- Focus and Scope
- Section Policies
- Peer Review Process
- Publication Frequency
- Open Access Policy
- Archiving
- Publication Ethic
- Screening for Plagiarism
- Digital Archiving
- Statistic Download Article
- Review Guidelines
- Article Retraction
- Article Malpractice
- Competing Interest
- Generative AI Policies
Focus and Scope
Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia (Indonesian Journal of Plant Protection, Indones. J. Plant Prot.) publishes research on pests and diseases of agricultural crops and commodities, in the field of invertebrate and vertebrate pests, plant pathology, weed science, and their management, such as:
1. Acarology
2. Agronomy
3. Bacteriology
4. Climatology
5. Entomology
6. Environmental Chemistry
7. Integrated Pest Management
8. Mycology
9. Microbiology
10. Nematology
11. Pesticide Toxicology
12. Pest Vertebrate
13. Plant Pest and Disease Ecology
14. Virology
Section Policies
Review Articles
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Research Articles
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Short Note
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Short Communication
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Obituary
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
Peer Review Process
Publication Frequency
Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia is published every July and December each year.
Open Access Policy
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
Archiving
This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...
Publication Ethic
The publication of an article in Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia supports and embodies the scientific method. Therefore, all parties involved in the publishing process (the journal editors, peer reviewers, authors, the publisher, and society) must agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior referring to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
Duties of Authors
- Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the work and its significance, as well as objective discussion. Data must be presented accurately in the manuscript. The manuscript must contain detailed information and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constituting unethical behavior are unacceptable.
Data Access and Retention: Authors are asked to provide raw data in connection with the manuscript for editorial review. The raw data must be prepared to provide public access (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) if necessary and practicable. Such data must be retained for a reasonable time after publication.
- Originality and Plagiarism: The authors must ensure that they have written entirely original works. If the authors used the work and/or words of others, those must be appropriately cited or quoted.
Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication: An author must avoid publishing a manuscript that has been published in another primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
- Acknowledgement of Sources:
Proper acknowledgement of the work of others must always be given. Authors must cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work and avoid unnecessary self-citation and unrelated publications. - Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, interpretation of the reported study, or funding acquisition. Persons who have participated but are not listed as authors must be acknowledged. The corresponding author should ensure that all possible co-authors are included in the manuscript. All authors must approve the manuscript before submitting it to the journal.
- Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. - Fundamental errors in published works:
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. - Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must identify these in the manuscript.
Duties of Editors
- Fair Play: An editor at any time evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, norms, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
- Confidentiality:
The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest:
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the express written consent of the author.- Publication Decisions: The editorial board is responsible for deciding which of the submitted articles should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.
- Review of Manuscripts: The editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and indicate which parts of the journal are reviewed. The editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest.
Duties of Reviewers
- Contribution to Editorial Decisions:Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions. Editorial communications with the author may assist the author in improving the manuscript.
- Promptness: Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse themselves from the review process.
- Standards of Objectivity: Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
- Confidentiality:
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
- Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
- Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers should identify relevant published works that have not been listed by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Screening for Plagiarism
The manuscript that submited into this journal will be screened for plagiarism using Aimos 2.0 and DupliChecker
Digital Archiving
This journal ulitilize the Indonesian Publication Index (IPI) system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.
Statistic Download Article
Statistic download using ALM Plugin, statistic will show on every article page.
ex. https://jurnal.ugm.ac.id/jpti/article/view/16012
Review Guidelines
Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review
- Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is the good reason.
- Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know:a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
- Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
- Ready? Read through entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequately or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or resulted so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
- What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound science reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.
Full Review Process of Manuscript
- Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organisation?
- Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
- Eliminated/expanded/added?
- Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
- Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
- Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
- Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.
Article Retraction
Articles may be retracted for the following reasons:
A significant error invalidates the conclusions, whether due to misconduct* (e.g., data fabrication) or honest mistakes (e.g., misinterpretation or experimental errors), or a major conflict of interest affecting research interpretation).
Findings have been published elsewhere without proper reference, permission, or justification (redundant publication).
Ethical issues like plagiarism (using others' work without proper credit) or manipulation of authorship that compromise research integrity.
Reports of unethical research practices.
Evidence of systematic manipulation of the publishing process.
*Article misconduct is stated based on the Committee on Publication Ethics.
Retracted articles will be clearly marked as "retracted," and a PDF version will remain accessible, containing a retraction statement linked to the original article. This statement typically indicates the author's position regarding the retraction.
