These guidelines serve as a framework to foster appropriate inclusion of current and legacy contributors to a given manuscript. They are not meant to be a decision tree nor an all-inclusive list of criteria for inclusion, but rather a thought-provoking set of potential contributor criteria.
To begin, it is strongly encouraged that the lead and senior/corresponding authors have early and continuing discussions on authorship and acknowledgements with the broader pool of potential contributors. In this process keep in mind that there may be contributors who work behind the scenes, e.g., students or technicians, that merit co-authorship.
Based on criteria from Science [https://www.science.org/content/page/science-journals-editorial-policies] and Nature [https://www.nature.com/nature-portfolio/editorial-policies], we list a set of criteria for authorship and acknowledgment.
Please note that exclusion from authorship of individuals who have made author-level contributions is not permitted within CBI, nor is gratuitous authorship.
Authorship and Citation Consideration Criteria:
- All authors are expected to have made substantial contributions to two or more of the following: conceptualization, data curation, formal analysis, funding acquisition, investigation, methodology, project administration, resources, software, supervision, validation, visualization, and writing, reviewing & editing [Ref: htts://credit.nico.org/].
- All authors are expected to have approved the submitted version, as well as any substantially modified version that involves the author’s contribution to the study.
- The lead and senior/corresponding authors are responsible for ensuring the 1) accuracy or integrity of the work, including co-authorship and 2) that any questions related to accuracy or integrity are investigated and resolved.
- Co-authorship is appropriate for the development of unique and nontrivial resources on which the work depends, e.g., GWAS populations, SNP libraries, common gardens, databases, genetic reagents, etc. However, co-authorship is extended only for the first-time a given resource or dataset is used in a CBI publication; subsequent co-authorship should not necessarily be extended to future papers unless there is a direct or new contribution to the manuscript.
- Data products such as SNP libraries, expression data, geolocated populations, etc. should be published as data DOI’s simultaneously with the manuscript submission. These DOI’s should be referenced in subsequent publications. Similarly, software products used in analysis, including version numbers should be referenced via their respective DOI’s.
- Lead and senior/corresponding authors should actively work to avoid citation bias [Ref: https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/32762966/]. CBI publications should cite the most relevant publication internal or external to CBI.
Dispute Resolution:
Most questions related to authorship, including lead authorship, will be decided after consultation by the senior/corresponding author. If there is an unresolvable dispute on co-authorship, the dispute should be sent to Chief Executive Officer who will bring it to a subcommittee of the Leadership Team. The dispute and merits will be investigated, and the dispute will be brought to a resolution, with recommendation going to the CEO for final decision.
Acknowledgment Consideration Criteria:
Individuals who have participated in generation of the work/reagents/resources but who do not meet the criteria for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments section with a brief indication of the nature of their contribution.
__________
All CBI publication should include the standard CBI acknowledgment statement in the acknowledgments:
“This material is based upon work at the Center for Bioenergy Innovation supported by the U.S. Department of Energy, Office of Science, Biological and Environmental Research under Contract Number ERKP886”.
If you have used JGI for DNA/RNA sequencing or DNA synthesis please include this acknowledgment:
“The sequencing work was conducted by the U.S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, a DOE Office of Science User Facility, is supported by the Office of Science of the U.S. Department of Energy operated under Contract No. DE-AC02-05CH11231.”
CBI Predatory Journal Considerations
Recently a concern was raised on the increasing proliferation of “predatory journals.” These may be defined as “pay to publish with minimal editorial scrutiny.” CBI wanted to increase our collective awareness of this issue. Similarly, there are “predatory conferences” which seek to use your reputation to bolster their attendance and profits. Some of these even list researchers as editors, organizers or “invited” speakers without their awareness or permission.
As you consider where to submit your research, consider the journal’s listing in major databases (e.g., WebSci, Scopus) and impact factor of the journals. For new journals, consider the publisher, the recent publications, and how you heard of the journal or conference (i.e. an unsolicited email).
If unsure, consult with your coauthors and colleagues. We trust your judgment on this issue. If you wish to investigate more, here are some reputable links.
- Avoid PREDATORY Journals – Where (and Where Not) to Publish Your Work – LibGuides at Old Dominion University (odu.edu)
- Predatory Journals: What They Are and How to Avoid Them – PMC (nih.gov)
- Predatory Journals & Conferences | Idaho State University (isu.edu)
- Predatory journals entrap unsuspecting scientists. Here’s how universities can support researchers (nature.com)
- Identify trusted publishers for your research • Think. Check. Submit. (thinkchecksubmit.org)