Print all
Special issue November 2024
September/October 2024
Editorial Policies
Disclaimer: The following policies of the South African Journal of Science are intended to guide authors and reviewers of our Journal. While other journals are welcome to adapt and implement these policies, they do so at their own discretion and assume full responsibility for any consequences arising from their adoption. When using or adapting any of our policies or guidelines, please include an acknowledgement in your policy, along the lines of: This policy has been reproduced/adapted from the South African Journal of Science. The South African Journal of Science and its publisher, the Academy of Science of South Africa (ASSAf), accept no responsibility for the accuracy, applicability, or outcomes resulting from the use of these policies by other journals.
Policy on publishing ethics
The South African Journal of Science recognises the fundamental importance of research integrity and publishing ethics. The Journal adheres to best practice in scholarly publishing, that is, to the commonly accepted standards of expected ethical behaviour for all stakeholders involved in publishing manuscripts – authors, reviewers and editors.
These expectations are outlined in our legally binding publishing agreement and editorial policies, and our comprehensive guidelines support researchers to pre-empt any intentional or unintentional breach of research integrity and publishing ethics.
Our Plagiarism and Data publishing ethics policies deal with those specific aspects of publishing ethics. This Policy outlines the Journal’s response to concerns raised in all other aspects of publishing ethics, in general or as stipulated in our guidelines and policies.
A non-exhaustive list of examples is: conducting a study without the necessary ethics clearance or study permits, gift and ghost authorship, manuscripts containing AI-generated content, breach of confidentiality, non-disclosure of conflicts of interest.
The Editor-in-Chief will investigate all ethical concerns raised, and will attempt to resolve concerns, where it is possible to do so, as quickly and transparently as possible.
Should an ethical infringement be confirmed, the manuscript will be rejected, or if published, the article will be retracted (see Article Retraction Policy). Should the infringement be determined to be intentional, the infringer’s institution and funders will be informed of the offence and they will be banned from future interactions with the Journal.
Inclusivity and accessibility statement
The South African Journal of Science is committed to enhancing inclusivity and accessibility.
If you are an author or reviewer who requires disability accommodations for inclusion or access, please let us know how we can assist you. Authors can indicate disability accommodations required to the editorial team directly prior to submission, or include requests in their covering letter or comments to the editor during submission. Reviewers can indicate accommodation requirements to the editorial team directly or to the Associate Editor in response to an invitation to review.
We welcome your feedback on how we can further improve inclusivity and accessibility for all users of our Journal. Send your feedback to sajs@assaf.org.za
Inclusive language policy
Please ensure your manuscript adheres to the Inclusive Language Policy.
Conflicts of interest policy
The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines conflicts of interest as “those which may not be fully apparent and may influence the judgement of authors, reviewers and editors”. A conflict of interest can be described as “those which, when revealed later, would make a reasonable reader feel misled or deceived”. Conflicts of interest can be personal, commercial, political, academic or financial. Such interests must be declared by authors, reviewers and editors. In case of uncertainty, rather disclose.
Authors’ conflicts of interest
Authors are asked during the submission process to confirm that they have declared any potential conflicts of interest in their covering letter. Examples include employment, funding sources, owning of shares and payment for lectures or travel.
Should a potential conflict of interest exist, it must be declared in the covering letter and will be included in the published version if the article is accepted for publication. A potential conflict of interest does not necessarily mean the submission will be rejected.
Reviewers’ conflicts of interest
Reviewers are asked to declare any potential conflicts of interest in the manuscript review form. Examples include submissions by family members or students and discerning the identity of the authors. A conflict of interest does not necessarily invalidate the review report.
Editors’ conflicts of interest
The same policy for authors’ conflicts of interest applies when editors are the authors of editorials, non-reviewed front section articles and manuscripts for peer review.
With regard to assigning reviewers and making a decision on a manuscript, an editor will withdraw as editor for that manuscript if there is a conflict of interest, such as in the case of a submission by a family member or student.
