Editor Guidelines

Editorial Responsibilities

Plant Science Horizons (PSH) is committed to maintaining rigorous editorial standards, publication ethics, transparency, fairness, and scientific integrity throughout the peer-review and publication process.

1. Purpose of the Editorial Role

Editors play a central role in maintaining the scientific quality, credibility, fairness, and integrity of the journal. Editorial decisions must be based solely on scholarly merit, originality, methodological rigor, clarity, and relevance to the journal.

Editors are expected to act professionally, confidentially, independently, and according to recognized standards of publication ethics.

2. General Editorial Principles

Evaluate submissions only on scholarly merit
Maintain confidentiality throughout peer review
Prevent conflicts of interest from influencing decisions
Respond appropriately to ethical concerns
Maintain scientific and ethical standards
Correct the scholarly record when necessary

3. Editorial Independence

Editors must maintain full editorial independence. Decisions must not be influenced by commercial interests, sponsorship, institutional pressure, personal relationships, or external lobbying.

4. Initial Editorial Assessment

Before peer review, handling editors should determine whether the manuscript:

Fits the aims and scope of the journal
Is written in acceptable academic English
Follows formatting and submission requirements
Appears scientifically sound and original
Includes required metadata and statements
Does not raise immediate ethical concerns

5. Scope & Suitability

Editors must determine whether submissions make a meaningful contribution to plant science and align with the journal’s readership and scientific focus.

6. Scientific Quality Assessment

Editors should evaluate the clarity of the research question, study design, methods, novelty, literature engagement, and proportionality of conclusions before external review.

7. Plagiarism & Integrity Screening

Similarity reports should be interpreted carefully and not used mechanically.

Acceptable Overlap

  • Standard methodology descriptions
  • Properly quoted text
  • References and bibliographic material
  • Title-page information

Problematic Overlap

  • Unattributed copying
  • Patchwriting or close paraphrasing
  • Duplicate publication
  • Undisclosed self-plagiarism

8. Reviewer Selection & Peer Review Management

Select reviewers with relevant expertise and no conflicts of interest
Maintain diversity in geography, institution, and scientific perspective
Monitor reviewer performance and timeliness
Avoid biased, hostile, or unsubstantiated reviews
Ensure reviewer comments remain professional and constructive
Provide authors with fair summaries of review outcomes

9. Editorial Decisions

Editorial decisions must be evidence-based, fair, and clearly communicated.

Reject

Outside scope, weak methodology, ethical concerns, or insufficient novelty.
Major Revision

Substantial scientific or structural improvements required.
Minor Revision

Limited textual or presentational corrections needed.
Accept

Meets all scholarly, ethical, and editorial standards.

10. Communication with Authors

Editors should communicate respectfully, clearly, professionally, and constructively at all stages of the editorial process.

11. Communication with Reviewers

Reviewers should receive clear instructions, realistic deadlines, professional communication, and appropriate acknowledgment.

12. Ethical Oversight

Editors are responsible for recognizing and responding to ethical concerns including:

Plagiarism
Duplicate publication
Data fabrication or falsification
Image manipulation
Authorship disputes
Undeclared conflicts of interest

13. Human & Animal Research

Human Studies

  • Ethics committee approval
  • Informed consent
  • Privacy and confidentiality protection

Animal Studies

  • Compliance with ethical standards
  • Justified experimental design
  • Minimization of suffering

14. Conflicts of Interest

Editors must avoid handling manuscripts where personal, institutional, financial, or collaborative relationships may compromise impartiality.

15. Confidentiality

All manuscripts, reviewer identities, editorial discussions, and unpublished data must remain confidential throughout and after the editorial process.

16. Corrections & Retractions

Corrections

Issued when errors affect clarity or accuracy without invalidating the findings.
Retractions

Applied when findings are unreliable due to major error or misconduct.
Expressions of Concern

Used when investigations are ongoing and concerns remain unresolved.

17. Editorial Leadership

Editor-in-Chief

Oversees editorial standards, publication integrity, ethical compliance, policy implementation, and overall journal quality.

Associate & Section Editors

Manage manuscripts within their expertise while maintaining confidentiality, impartiality, and ethical oversight.

18. Final Principle

Editors of Plant Science Horizons are entrusted with maintaining fairness, integrity, scientific rigor, transparency, and responsible scholarly communication. Editorial decisions directly shape the journal’s reputation and the integrity of the scientific record.