Ethical Principles and Publication Policy


Turkish journal of Forestry published four times a year (March, June, September and December)


All the research articles are reviewed at least 2 reviewers. During this evaluation, Turkish journal of Forestry prefers to follow the “Double-Blind Review” which means both the reviewers and authors cannot see their information on the manuscript file. After completing review process, final decision is given by the editor-in-chief and the subject editor by considering the comments of the reviewers


This is an open access journal which means that all content is freely available without charge to the user or his/her institution. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author. This is an accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.


After completing the review process, all the accepted manuscripts are published without requiring any manuscript submission and/or processing charges.


Turkish Journal of Forestry accepts the original “Research Articles” and “Reviews” in both English and Turkish.


The basic principles of our journal's publication policy are to be objective, honest, open and impartial at all stages of research and publication and to act in accordance with ethical rules. For editors, authors and peer reviewers, our journal have prepared a guideline that contains the code of ethics. The Turkish journal of forestry accepts general principles of publication of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Depending on COPE’s recommendations and general publication requirements, editors, authors and peer reviewers should have the following responsibilities:

Editors' Responsibilities

The editors should make an impartial assessment of all articles proposed for publication without discrimination of race, religion, gender, nationality, etc.
Editors should assume responsibility for every article published or unpublished. In case of rejection of the manuscripts,he/she should communicate with the author and explain the reasons clearly.
Editors should check the articles in terms of scientific ethics and reject the article for unethical behavior.
Editors should submit the manuscripts that they deem appropriate to the peer reviewers (at least two peer reviewers) for scientific evaluation, hiding the author's information. When selecting an peer reviewer, he/she should make an objective choice among scientists who are independent of each other and who are suitable for their area of expertise.
Editors should filter their peer reviews from a scientific point of view and consider that an objective evaluation has been carried out. It should not take into account inconsistent and non-objective assessments and should not give these peer reviewers an opportunity to reassess.
Editors should consider a consistent and evidence-critical critique of a previously published article and make the necessary warnings.
Editors should be open and transparent in communicating with the author. The peer reviewer must communicate his evaluations by hiding the names of the peer reviewers and explaining his / her expectations from the author.
Editors should comply with the basic principles of journal publication policy.

Authors' responsibilities

Authors should comply with ethical principles such as plagiarism, not making slicing, and acting in accordance with applicable laws and regulations.
Authors should present their scientific publications in an open, honest and non-fabrication, falsification and inappropriate data manipulation.
Authors should make necessary references in their scientific publications.
Authors should try to define their methods clearly so that their findings can be confirmed by others.
The published works of the authors should be original and not published elsewhere.
Authors should assume responsibility for their published work together.
Authors should be determined by considering the contribution of individuals to the study. The “ghost” who contributed to the study but not reported, the “guest” who did not make a significant contribution but increased the chances of being published and the “gift” whose contribution was very mild should not be on the author list.
Authors should report to the editor that there are no conflicts of interest or potential conflicts of interest to be accepted in the published article.

Peer reviewers’ Responsibilities

If the peer reviewers do not have sufficient information to judge the manuscript submitted for scientific evaluation, they should return the manuscript without evaluation.
Peer reviewers should act impartially, honestly and objectively.
Peer reviewers should alert the editor when they find a conflict of interest and send the article back.
Peer reviewers should pay attention to confidentiality during the evaluation process and after the publication of the article.
Peer reviewers should not make any personal criticisms, should state their criticisms clearly and in detail, and provide information to the editor to assist in this matter.
Peer reviewers should investigate the authenticity of the article they are reviewing.
Peer reviewers should check the compliance of the manuscript with scientific ethical norms.
Peer reviewers should provide information to the editor when the scientific evaluation process identifies a situation that may have a negative impact on the plant, animal and human health in the method or results of the study.



According to general publication policy of the Turkish journal of Forestry, only the researchers who contributed to the work in a real sense should be considered as an author. Authors should be responsible to disclose all the personal and financial relationships which might bias their work.

Peer Reviewers

Peer Reviewers should be responsible to decline the review process if any substantial conflicts-of-interest exists. In case of any doubt, they should consult to the Editor to make a decision regarding the review process.


Editors should be responsible to manage the review process and have the right of declining any submission in case of any conflict-of-interest. They should not have any direct personal and/or financial conflicts with their assigned manuscripts. They should not be assigned to manuscripts if they are in the author list of them.


As of January 2017, all the submitted articles is evaluated by using the IThenticate® plagiarism detection software. After evaluating the generated similarity report, the editorial board decides to proceed the submission to the review or directly decline it.


Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:

Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the article simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the article with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the article (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their article online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published article (See The Effect of Open Access).


Each accepted manuscript on the Turkish Journal of Forestry gets a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number.