Editorial Advisory Board members
Members of the Editorial Advisory Board are permitted to publish in the Journal. Submissions received from Board members are treated in the same manner as other submissions with respect to anonymous reviewing and confidentiality.
Discussion of unpublished material
We will not consider contributions that are based on or in response to material that is not yet published or is embargoed, until such time that the material is accessible to reviewers and readers.
Please consult with the Editor-in-Chief if you are considering submitting a contribution of this nature.
Confidentiality, embargoes and media policy
Confidentiality
Authors, reviewers, assessors and editorial staff should treat all submitted manuscripts and correspondence with the Editorial Office as confidential.
Media embargoes
All manuscripts are considered to be under a media embargo from the time of submission until online publication of the article or rejection of the manuscript. Authors may discuss their articles or findings with the media before publication but must adhere to the media embargo. It is advisable to inform the Editorial Office of any pending media reports so that they can provide assistance, especially with regard to the publication date. The key findings of an article should not be released in the press until online publication of the article, and all media reports emanating from a published article should include the full source or a link to the article online.
The Journal issues media releases summarising the content of the forthcoming issue the week before publication. Full-text articles are provided to the media upon request. The names and contact details of the corresponding authors are provided to the media; authors should inform the Editorial Office in advance if an author other than the corresponding author should be contacted for media-related enquiries. The contents of the media release and the articles are embargoed until the date and time of publication by the Journal.
Peer review process
Research Letters, Research Articles and Review Articles are subject to peer review. Although the Editor-in-Chief may solicit an external review, items published in the front section of the journal are not subject to peer review.
- Manuscripts are submitted online. All manuscripts undergo an initial assessment by the Editorial Office to ensure that they comply with the guidelines. Submissions that do not comply will result in delays.
- Manuscripts are then assigned to the Editor-in-Chief to decide whether or not they fall within the remit of the journal. The Editor-in-Chief may also refer to Associate Editors for their assessment. All manuscripts should be written in a style suitable for non-specialists.
- All manuscripts deemed potentially suitable then undergo a similarity detection process using iThenticate and Crossref Similarity Check. When a similarity report is indicative of potential plagiarism, the report and manuscript will be examined by the Editor-in-Chief to determine whether or not material has been plagiarised and, if so, the extent of the plagiarism. In the case of suspected plagiarism, the Plagiarism Policy will come into effect. When the similarity report indicates no plagiarism detected, the Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to the Associate Editor responsible for the discipline in which the manuscript falls.
- Associate Editors can at this stage reject manuscripts that are too specialised or refer manuscripts back to the authors for language editing or re-writing. If a manuscript is deemed suitable for review, the Associate Editor appoints and invites Reviewers online. It is at the discretion of the Associate Editor whether or not Reviewers recommended by Authors are selected; the selection will, however, include Reviewers who are not on the recommended list.
- Reviewers are given 14 days to submit a report. At least two reports are required to make a decision. The review process is double-anonymous, that is, both authors’ and reviewers’ identities are concealed.
- Once at least two reports have been received, the Associate Editor makes a decision on the manuscript. If Reviewers’ recommendations diverge, the Associate Editor can arbitrate the recommendation or refer the manuscript to a third Reviewer.
- Authors are given 30 days to revise a manuscript needing minor revisions and 60 days to revise a manuscript needing major revisions. Revised manuscripts are submitted online. You will need to log in and select the article in your submissions page. The resubmission is done in the review stage, there is no need to start a new submission. At the review stage you will need to do two things to resubmit once you have revised your document: Upload the new file in the revisions section. To upload a new file click on ‘Upload file.’ A new window will open allowing you to upload your file(s). Select the appropriate option from the dropdown menu to indicate that you are not submitting a revision of an existing file. IMPORTANT: Revised manuscripts not submitted within the timeframes stipulated above will not be considered as a revision. If a reasonable extension is needed, please ask the Associate Editor in advance of the deadline.
