Article Withdrawal, Correction & Retraction Policy

Plant Science Horizons (PSH) is committed to maintaining an accurate, transparent and trustworthy scholarly record. When significant problems are identified before or after publication, the journal may use withdrawal, correction, expression of concern, retraction, or—only in exceptional circumstances—removal, depending on the status of the manuscript and the effect of the problem on the reliability of the record.

Purpose of this policy

This policy explains how PSH responds when a submitted or published work contains material errors, unreliable findings, research-integrity concerns, legal or ethical problems, duplicated publication, or other issues that may affect the scholarly record.

Editorial action is intended primarily to protect readers and correct the scientific literature, not to punish authors.

Core principles applied by PSH

Different actions apply at different stages

Author-requested withdrawal

Authors may request withdrawal of a manuscript before publication. The request should be sent by the corresponding author and, where possible, should indicate that all authors agree with the request.

The journal may ask for a brief reason so that the submission record is complete. A withdrawal request does not prevent PSH from documenting or assessing serious ethical concerns that arose while the manuscript was under consideration.

Closing a manuscript before publication

PSH may close editorial consideration before publication when a manuscript is rejected, withdrawn, abandoned, submitted simultaneously elsewhere, affected by serious unresolved ethical concerns, or inactive despite reasonable attempts to contact the authors.

Journal-initiated closure should be recorded accurately in the editorial system and should not be misrepresented as a post-publication retraction.

Withdrawal does not erase publication-ethics concerns

If simultaneous submission, duplicated publication, fabricated reviewer information, plagiarism, or another integrity concern is discovered, withdrawal of the manuscript does not necessarily end the journal's assessment.

PSH may document the concern, communicate with the authors, and contact another journal or relevant institution when necessary to protect the scholarly record.

Withdrawal after acceptance but before publication

Authors should notify PSH promptly if they wish to withdraw an accepted manuscript before publication. Because editorial and production work may already have been completed, the journal may request confirmation from all authors and a clear explanation.

Once an article has been formally published as part of the scholarly record, post-publication mechanisms such as correction or retraction apply instead of ordinary manuscript withdrawal.

When a published correction is appropriate

A correction may be issued when an error affects the accuracy, interpretation, attribution, metadata, or reproducibility of an article but the central findings remain reliable.

Not every typographical error requires a formal notice

Minor spelling, formatting or typographical errors that do not alter meaning, attribution, interpretation or discoverability may not require a formal correction. The editor determines whether the error is sufficiently material to justify an amendment to the published record.

When serious concerns remain unresolved

PSH may publish an Expression of Concern when credible concerns could materially affect confidence in a published article but sufficient evidence for correction or retraction is not yet available.

This may occur while awaiting an institutional investigation, expert assessment, raw data, legal clarification, or other information needed for a final decision.

When a published article should no longer be relied upon

Retraction may be appropriate when the journal has clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, the article reports unethical research, substantial plagiarism or redundant publication has occurred, or another serious problem makes continued reliance on the publication inappropriate.

Retraction is a correction of the literature. It does not automatically mean that every author committed misconduct.

Examples of circumstances that may require retraction

Proportionate correction matters

• A limited correctable error that does not invalidate the principal conclusions.
• An authorship change when the scientific content remains reliable and the dispute can be resolved appropriately.
• A minor undisclosed conflict that does not invalidate the work, though a correction may still be needed.
• A disagreement in scientific interpretation without evidence that the published record is unreliable.
• A good-faith error that can be corrected without retracting the whole article.

Retraction does not itself determine intent

A publication may need to be retracted because of honest error even when no misconduct occurred. Conversely, misconduct may be established by an institution even when only part of an article requires correction.

PSH focuses on whether the publication can be relied upon and uses institutional findings where relevant without exceeding the journal's editorial role.

How concerns are first evaluated

When a concern is received, the journal first determines whether it is specific, credible, relevant to the publication, and sufficiently serious to require further assessment.

Unsupported, repetitive, abusive, or purely speculative allegations may not warrant a full investigation.

Authors are normally invited to respond

Authors will normally be given a reasonable opportunity to address substantive concerns and provide relevant evidence, such as raw data, original images, laboratory records, ethics documentation, authorship information, related publications, or other source material.

Failure to respond does not prevent PSH from taking action when the available evidence is sufficient.

Sources of evidence

Consultation when specialist assessment is needed

PSH may seek confidential advice from independent subject experts, statisticians, image-integrity specialists, research-integrity advisers, editorial-board members without relevant conflicts, or other qualified individuals where additional expertise is needed.

When PSH may contact an institution or authority

Journals can evaluate the reliability of published work but may lack authority or access to conduct a full research-misconduct investigation. Serious unresolved concerns may therefore be referred to an author's institution, employer, funder, ethics body, or other appropriate authority.

