The Editorial Board of the “Scientific and technical bulletin of Livestock farming Institute of NAAS of Ukraine” (hereinafter “the Publication”) adheres to an Open Access policy. All articles are posted on the Publication’s website indefinitely and free of charge immediately after the issue is released, and are also distributed and stored in paper form through the national library system. Real-time full-text access to scientific articles is available on the official website in the Archive section.

To ensure high standards of ethics, transparency, and quality of scientific publications, the Editorial Board of the “Scientific and technical bulletin of Livestock farming Institute of NAAS of Ukraine” adheres to the principles of COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics), WAME (World Association of Medical Editors) and DORA (San Francisco Declaration on Research Assessment)

The Editorial Board of the “Scientific and technical bulletin of Livestock farming Institute of NAAS of Ukraine” follows these publication ethics rules:

• Adherence to the basic principles of the publication: scientific rigor, objectivity, professionalism, and informational support for the most significant innovative research;
• Transparency in the process of submission, peer review, and publication;
• Unconditional loyalty to all participants in the creative process involved in the journal’s creation;
• Use of double-blind peer review, engaging objective and competent reviewers;
• Academic integrity – avoidance of plagiarism, falsification, and redundant (double) publications;
• Ongoing consultative work with authors to meet international database requirements for the formatting and content of submitted materials;
• Retraction and correction of articles – a clear procedure for retractions, corrections, and errata notices.

 

Peer Review Procedure and Editorial Ethics

The peer review procedure, publication ethics, and editorial policy of the “Scientific and technical bulletin of Livestock farming Institute of NAAS of Ukraine” are based on the principles of academic integrity and comply with the recommendations of COPE  (Committee on Publication Ethics).

Scientific articles submitted to the editors undergo plagiarism checks and compliance checks regarding formatting and references. Articles formatted according to the Bulletin’s requirements with a text originality of at least 80% are admitted to the review stage.

Reviewing (expert evaluation) of manuscripts is conducted (within 7 working days) to ensure a high scientific and theoretical level of the journal and is carried out on the principle of double-blind (anonymous) review, where reviewers do not know the authors’ personal data, and authors do not know the reviewer’s personal data.

 

Ethical Obligations of Editors

1. Editorial board members, led by the Editor-in-Chief, are responsible for deciding which articles to publish based on the principles of validity and scientific significance.
2. Editors are responsible for ensuring compliance with requirements and recommendations in the scientific article.
3. Editors have the right to consult with reviewers when making a final decision on publication.
4. The editor must consider all manuscripts submitted for publication without bias, evaluating each properly regardless of race, religion, nationality, or any other affiliation, as well as the position or place of work of the author(s).
5. Sole responsibility for accepting or rejecting a manuscript lies with the editor. This includes taking into account the reviewer’s recommendation, though manuscripts may be rejected without review if deemed outside the Publication’s scope.
6. Unpublished data, information, or ideas obtained during the review process are kept confidential.
7. Following a positive decision, the article is published in the journal and placed on the institution’s electronic resources.
8. The editor’s responsibilities regarding a manuscript authored by the editor themselves must be delegated to another qualified member of the editorial board.
9. If convincing evidence is presented that the content or conclusions of a published work are erroneous, the editor should facilitate the publication of a correction or erratum in the next issue.

 

Ethical Obligations of Authors

1. Provide reliable results of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance.
2. Ensure the accuracy of bibliographic references.
3. Cite publications that have significantly influenced the nature of the work. Except for reviews, citations of work not directly related to the report should be minimized.
4. Authors should not publish a manuscript describing essentially the same research in more than one journal as an original publication. Concurrent submission is considered unethical and unacceptable.
5. Authors bear full responsibility for the content of the articles and the fact of their publication.
6. The author is obliged to revise the article in accordance with the comments of the reviewers or the editorial board.

 

Ethical Obligations of Reviewers

1. Peer review assists the Editor in making decisions and helps authors improve the quality of their work.
2. If a reviewer feels unqualified to review the research, they should notify the editor.
3. Reviewers must not participate in the review if there is a conflict of interest resulting from competitive or collaborative relationships with the authors.
4. Reviewers must respect the intellectual independence of the authors.
5. Every manuscript received for review must be treated as a confidential document.
6. Reviewers must explain and argue their judgments adequately so that editors and authors can understand the basis of their comments.
7. Reviewers should point out cases of insufficient citation of relevant work by other scientists.
8. Reviewers must provide their feedback in a timely manner.
9. Unpublished data from manuscripts must not be used in the reviewer’s own research.

 

Policy on Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-Assisted Technologies

The Law of Ukraine “On Copyright and Related Rights” (January 1, 2023) distinguishes between AI-generated results and human creativity. The Editorial Board considers the extent to which AI was used for information retrieval, structuring, drafting, or creating graphics, and the extent to which the author(s) performed substantial editing and rewriting. In such cases, the copyright is fully protected. Articles generated by AI without human participation (e.g., via a single prompt) are rejected. Authors bear full responsibility for the originality, content, and accuracy of the facts presented.

 

Complaint Procedure

The Editorial Board of the “Scientific and Technical Bulletin of Livestock Farming Institute of NAAS of Ukraine” ensures a transparent and fair procedure for handling complaints regarding violations of academic integrity and ethical principles by authors, reviewers, or members of the journal’s editorial board.

Complaints must be submitted electronically to labinform@i.ua stating the nature of the violation. Complaints must include clear data about the applicant, a link to the publication, and a detailed description of the violation with evidence. Anonymous complaints are not considered.

A preliminary review of the complaint is conducted within 10 working days by the Editor-in-Chief, their deputy, or an authorized member of the editorial board. During this stage, an initial assessment of the complaint’s merits is performed (checking for relevance to the Publication’s scope and the presence of sufficient grounds for consideration), and a decision is made regarding further action. The applicant receives a notification regarding the registration of the complaint or a refusal to consider it.

In case of registration, an expert review of the complaint is conducted by a temporary commission of three editorial board members, with the involvement of independent experts if necessary.

Based on the results of the expert review, the editorial board makes a decision, which may include:

• rejecting the complaint as groundless;
• recognizing the violation as minor and suggesting corrections;
• recognizing the violation as significant and taking appropriate measures;
• refusal to publish the material;
• retraction of an already published article;
• prohibition on submitting materials for a certain period;
• notification of the violation to the author’s institution.

The total timeframe for considering a complaint is no more than 30 calendar days.

 

Procedure for the Retraction of a Published Article

The retraction (withdrawal, cancellation) procedure is carried out in compliance with the principles of objectivity, impartiality, and confidentiality. It is applied to correct the scientific record and inform the scientific community of significant violations of academic integrity or errors that make further use of the research results impossible. The editorial board is guided by the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

The decision to retract an article, including at the author’s initiative, is made by the editorial board in the event of discovering violations of publication ethics and/or other significant deficiencies, such as: errors, plagiarism, or improper borrowing of text, ideas, data, or research results; lack of proper references to primary data sources; duplicate publication of the same article in another edition without proper justification; inclusion of authors who did not make a significant scientific contribution or exclusion of authors who did; discovery of an unethical peer-review process; or the presence of a conflict of interest that could have influenced or did influence the research results.

After retraction, the article is stored in the scientific publication’s archive with a clear label “ВІДКЛИКАНО / RETRACTED.” An official retraction notice stating the reasons is published; information is transmitted to the relevant scientometric databases and repositories; and the article’s DOI is preserved with a corresponding note.