- Associate Editors then make a decision on minor revisions and refer major revisions to one or more Reviewers (the original Reviewer/s when possible) for their recommendations before making a decision.
- Authors can appeal a decision in writing to the Editor-in-Chief.
- Accepted manuscripts are received by the Editorial Office where they enter the production queue to undergo copy-editing, layout and proofing. Research Letters are given priority and are scheduled for publication in the forthcoming open issue. Research Articles and Review Articles are produced for publication in date order of acceptance, but can, at the discretion of the editors and for compelling reasons, be assigned to a particular issue. See Production Process
Peer review mentoring
The South African Journal of Science encourages peer review mentoring.
If you are an experienced researcher and peer reviewer who supervises an early career researcher with the appropriate expertise, we invite you to co-opt them and mentor them through the peer review process.
The review report remains the responsibility of the invited Reviewer, who should provide guidance and supervision through the process. Whilst confidentiality is waived between the invited Reviewer and Reviewer Mentee once they have agreed to be mentored, the Confidentiality and Conflicts of Interest policies will likewise apply to the Reviewer Mentee.
If you mentor someone during a peer review, please disclose it in the online review form where indicated and include the following details:
- Name, affiliation, position and email address of Reviewer Mentee
- Mentee’s contribution to the review (e.g. observer, joint reviewer)
- Whether you recommend the Mentee for future independent peer review
Reviewer Mentee names will be captured and their contributions to peer review will be acknowledged by the Journal.
We welcome any feedback or suggestions on peer reviewer mentoring. Email: sajs@assaf.org.za
Editing peer reviews
Peer review is a vital and valued part of scholarly publishing.
Reviewers are expected to be collegial and respectful in their peer review reports, in purpose, tone and language. [Please refer to the Guidelines for Reviewers]
In respect of the independence of peer review, it is the Journal’s practice not to alter the content of a peer review report before it is shared with authors.
Peer review reports may be edited by editorial staff before sending to authors only to address offensive language and deviations from journal style or to protect anonymity; such edits will not change the meaning or intention of the review, nor alter the Reviewer’s opinion about the quality, content, or intellectual validity of the manuscript under review.
In exceptional circumstances, a review report that does not meet the requirements of the Journal with respect to content (e.g. a recommendation is provided with no substantiation), or tone or language (e.g. criticism is directed at the authors and not the work or offensive language is used) may, at the discretion of the Editor, not be shared with the authors. In such a case, the Editor will notify the Reviewer that their report cannot be used.
This policy was informed by the Committee on Publication Ethics’ guidelines on editing peer reviews: https://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines/editing-peer-reviews
Appeals and complaints
Appeals
Authors have the right to appeal a decision on their submission if they believe the decision was unfair.
To appeal a decision, please submit a letter detailing the nature of the appeal and indicating why the decision is viewed as unfair.
The letter should be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief within 10 days of the decision.
The Editor-in-Chief will review all relevant documentation relating to the submission, may consult the relevant Associate Editor or Reviewers and may appoint a new Reviewer to evaluate the submission before making a decision.
The decision of the Editor-in-Chief will be final.
Complaints
For complaints relating to the policies and procedures of the Journal or the conduct of editorial staff, please email the details of the complaint to the Managing Editor or Editor-in-Chief. Details should be confined to the facts of the case and provided in writing via these email addresses. Complaints directed to other persons or via other channels will not be acted upon.
All complaints directed through the correct channels will be acknowledged and investigated. The Chair of the Editorial Advisory Board will be informed and will oversee the process. We will attempt to resolve complaints as quickly and transparently as possible, and endeavour to communicate updates to complainants as they arise.