PSH may consider formal institutional findings when determining whether correction, expression of concern, retraction, or another editorial action is appropriate.

Independent handling of post-publication cases

Editors with relevant financial, personal, institutional, supervisory, collaborative, or authorship conflicts should not lead an investigation or decision. Cases involving an Editor-in-Chief, editor, Editorial Board member, Guest Editor, or publisher-affiliated author should be assigned to independent editorial oversight.

What a retraction notice should do

• Clearly identify the retracted article.
• State that the article is retracted.
• Explain the reason sufficiently for readers to understand why the work should not be relied upon.
• Distinguish evidence from unresolved allegation.
• Identify who is issuing or requesting the retraction where appropriate.
• Remain freely accessible.
• Be permanently linked to the original article.

The article normally remains identifiable

A retracted article should normally remain available in the journal archive so that readers can identify the publication and understand its status. The article page and publication file should be clearly marked as retracted and linked prominently to the retraction notice.

Retraction should not ordinarily result in silent deletion of the bibliographic record.

Preserving the publication history

The DOI of a retracted article should continue to resolve to the article record rather than being reused. Metadata should be updated, where technically possible, to identify the retracted status and link the article with the retraction notice.

The original publication date, authorship record and bibliographic identity should be preserved except where a separately justified correction is needed.

Removal is different from retraction and should be exceptional

Complete removal of published content from public access may be considered only in exceptional circumstances, for example when continued display creates serious legal liability, violates privacy or confidentiality, presents a substantial safety risk, or must be restricted by a binding legal requirement.

Where content must be removed, PSH should preserve an explanatory bibliographic notice whenever legally and ethically possible.

Correcting only the affected part when scientifically appropriate

If an identified error affects only a limited component of an article and the remainder remains reliable, a correction or another targeted amendment may be preferable to retraction of the entire article.

The editor should consider whether readers can still rely on the corrected publication as a whole.

Authorship problems do not automatically invalidate the science

Authorship disputes should ordinarily be resolved through authorship correction and, where necessary, institutional involvement. Retraction may be considered only when the authorship issue is inseparable from serious misconduct, legal invalidity, or unreliability of the publication.

Copyright problems and duplicated content

Substantial plagiarism or copyright infringement may justify retraction when the problem materially affects the originality, legality or integrity of the publication.

Limited unattributed text or a correctable permissions problem may be addressed through correction when the scientific record remains reliable and legal requirements can be satisfied.

Underlying evidence may determine the appropriate action

When concerns involve data fabrication, falsification, duplicated images, manipulated blots, microscopy, statistics or other evidence, PSH may request original source files and seek specialist review.

The appropriate action depends on whether the affected evidence can be corrected without changing the principal conclusions.

Editorial action does not require unanimous author agreement

PSH will consider author views and should accurately record agreement or disagreement when relevant, but a correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction may proceed when the evidence demonstrates that action is necessary to protect readers and the scholarly record.

Concerns raised by readers and third parties

PSH considers credible concerns from authors, readers, reviewers, editors, institutions, research-integrity specialists, or other sources. Reports should identify the article and provide sufficient detail for assessment.

The editorial response should focus on the evidence and reliability of the publication rather than the status, seniority, nationality or institutional affiliation of the person raising the concern.

Handling investigations responsibly

Integrity concerns should be handled as confidentially as reasonably possible while they are being assessed. Information may be shared with individuals or organizations whose involvement is necessary to evaluate, investigate, resolve or document the concern.

Action should not be delayed unnecessarily

PSH aims to evaluate post-publication concerns without unnecessary delay while allowing sufficient time for evidence gathering, author response, institutional input and expert assessment.

When the journal becomes confident that a publication is seriously unreliable, corrective action should not be postponed merely for administrative convenience.

Requests to reconsider an editorial action

Authors may request reconsideration of a withdrawal-related decision, correction, Expression of Concern, or retraction when they can provide substantive new evidence, identify a material factual error, or demonstrate a significant procedural concern.

Reconsideration does not guarantee reversal and should normally be assessed by an editor who can provide appropriate independence from the original dispute.

Related policies & guidance

Retraction and withdrawal decisions should be read together with PSH's manuscript, editorial and publication-integrity policies.

Publication-ethics framework

PSH's approach is informed by recognized publication-ethics principles, including relevant guidance from the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) regarding corrections, expressions of concern, retractions, visibility of notices, conflicts and post-publication review.

Reference to COPE guidance does not imply organizational membership, certification, accreditation or endorsement unless separately confirmed.

How PSH distinguishes corrective actions

Correcting the literature transparently

Plant Science Horizons uses withdrawal, correction, expressions of concern, retraction and exceptional removal for different purposes. The journal's aim is to preserve a transparent publication history, alert readers promptly when reliability is uncertain, and ensure that articles requiring correction or retraction remain clearly connected to the notices that explain their status.