this reason, a comprehensive study will later be shared on the TR Index website and announced to you.

We present below information that we think will be helpful, based on frequently asked questions.

QUESTION: Is ethics committee permission required for all articles?

No. The criteria also state that articles "require Ethics Committee Permission".

Research requiring Ethics Committee permission is as follows.

o All kinds of research carried out with qualitative or quantitative approaches that require collecting data from participants using surveys, interviews, focus group studies, observation, experiment, and interview techniques.

o Use of humans and animals (including materials/data) for experimental or other scientific purposes,

o Clinical studies conducted on humans,

o Research conducted on animals,

o Retrospective studies by the personal data protection law,
Moreover;

o Indicating that an "informed consent form" was obtained in case reports,

o Obtaining and specifying permission from the owners for the use of scales, surveys, and photographs belonging to others,

o Indicating that copyright regulations are complied with for the ideas and artistic works used

QUESTION: Should a retrospective Ethics Committee Permission be obtained for studies completed in previous years and publications produced from the thesis?

Retrospective ethics committee permission is not required for articles that used research data before 2020, were produced from master's/doctoral studies (must be stated in the article), applied for publication to the journal in the previous year, and were accepted but not yet published.

QUESTION: Are these rules of the TR Index restricting publications made outside universities?

No. Researchers who are not university members can also apply to Ethics Committees in their region.

In addition ;
Actions Contrary to Scientific Research and Publication Ethics determined by the Council of Higher Education as the Dicle University Faculty of Veterinary Medicine Journal are listed below. It is important to comply with these rules.

ARTICLE 4: (1) Actions contrary to scientific research and publication ethics are as follows:

a) Plagiarism: Presenting the original ideas, methods, data, or works of others as one's work, in whole or in part, without citing them by scientific rules,

b)Fabrication:  Using data that does not exist or has been falsified in scientific research.

c) Falsification: Falsifying research records or data obtained, presenting devices or materials that were not used in the research as if they were used, falsifying or shaping the research results in line with the interests of the individuals and organizations receiving support,

d) Re-publication: Presenting duplicate publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,

d) Salamization: Dividing the results of a research into pieces in a way that violates the integrity of the research publishing them in more than one issue, and presenting these publications as separate publications in academic appointments and promotions,

e) Unfair authorship: Including people who do not have an active contribution among the authors or not including people who do, changing the author order in an unjustified and inappropriate way, removing the names of those who have an active contribution from the work in subsequent editions, using their influence to include their names among the authors even though they do not have an active contribution,

(2) Other types of ethical violations include:
a) Not mentioning the supporting persons, institutions, or organizations and their contributions in the publications made as a result of research carried out with support,

b) Using theses or studies that have not yet been presented or defended and accepted as a source without the permission of the owner,

c) Not complying with ethical rules in research conducted on humans and animals, and not respecting patient rights in their publications,

d) Acting contrary to the relevant legislation in biomedical research and other clinical research on humans,

e) Sharing the information contained in a work that he is assigned to review with others before it is published without the express permission of the owner of the work,

f) Using resources, spaces, facilities, and devices provided or allocated for scientific research for purposes other than intended,

g) Making unfounded, unfounded and intentional allegations of ethical violations,

h) To publish the data obtained in surveys and attitude research conducted within the scope of a scientific study without obtaining the explicit consent of the participants or, if the research will be carried out in an institution, without obtaining the permission of the institution,

i) Harming animal health and ecological balance in research and experiments,

j) Not obtaining written permission from authorized units before starting research and experiments.

k) Conducting research and experiments contrary to the provisions of the legislation or international agreements to which Turkey is a party regarding relevant research and experiments.

i) Failure to comply with the obligation of researchers and authorities to inform and warn those concerned about possible harmful practices regarding the scientific research carried out,

m) Not using data and information obtained from other persons and institutions in scientific studies to the extent and in the manner permitted, not respecting the confidentiality of this information and not ensuring its protection,

n) Making false or misleading statements regarding scientific research and publications in academic appointments and promotions,

Journals must state that they comply with the rules regarding "Publication Ethics", "Research Ethics" and "Obtaining a Legal/Special Permission Certificate" by referring to international standards and opening a separate title for each, both on the web page and in the printed journal.

In articles to be published in journals, it should be stated in the article whether ethics committee permission and/or legal/special permission is required. If it is necessary to obtain these permissions, it should be clearly stated from which institution, on what date, and with which decision or issue number the permission was obtained.

If the study requires the use of human and animal subjects, it must be declared that the study was carried out by international declarations, guidelines, etc.
It is mandatory to comply with the Principles of the Declaration of Helsinki in all clinical studies. http://www.wma.net/en/30publications/10policies/b3/index.html).

In such studies, authors are expected to state in the method section that they conducted the study by the principles and that ethics councils and other people participating in the study received "informed consent."

In experimental animal studies, authors must protect animal rights in the method section according to the principles of the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals and obtain ethics committee approval (http: //www. nap.edu/catalog/5140.html).

In case reports, informed consent of the patient (patient owner) must be obtained. Ethics committee approval information should be stated in the method section, along with the name, date, and number of the committee.