Production process and publication
- Accepted manuscripts are received by the Editorial Office where they enter the production queue to undergo copy-editing, layout and proofing. Research Letters are given priority and are scheduled for publication in the forthcoming open issue. Research Articles and Review Articles are produced for publication in date order of acceptance, but can, at the discretion of the editors and for compelling reasons, be assigned to a particular issue.
- Manuscripts and supplementary material undergo copy-editing to ensure, inter alia, that the language is clear and suitable for a non-specialist reader, that the text conforms to the house style, that the figures are presentable and that the referencing is correct. Only manuscripts (not supplementary material) undergo layout into the journal style.
- Authors are given the opportunity to approve the copyediting changes made and to address any Author Queries at the proof stage. Figures should be carefully checked as they may have been redrawn or relabelled. Only minor corrections such as typos and corrections to layout can be made at this stage; major text changes are not permitted.
- Final corrected proofs are not returned to authors unless requested. No changes can be made after the proof has been approved for publication. Any essential corrections can be published in a subsequent issue. See Corrections to published articles.
- Any delays during the Production Process as a result of missing deadlines or failure to address queries will delay the publication of the article. Major delays will necessitate the manuscript being re-scheduled to avoid delaying the publication of the issue.
Publishing peer review reports
The Journal adheres to a double-anonymous peer review model in accordance with the recommendation of ASSAf’s Code of Best Practice in Scholarly Journal Publishing, Editing and Peer Review.
A double-anonymous model is most likely to reduce bias in peer review, whilst open review models enhance transparency and accountability. However, making review reports and the authors’ response to the reviewers available to readers – post-publication – not only promotes openness and transparency, but readers could also learn and benefit from the extended discourse, whilst the benefit of the objectivity of double-anonymous review is retained.
We therefore encourage Reviewers and Authors to allow us to publish their anonymised review reports (all review rounds) and response letter as supplementary files after a manuscript has been reviewed and if it is accepted. We will only publish anonymised peer review reports and the response to reviewers if:
- Permission has been received from both the Reviewer and the Author
- Guidelines for review reports and responses have been adhered to, specifically with respect to collegiality .
Permission requests are included in the publishing agreement and online review report for authors and reviewers, respectively, and will be confirmed prior to publication.
We welcome engagement on this policy.
Data publishing ethics
In the context of data publication, the South African Journal of Science follows community best practices on data publishing ethics and aligns with the recommendations and workflows published by the FORCE11 & COPE Research Data Publishing Ethics Working Group.1
The Journal takes seriously and will investigate any ethical concerns regarding the data associated with a submitted manuscript or a published article. Where concerns have been raised, due process will be followed in accordance with COPE guidelines and the FORCE11 & COPE Working Group recommendations1 to inform whether any actions may be required about a data set or an article.
Where ethical concerns have been identified in relation to the data associated with a published article, the Journal’s Correction or Retraction policies will apply.
The Journal reserves the right to remove links to a published data set and/or associated content in order to address a legal or ethical concern, a publication ethics issue, or a breach in journal policy. We may also remove links to data sets while such concerns are under investigation. In the context of any data publishing concerns, we may contact other parties that host content associated with the data set (e.g. a data repository) and may contact the institution(s) of relevant authors if required.
The South African Journal of Science complies with the Protection of Personal Information Act No. 4 of 2013 of South Africa and may have a legal obligation to inform the Information Regulator if a legal breach is identified in relation to the data in a submission or publication in the Journal.
1Puebla I, Lowenberg D, FORCE11 Research Data Publishing Ethics WG. Joint FORCE11 & COPE Research Data Publishing Ethics Working Group Recommendations. Zenodo. 2021. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.5391293
Use of AI and large language models
The introduction and availability of AI- and large language model (LLM)-based tools have created opportunities in the scholarly research and publishing environments, but have also presented challenges with respect to transparency, credibility, and accountability. The South African Journal of Science recognises the benefits of these tools that relate to efficiencies, but advocates for the responsible use thereof.
