Anti-Plagiarism Policy

PhytoTalks is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic integrity, originality, and ethical publishing. The journal does not tolerate plagiarism in any form and expects all submitted manuscripts to represent the original work of the authors.

All manuscripts submitted to the journal are subject to editorial scrutiny for plagiarism (and unethical textual overlap before and, where necessary, during the peer review and publication process.

1. Definition of Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the use of another person’s ideas, words, data, images, tables, figures, interpretations, or intellectual work without proper acknowledgment, permission, or citation, and presenting them as one’s own.

Plagiarism includes both published and unpublished material and may occur intentionally or unintentionally.

2. Forms of Plagiarism

The journal considers the following practices to be unethical and unacceptable:

2.1 Direct Plagiarism

Direct plagiarism refers to the act of copying text, sentences, paragraphs, or entire sections from another source without providing a quotation, attribution, or proper citation.

2.2 Mosaic / Patchwork Plagiarism

This type of plagiarism involves rearranging, slightly modifying, or patching together content from one or more sources without proper acknowledgment, all while maintaining the original structure or meaning.

2.3 Paraphrasing without Attribution

Rewriting another author’s ideas or text in different words without citing the original source.

2.4 Self-Plagiarism / Text Recycling

Reusing substantial portions of one’s own previously published work without appropriate citation, disclosure, or editorial permission where required.

This includes:

  • duplicate publication,
  • redundant publication,
  • and excessive reuse of text, figures, tables, or data from prior publications.

2.5 Data or Figure Plagiarism

Using another person’s:

  • datasets,
  • experimental results,
  • graphs,
  • images,
  • figures,
  • illustrations,
  • tables,
  • or visual material

without proper permission, attribution, or acknowledgment.

2.6 Idea Plagiarism

Presenting another researcher’s original concept, interpretation, hypothesis, or intellectual contribution as one’s own without proper citation.

3. Originality Requirement

Authors submitting to PhytoTalks must ensure that:

  • the manuscript is original.
  • the work has not been plagiarized, either in whole or in part.
  • All borrowed materials are properly cited.
  • The submission does not infringe upon the intellectual property rights of others.

Authors are responsible for ensuring the authenticity and originality of their manuscript before submission.

4. Similarity Check and Screening

All manuscripts submitted to PhytoTalks undergo similarity screening using Turnitin plagiarism detection software and/or editorial assessment prior to peer review and, where necessary, during the editorial process.

The purpose of this screening is to identify possible instances of:

  • plagiarism,
  • self-plagiarism,
  • duplicate publication,
  • redundant publication,
  • and inappropriate textual overlap.

The journal recognizes that a similarity percentage alone does not necessarily indicate plagiarism. Therefore, each similarity report is assessed carefully by the editorial team in the context of the manuscript.

Editorial assessment may take into account overlap occurring in:

  • title page information,
  • author affiliations,
  • references,
  • standard methodology descriptions,
  • institutional names,
  • common scientific terminology,
  • ethical declarations,
  • and legally required statements.

Accordingly, editorial judgment, and not only numerical similarity, determines the final decision.

5. Acceptable and Unacceptable Similarity

A manuscript may be considered problematic if it contains:

  • substantial unattributed overlap with another published or unpublished source,
  • excessive copying from previously published work,
  • duplicate or redundant publication,
  • or inappropriate reuse of the authors’ own earlier publications.

Even if the overall similarity percentage appears low, serious plagiarism in critical sections (such as abstract, results, discussion, or conclusions) may still be considered unacceptable.

Likewise, a higher similarity score may sometimes be acceptable if it is caused by properly cited references, methodological standardization, or unavoidable technical phrasing.

Therefore, editorial evaluation, not only numerical similarity, determines the final decision.

6. Editorial Action in Cases of Suspected Plagiarism

If plagiarism or unethical overlap is suspected, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

  • request clarification from the author(s);
  • ask for revision and proper citation;
  • reject the manuscript;
  • suspend the review or publication process;
  • notify the corresponding author and co-authors;
  • refer the matter to the author’s institution or affiliated body in serious cases.

The action taken will depend on the severity, nature, and extent of the plagiarism identified.

7. Plagiarism Detected Before Publication

If plagiarism is identified before publication, the manuscript may be

  • returned to the authors for correction,
  • placed on hold pending explanation,
  • or rejected outright if the overlap is serious or deliberate.

Repeated or serious ethical violations may lead to the manuscript being barred from further editorial consideration.

8. Plagiarism Detected After Publication

If plagiarism is discovered after publication, the journal reserves the right to take corrective action in order to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Such actions may include:

  • publication of a correction,
  • publication of an editorial note,
  • issuance of an expression of concern,
  • or formal retraction of the article.

Where necessary, the journal may also notify:

  • the author’s institution,
  • funding agency,
  • affiliated organization,
  • or relevant academic authority.

Retraction or correction notices will remain part of the permanent publication record.

9. Self-Plagiarism and Redundant Publication

Authors must avoid submitting work that substantially overlaps with their previously published articles, conference papers, book chapters, theses, or pre-existing manuscripts without transparent disclosure and proper citation.

Where prior dissemination exists, authors must clearly indicate:

  • what material has been published before,
  • how the submitted manuscript is substantially different,
  • and whether permissions or acknowledgments are required.

Undisclosed duplicate or redundant publication is considered unethical and may result in rejection or retraction.

10. Responsibilities of Authors

Authors are expected to:

  • submit only original work;
  • properly cite all sources used in the manuscript;
  • use quotation or attribution where appropriate;
  • disclose any overlap with previous publications;
  • obtain permission for reused copyrighted material where required;
  • and ensure that all co-authors are aware of and agree with the submission.

The corresponding author is primarily responsible for the integrity of the submitted manuscript, although all authors share collective responsibility.

11. Responsibilities of Editors and Reviewers

Editors and reviewers play an important role in identifying possible plagiarism and ethical concerns.

They are encouraged to report any suspected case of:

  • copied text,
  • unattributed content,
  • duplicate publication,
  • data misuse,
  • or other forms of academic misconduct

to the editorial office for further investigation.

All such concerns will be handled seriously, confidentially, and fairly.

12. Use of AI-Generated or AI-Assisted Content

Authors must ensure that any use of AI-assisted writing, editing, or content generation tools does not result in plagiarism, unattributed borrowing, fabricated references, or misleading scholarly content.

The use of AI tools does not remove the author’s responsibility for ensuring originality, proper citation, and ethical compliance.

Any AI-assisted content included in the manuscript remains the full responsibility of the authors.

13. Ethical Standard and Compliance

The plagiarism policy of PhytoTalks is guided by principles of publication ethics, academic honesty, editorial transparency, and responsible scholarship.

The journal reserves the right to update this policy in accordance with evolving standards and best practices in scholarly publishing.