Cukurova University Journal of Natural and Applied Sciences (CUNAS) is committed to the principles of transparency, objectivity, respect for scientific integrity, and adherence to the ethical guidelines of academic publishing. The journal upholds the highest standards of publication ethics and expects all parties involved in the publication process—including authors, reviewers, the Editor-in-Chief, and Editorial Board members—to act in accordance with the responsibilities set forth by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

1. Publication Ethics
1.1 Responsibilities of Authors

Authors submitting a manuscript to CUNAS are expected to:

-Originality: Submit only original and unpublished work. Proper citations must be provided for any referenced materials.

-Conflict of Interest: Disclose any potential financial or personal conflicts of interest related to the submitted work.

-Data Accuracy: Ensure that all data presented are accurate, valid, and obtained ethically. Raw data may be requested by the editorial team if needed.

-Authorship Contribution: List only those who have made significant contributions as authors. Ghost authorship and honorary authorship are not acceptable.

-Ethical Approval: For studies involving human or animal subjects, proper ethical committee approvals and participant consents must be obtained and documented in the manuscript.

-Reporting Errors: Notify the journal immediately upon discovering an error in a submitted or published article. Corrections or retractions will be issued where necessary.

-No Simultaneous Submissions: Manuscripts under review or published elsewhere must not be submitted.

-Authorship Order: The order of authors cannot be changed after the submission is completed.

1.2 Responsibilities of the Editor-in-Chief and Editorial Board

Objectivity and Independence: Manuscripts are evaluated solely based on academic merit, originality, and relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to authors' race, gender, religion, or political views.

-Peer Review Process: The Editor-in-Chief ensures that suitable reviewers are assigned to each manuscript and that the single-blind peer review process is conducted fairly and confidentially.

-Confidentiality: Manuscripts under review are treated as confidential documents. Information is not disclosed to third parties without the author's consent.

-Managing Misconduct: In cases of suspected plagiarism, data fabrication, or other unethical practices, the editorial team will initiate an investigation according to COPE guidelines.

-Handling Conflicts of Interest: Editors must recuse themselves from the review process if a conflict of interest exists. All such cases are delegated to another editor.

-Communication with Authors and Reviewers: Editors maintain clear and constructive communication with authors. Reviewers are provided with guidance and are expected to provide high-quality, impartial evaluations.

-Final Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief has the sole and independent authority to make final decisions regarding manuscript acceptance or rejection, based on reviewer comments and scientific merit.

-Corrections and Retractions: When errors or ethical violations are found in published articles, editors initiate transparent correction or retraction processes as required.

1.3 Responsibilities of Reviewers

-Impartiality: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts based solely on scientific merit, avoiding personal bias.

-Confidentiality: Manuscripts and review content must be kept confidential and not shared with others.

-Conflict of Interest: If a reviewer recognizes a conflict of interest, they must inform the editor and decline to review the manuscript.

-Timeliness: Reviews should be submitted within the specified timeframe. Delays should be communicated to the editor in advance.

-Constructive Feedback: Reviewers are expected to provide detailed, objective, and constructive feedback, avoiding personal or unprofessional language.

-Reporting Ethical Concerns: Any indication of plagiarism, duplicate publication, or other ethical concerns must be reported to the editor.

1.4 Responsibilities of the Publisher

-Editorial Independence: The publisher respects the full autonomy of the Editor-in-Chief and does not interfere with editorial decisions.

-Support for Ethical Publishing: The publisher supports the use of plagiarism detection tools and upholds publication ethics in accordance with COPE.

-Transparency and Accountability: The publisher ensures that all content published in CUNAS meets scientific and ethical standards and facilitates transparent complaint handling procedures.

-Freedom of Expression: The publisher promotes academic freedom and open discussion of scientific results.

-Implementation of Ethical Policies: The publisher enforces journal-wide compliance with the ethical policies defined by CUNAS and COPE.

2. Publication Process and Quality Assurance
2.1 Editorial Workflow and Decision-Making

CUNAS follows a transparent and rigorous editorial workflow. All submitted manuscripts are evaluated based on scientific quality, originality, and compliance with ethical standards. After passing the initial screening by the Editor-in-Chief, the manuscript is assigned to an appropriate Editorial Board member for further handling. Based on peer-review reports and the editor’s assessment, the final decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief. Decisions may include:

-Acceptance

-Minor or major revision

-Rejection

Detailed information on the review process can be found on the journal’s Peer Review Policy page.