Authors are urged to be aware of the limitations and possible biases of these tools. Irrespective of the tool used or the context thereof, authors alone remain fully responsible for the scientific integrity of their submissions, including for any breach in publishing ethics, such as copyright infringements.
This policy guides the use of such tools pertaining to submissions to the South African Journal of Science. This policy is informed by the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Authors
All authors are fully responsible for the originality, validity, and integrity of the content of their manuscript. Authors submitting manuscripts to the South African Journal of Science attest in the Author Declaration and Publishing Agreement, inter alia, that the manuscript is their original work and does not contain any unlawful content and does not infringe any existing third-party copyright, moral right or other intellectual property rights; and that the work of others has been appropriately attributed. As such, AI-generated content will not be considered for publication. Any submission found to include AI-generated content will be declined [or retracted if already published] and the Journal’s Policy on Publishing Ethics will come into effect.
The above mandate notwithstanding, AI and large language models may be used to edit descriptive (non-data) images, revise and edit writing, and seek and summate existing literature. Such use and the extent thereof must be declared at the time of submission in the cover letter and detailed in the Methods. The declaration of such a use should include the name, version, and manufacturer of the tool used, and the date on which it was accessed, for example:
(Chat GTP 3.5, Version 28 August 2023, Open AI, accessed 16 September 2023)
The ‘prompt’ or plain-language instruction entered in the tool should also be provided, either in the Methods section of the manuscript or as supplementary material to the manuscript.
Where AI tools or large language models have been used, for example, in the conception and design of a study, editing of non-data images, or in editing or revising the writing, such contributions do not meet the criteria for authorship.
The use of tools specifically for spelling and grammar checks, similarity checking, and reference management is fully permitted and does not need to be disclosed.
Reviewers
Reviewers are responsible for the content of their review reports and for adhering to the Confidentiality Policy. AI-generated review reports will not be considered. All submitted manuscripts and correspondence with the Editorial Office should be treated as confidential and not shared in any way. Uploading any part of a manuscript into a large language model or similar tool is a violation of our Confidentiality Policy.
Reviewers who use an AI tool as a resource for peer review, in a way that does not violate the Confidentiality Policy, must disclose and detail this use in the review form and provide the name, version, and manufacturer of the tool used as well as the prompt provided.
Editors
A similarity check is performed on submitted manuscripts that undergo peer review.
The Journal does not use any tools to replace the work of peer reviewers in the evaluation of manuscripts, and editors of the South African Journal of Science do not use AI-based tools in the writing of their decision letters.
The table summarises these stipulations as they may be applicable to authors:
|
Example |
AI can be used |
Use must be disclosed |
|
Writing/generating any part of a manuscript e.g. "Write 3000 words on [specific topic], covering key concepts, recent developments, methodologies, and potential future directions." e.g. “Write an Introduction to the below text and add key references.” |
No |
n/a |
|
Creating images |
No |
n/a |
|
Modifying data images, e.g. gel images, micrographs |
No |
n/a |
|
Conception and design of study e.g. “Evaluate this study protocol to identify possible confounding factors.” |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Editing, translating and summarising papers or large sections of writing e.g. “Provide recommendations to improve readability of the text.” e.g. “Edit the text to reduce to 250 words while preserving content, intention and clarity.” |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Editing non-data images |
Yes |
Yes |
|
Grammar checking and copyediting tools |
Yes |
No |
|
Similarity checking tools |
Yes |
No |
|
Reference managers |
Yes |
No |
The use of AI tools in scholarly publishing is expected to evolve, and this policy will be revised as needed.
We welcome feedback on this policy from all users. Send your feedback to sajs@assaf.org.za
Revised March 2024
Changes in authorship
Changes in authorship constitute a significant change and it is strongly advised that authors clarify the authorship of their manuscripts, including the order of the authors’ names, before submission.
Changes to authorship after submission require approval from the Editor-in-Chief.
