Ethics Statement

The Journal of the Botanical Research Institute of Texas (JBRIT) is committed to maintaining high standards of scholarly integrity, ethical publishing, and scientific rigor. Our editorial and peer review processes are intended to support fair evaluation, transparent communication, and the long-term reliability of the scientific record.

Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made based on scholarly merit, originality, clarity, relevance to the journal’s scope, and contribution to botanical knowledge. Decisions are made independently of financial considerations, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, seniority, or personal relationships.

Editors retain full authority over acceptance, revision, and rejection decisions.

Peer Review

JBRIT utilizes single-blind peer review. Manuscripts are ordinarily evaluated by at least two reviewers with relevant subject expertise. Reviewers are selected on the basis of expertise and absence of significant conflicts of interest. Editors may also seek additional reviews or technical consultation where appropriate, including nomenclatural, statistical, or methodological review.

Reviewers may request anonymity from authors during the review process. To recognize the important contributions of reviewers while preserving manuscript-level confidentiality, reviewer names may be published collectively by volume or year, without association to specific manuscripts.

JBRIT may consider manuscripts that have undergone independent pre-submission review prior to formal submission. Authors should disclose the existence of such reviews at the time of submission and will be asked to provide reviewer comments, annotated manuscripts, response documents, or information regarding reviewer expertise and independence. Prior review does not guarantee acceptance and does not replace the journal’s editorial evaluation.

Conflicts of Interest

Editors, reviewers, and authors should disclose any relationships or circumstances that could reasonably be perceived as influencing scholarly judgment.

Potential conflicts may include:

  • Financial interests
  • Close personal or professional relationships
  • Institutional competition
  • Collaborative involvement
  • Direct academic rivalry

Editors may recuse themselves from handling submissions where a significant conflict exists.

Author Responsibilities

Authors are responsible for ensuring that submitted work:

  • Is original
  • Accurately represents findings and sources
  • Appropriately cites prior work
  • Complies with applicable laws and regulations
  • Is not under consideration elsewhere

All listed authors must have made meaningful scholarly contributions to the work. Ghost authorship and honorary authorship are discouraged. The corresponding author is responsible for communication with coauthors and for ensuring that all authors approve the submitted and final versions of the manuscript.

Manuscripts must not substantially duplicate previously published work unless clearly disclosed and justified.

Data Integrity and Scientific Record

Authors should retain underlying data, specimen information, field notes, analytical methods, images, and other supporting documentation sufficient to validate published conclusions where appropriate.

Fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, deceptive image manipulation, and deliberate misrepresentation of data are prohibited.

Editors reserve the right to request supporting documentation or clarification during editorial review.

Use of Artificial Intelligence Tools

All authors remain fully responsible for the accuracy, originality, citations, and integrity of all submitted material, regardless of the tools used in its preparation.

Authors may use large language model (LLM) tools to support the preparation of manuscripts provided that such use is disclosed and does not compromise the accuracy, originality, or integrity of the submitted work.

LLM tools may be used to improve the clarity, flow, and readability of text drafted by the author. This includes grammar and spelling correction, restructuring sentences for concision, and translation assistance or language polishing for authors writing in a non-native language. LLM-generated text that is retained in the manuscript must be reviewed, verified, and owned intellectually by the author.

In data analysis contexts, LLMs may be used to assist with code generation, data cleaning scripts, or the interpretation of outputs, where the author retains full responsibility for validating results and understanding the methods applied.

The following uses fall outside the bounds of this policy: using LLM tools to fabricate, misrepresent, or substitute for original analysis or findings; generating citations or references without independent verification, and representing LLM-produced content as the author's own intellectual contribution.

Where LLM tools have been used in any capacity, authors must include a brief disclosure statement in the manuscript.

Artificial intelligence systems may not be listed as authors.

Taxonomic, Specimen, and Collection Ethics

Authors are responsible for complying with the current International Code of Nomenclature and all applicable legal and institutional requirements governing collection, export, permitting, and use of specimens and associated data.

JBRIT recognizes the scientific importance of herbarium collections, museum collections, field observations, and biodiversity data. Authors are expected to ensure that specimen citations, herbarium acronyms, voucher information, and locality data are accurate and sufficiently documented to support scientific reproducibility and future research.

Research involving protected species, culturally sensitive resources, or restricted localities should be conducted and reported responsibly.

Sensitive Locality Information

JBRIT recognizes that publication of precise locality information may create conservation risks for rare, threatened, commercially exploited, or otherwise sensitive taxa.

Editors may request modification, generalization, or redaction of locality information where publication of precise data could reasonably contribute to poaching, habitat disturbance, overcollection, or other conservation harm.

When locality information is intentionally generalized or withheld, authors should indicate this within the manuscript where appropriate.

Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Evaluate submissions fairly and professionally
  • Maintain confidentiality
  • Avoid use of unpublished information for personal advantage
  • Disclose conflicts of interest
  • Provide constructive feedback grounded in scholarly standards

Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Actions

When significant errors, ethical concerns, or inaccuracies are identified, JBRIT may issue corrections, clarifications, expressions of concern, or retractions.

Allegations of ethical misconduct may be evaluated by the editorial office in consultation with editors, reviewers, authors, or relevant institutional representatives where appropriate. Editors reserve the right to investigate potential ethical violations and to take appropriate editorial action when necessary.

Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by contacting the editorial office with a written explanation. Appeals may involve additional editorial consultation or external review where appropriate.