Post Publication

1. Policy Statement

BIOMA encourages constructive, evidence-based discussion and critical evaluation of articles published in the journal. In accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices, the journal recognises post-publication discussion as an essential mechanism for maintaining scientific accuracy, transparency, and research integrity.

Discussions may address the validity of research methods, data interpretation, reproducibility, and the scientific implications of published findings. In biology, these discussions may include species identification, biodiversity assessments, ecological patterns, experimental procedures, statistical analyses, and molecular evidence.

2. Scope and Submission

Readers and researchers may submit comments, questions, or scientific critiques through a Letter to the Editor or the journal’s designated submission channel. Submissions must identify the article concerned and present clear, relevant arguments supported by appropriate evidence and references.

BIOMA welcomes discussions concerning research methodology, data quality, statistical analysis, biological classification, ecological interpretation, reproducibility, and research ethics. All submissions must maintain professional language, avoid personal attacks, and comply with the journal’s publication ethics policies.

3. Editorial Assessment

All submissions are subject to editorial assessment for scientific relevance, accuracy, originality, supporting evidence, and compliance with publication ethics. The editor may request revisions, reject submissions that lack substantive scientific merit, or seek independent expert review when specialised evaluation is required.

The original article’s authors will normally be invited to respond to substantive criticisms. Accepted discussions and responses may be published together or linked to the original article to facilitate transparent scholarly dialogue.

4. Research Integrity and Corrections

Concerns involving potential errors, unreliable data, inappropriate image manipulation, incorrect biological identification, or possible research misconduct will be assessed in accordance with BIOMA’s publication ethics and correction policies.

Depending on the evidence and severity of the concern, the journal may issue a correction, an Expression of Concern, or a retraction. Where necessary, BIOMA may consult independent experts or contact the relevant research institution. Scientific disagreement alone does not constitute evidence of research misconduct.

5. Publication and Ethical Conduct

Published discussions and author responses will be linked to the original article where feasible. All participants are expected to uphold academic integrity, objectivity, confidentiality, and respectful scientific communication. Editorial decisions will remain independent of personal, institutional, or commercial interests.

Readers wishing to raise concerns should contact the BIOMA Editorial Office through the journal’s official communication channels and provide relevant supporting information.

This policy follows COPE’s guidance on post-publication discussion and corrections and should be read alongside BIOMA’s policies on Research and Publication Misconduct, Corrections and Retractions, and Conflict of Interest.