To request changes in authorship, send a letter by email to the Editor-in-Chief or publisher which includes:
- A description of the change
- The reason for the change
- The requested final author list
The letter should be signed by all parties and the email through which the letter is sent should be copied to all parties. The email should also include a new Author Declaration and Publishing Agreement signed by all final authors.
Requests for changes will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief in line with the authorship guidelines.
In order to come to a fair decision, we may approach any of the authors as well as their institutions for more information on the requested change. However, please note that it is not the responsibility of the Editors and Publisher to arbitrate authorship disputes; please consult your institutional policies in such cases.
Note: Approved changes post-publication will also necessitate a correction (see Corrections Policy).
Responses and rebuttals
We welcome formal responses on articles published in the Journal that advance a constructive scholarly discourse.
Responses to an article must be submitted within 30 days of the publication of the article and should generally be submitted for consideration as a Commentary. Responses, as for all Commentaries, will be subject to an external assessment.
Responses accepted for publication will be shared with the author(s) of the original article, who will be invited to submit a rebuttal to the response. Rebuttals will also be subject to external assessment. Responses and rebuttals will, as far as possible, be published in the same issue and will receive priority publication.
We will consider only one response from the same author or group of authors on a specific published article. Response to a rebuttal in the form of a rejoinder will be considered only if deemed necessary by the Editor-in-Chief.
The purpose and tone of a response must be constructive and collegial; any critique must be directed at the content of the article and not at the author(s) of the article. Responses that contain libellous or defamatory statements will not be considered.
If deemed appropriate, we will initiate a correction or retraction of the published article.
Whilst we welcome responses on articles published in our Journal, we will, in certain circumstances, also consider responses to research articles published elsewhere, provided they are within the scope of the Journal; please liaise with the Editor-in-Chief before submitting such a response.
This policy and related procedures followed are informed by the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE): COPE Council. COPE Flowcharts and infographics – Handling of post-publication critiques. https://doi.org/10.24318/o1VgCAih
Corrections policy
Corrections to articles published in the South African Journal of Science
A published article forms part of the published record and will not be altered or removed (see the Article Retraction Policy).
Major corrections
A correction will be published if a published article contains a significant error that affects, for example, the accuracy of the article. Corrections are published as either Errata or Corrigenda. Both Errata and Corrigenda are published at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. An Erratum or Corrigendum will be linked to the original article online. The publication of a correction will be indicated in the article title, e.g. ‘(with corrigendum)’, and on the article landing page and downloaded PDFs and EPUBs via the CrossMark widget.
Errata
An Erratum is the correction of an error introduced by the Journal during editing or production. The Author will be given an opportunity to approve an Erratum before publication.
Corrigenda
A Corrigendum is the correction of an error made by the author/s.
Minor corrections
Obvious typographical errors will generally not be corrected. Other minor errors may be corrected at the discretion of the Editor-in-Chief. In the case of minor corrections, an updated version of the article will be published alongside the original version. As readers do not need to be alerted to minor changes, the Crossmark status will reflect as ‘Current’.
Plagiarism policy
A definition of plagiarism is included in the Guidelines for Authors and authors are referred to this policy for the consequences of an offence of this nature. All cases of suspected or alleged plagiarism will be considered seriously and on an individual basis.
The South African Journal of Science is a member of Crossref Similarity Check. Manuscripts submitted for consideration for publication will be scanned for potential plagiarism before undergoing peer review to verify their originality. Similarity reports will be reviewed on an individual basis.
Submitted manuscripts
- Suspected plagiarism in a submitted manuscript can be brought to the attention of the Editor-in-Chief either through the similarity report of the plagiarism detection scan or through a Reviewer of the manuscript.
- When a similarity report is indicative of a potential offence, the report and manuscript will be examined by the Editor-in-Chief to determine whether or not material has been plagiarised and, if so, the extent of the plagiarism.