2.2 Plagiarism and Originality Checks

CUNAS follows a zero-tolerance policy for plagiarism. Authors must confirm that their work is original, has not been published elsewhere, and is not under consideration by another journal.

-All submissions are checked using plagiarism detection software. Manuscripts with a similarity index exceeding 20% may be rejected or returned for correction.

-Self-plagiarism is not permitted. Substantial reuse of previously published material without appropriate citation is considered unethical.

-Citations and references must be complete and accurate. Misattribution or omission of sources may be treated as a violation of ethical standards.

2.3 Corrections, Retractions, and Complaints

When significant errors or ethical issues are identified in published articles, CUNAS initiates correction or retraction procedures as follows:

-Corrections: If minor errors are identified post-publication, authors will be asked to submit a correction notice.

-Retractions: In cases of serious ethical misconduct (e.g., plagiarism or data fabrication), the article will be formally retracted with a public notice.

-Complaints: Authors, reviewers, or readers may report ethical concerns. All complaints will be handled impartially and thoroughly by the editorial team.

2.4 Data and Privacy Protection

CUNAS protects the confidentiality of all authors, reviewers, and participants. During the review process, the identities of authors and reviewers are kept confidential as part of the single-blind review system.

-Identifiable participant data must not be published without consent.

-Research data should only be shared with proper safeguards and permissions.

2.5 Scientific Integrity and Transparency

Authors must report all findings honestly and without manipulation.

-Data Availability: Authors are encouraged to make data available upon request.

-Funding and Conflicts: All funding sources and potential conflicts must be clearly disclosed.

3. Addressing Unethical Behavior
3.1 Plagiarism, Data Manipulation, and Fraud

CUNAS adopts a strict stance against:

-Plagiarism: Use of others’ ideas without citation is grounds for rejection or retraction.

-Data Manipulation: Misrepresentation or selective reporting of data is strictly prohibited.

-Fabrication: Inventing data or citations is a serious ethical violation.

3.2 Ensuring Academic Integrity
Authors must submit only original and accurate content.

-Reviewers must be objective and disclose conflicts.

-Editors must ensure fairness and transparency.

3.3 Managing Conflicts of Interest

-Authors: Must disclose all financial/personal conflicts.

-Reviewers: Must recuse themselves when a conflict exists.

-Editors: Must not handle submissions in which they have conflicts.

3.4 Handling Ethical Complaints

Complaints must be submitted in writing to the Editor-in-Chief.

Investigations will be conducted thoroughly.

Sanctions (e.g., retraction, ban from submission) will be imposed when warranted.

4. Policy on the Use of Generative Artificial Intelligence (GenAI)
4.1 Authors

Any use of GenAI tools (e.g., ChatGPT) must be disclosed.

GenAI must not be listed as an author.

Use must be limited to language support, not content generation.

Example disclosure:
“The authors used ChatGPT to improve language clarity. The final manuscript was reviewed and approved by all authors.”

4.2 Reviewers and Editors

CUNAS prohibits the use of GenAI tools for reviewing or editorial decisions due to confidentiality concerns.

4.3 Ethical Compliance

Inappropriate or undisclosed use of GenAI will be treated as a breach of ethics.

5. Research Involving Human and Animal Subjects
5.1 Ethics Committee Approval

Human studies must follow the Declaration of Helsinki and require IRB approval (including committee name, approval number, and date).

Animal studies must comply with national/international welfare standards and declare ethical approval.

5.2 Protection of Human Participants
Informed Consent: Participants must be fully informed and voluntarily agree.

Anonymity: Identifiable data may not be published without explicit consent.

5.3 Animal Welfare and Ethical Standards

Authors are encouraged to follow the ARRIVE guidelines.

The number of animals used should be minimized.

Pain and distress must be reduced, and welfare monitored.

Final Notes:
CUNAS reserves the right to reject or retract manuscripts that fail to comply with these ethical standards. Authors may be asked to provide ethical approvals, consent forms, or clarifications at any stage of the process.