- When suspected plagiarism is reported to the Editorial Office, the report will be acknowledged and all relevant documentation/evidence will be retrieved and examined by the Editor-in-Chief, in conjunction with the relevant Associate Editor, to determine whether or not material has been plagiarised and, if so, the extent of the plagiarism.
- If material has been plagiarised, the corresponding author will be informed by the Editor-in-Chief that the manuscript is rejected on these grounds.
- If the extent of the plagiarism is minor and the Editor-in-Chief determines that the author/s did not intend to plagiarise, no further action will be taken. If the plagiarism is extensive or admitted to, the author/s’ institution/s and funding bodies will be informed of the offence (the submitted and plagiarised material will be sent to them) by the Editor-in-Chief. Authors will be notified by the Editor-in-Chief that their institution/s will be informed and that they will be banned from submitting to the South African Journal of Science in the future.
- The reader or Reviewer reporting the suspected plagiarism will be informed of the outcome of the investigation.
Published articles
- When suspected plagiarism is reported to the Editorial Office, the report will be acknowledged and all relevant documentation/evidence will be retrieved and examined by the Editor-in-Chief, in conjunction with the relevant Associate Editor, to determine whether or not material has been plagiarised and, if so, the extent of the plagiarism.
- If material has been plagiarised, the corresponding author will be informed by the Editor-in-Chief and questioned.
- If the extent of the plagiarism is minor and the Editor-in-Chief determines that the author/s did not intend to plagiarise, a statement indicating the plagiarised material and appropriate reference will be published online and the article online will be linked to the statement and vice versa.
- If the plagiarism is extensive or admitted to, the article will be retracted (see Article Retraction Policy) and a statement published acknowledging the original author/s.
- The author/s’ institution/s and funding bodies will be informed of the offence (submitted and plagiarised material will be sent to them) by the Editor-in-Chief. Authors will be notified by the Editor-in-Chief that the relevant institution/s will be informed and that they will be banned from submitting to the South African Journal of Science in the future.
- The original author/s and publisher will also be informed of the offence.
- The reader or Reviewer reporting the suspected plagiarism will be informed of the outcome of the investigation.
Article retraction policy
Published articles should remain extant and intact. However, under exceptional circumstances involving plagiarism (see Plagiarism Policy) and redundant publication or data error, articles may need to be retracted, removed or replaced in order to protect the integrity of the literature. The need for a retraction will be determined by the Editor-in-Chief, but may be initiated, in cases of flawed data or conclusions, at the request of the author/s.
To retract an article, a notice of retraction will be published in the next issue. This notice of retraction will:
- include the title and authors of the article, the reason for the retraction and who is retracting the article
- be linked to the article online
- be indicated on the article landing page and downloaded PDFs and EPUBs via the CrossMark widget.
Preprints, digital archiving and preservation policy
Preprints
Authors may post their manuscripts on a recognised preprint server prior to submission. Authors are required to disclose preprints in their cover letter at submission.
Self-archiving
Authors may not deposit any version of their manuscript into a subject or institutional repository until the manuscript has been published. Authors may then deposit the published version in a subject or institutional repository. Authors may deposit the submitted or accepted version on personal web pages before publication, but these versions must be replaced by the published version after publication.
Digital archiving and preservation
The digital content of the Journal is extremely valuable and measures are in place to ensure both its current accessibility and long-term preservation.
On the website
All digital Journal content is stored on a secure server which is backed up frequently. In the event of a problem, the back-up will be restored within 24 hours.
On other sites
South African Journal of Science articles in digital format are archived on SciELO SA and in Sabinet African Journals. All content within SciELO SA and Sabinet are digitally preserved through Portico. Portico is a leading digital preservation service worldwide. The content is preserved as an archival version and is not publically accessible via Portico, but is provided when required under specific conditions, such as discontinuation of the collection or catastrophic failure of the website.
.png){kind=spacer}