Removals may be either temporary or permanent, and bibliographic information, including the title and author, will be preserved along with an explanation for the removal. This approach ensures transparency and maintains the integrity of the scholarly record.
Article Malpractice
Plagiarism occurs when large sections of text are copied and pasted without proper attribution, and such manuscripts will be rejected by Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia. Additionally, when paraphrasing or summarizing others' work, it's essential to provide clear citations. Reusing text from your own previous publications is known as self-plagiarism, and it also requires careful attribution. Always cite sources appropriately to avoid misleading readers about the originality of your contributions.
Competing Interest
A potential conflict of interest arises when an investigator, author, editor, or reviewer possesses a financial or personal interest that could compromise their objectivity or lead to biased actions. These interests may include personal financial gains, affiliations with organizations, or other relationships that could influence decision-making. Recognizing and disclosing these potential conflicts is crucial for ensuring transparency and maintaining the integrity of the research process and the publication of findings.
Competing interests typically arise from financial relationships, which can be classified as follows:
● Direct: This includes jobs, stock ownership, grants, and patents.
● Indirect: This consists of honoraria, consultancies for sponsoring organizations, mutual fund ownership, and paid expert testimony.
Undeclared financial interests can seriously undermine the credibility of the journal, the authors, and the scientific research itself. For instance, an investigator who owns stock in a pharmaceutical company that is funding the research may present a conflict of interest.
Competing interests may arise from various factors, including personal relationships, academic rivalries, and a profound dedication to intellectual pursuits.
Not all relationships indicate a true conflict of interest; conflicts can be either potential or actual. Some factors to consider include whether a person's connection with the organization affects their ability to conduct the research or write the paper without bias, and whether revealing this relationship later might lead a reasonable reader to feel deceived or misled.
It's important to fully disclose any relationships that may create a potential conflict of interest, even if the individual feels it does not affect their judgment. Such disclosures should be reported to the institution's ethics committee as well as to the journal editor when submitting a paper. Most publishers require that these disclosures be included in a cover letter and/or as a footnote in the manuscript.
A journal may use disclosures as a basis for making editorial decisions and will publish these disclosures as they can be important for readers when evaluating the manuscript. Similarly, the journal may choose not to publish a manuscript based on the declared conflict of interest.
Generative AI Policies
For Authors
- When authors engage with generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the writing process, it is imperative that these tools are employed solely to enhance the readability and language of the work. The implementation of such technologies must occur under human oversight and control. Authors are encouraged to conduct thorough reviews and edits of the generated content, as AI may produce outputs that, while appearing authoritative, can also be incorrect, incomplete, or biased. Ultimately, authors retain full responsibility and accountability for the integrity of their work.
- Authors are required to disclose the utilization of artificial intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies within their manuscripts. A statement reflecting this usage will be included in the final published work. This disclosure enhances transparency and fosters trust among authors, readers, reviewers, editors, and contributors, while also ensuring adherence to the terms of use associated with the relevant tools or technologies.
- Authors are encouraged to maintain clarity regarding authorship by ensuring that AI or AI-assisted technologies are not listed as authors or co-authors, nor cited as such. Authorship represents a set of responsibilities and tasks that are uniquely attributed to individuals. Each author or co-author plays a vital role in addressing any concerns related to the accuracy and integrity of the work. Furthermore, authorship also entails the important responsibility of approving the final version of the work and consenting to its submission. This approach promotes accountability and ensures the highest standards of research quality.
- The use of generative AI or AI-assisted tools to create or modify images in submitted manuscripts is not allowed. This includes enhancing, obscuring, moving, removing, or adding features to images or figures (adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are acceptable only if they do not obscure or eliminate any original information). The only exception is if AI or AI-assisted tools are essential or necessarily used to the research design or methods. If used, this must be clearly described in the m ethods section, including the tool or model's name, version numbers, and manufacturer, along with compliance to the software's usage policies and proper content attribution. Authors may be asked to provide original versions of images or raw images used for editorial review. Generative AI or AI-assisted tools cannot be used for creating artwork such as graphical abstracts. However, for cover art, using generative AI is allowed with prior permission from the journal editor and publisher, provided all rights are cleared and proper attribution is given.
- The use of AI technologies for data analysis or classification is acceptable and should be treated like any other research tool. The method and details of how AI was applied must be clearly described in the Materials and Methods section. When appropriate, AI techniques such as machine learning or regression analysis may be used to meet research objectives.
For Reviewers
The use of generative AI and AI-assisted technologies in the journal peer-review process
- When a researcher is invited to review another researcher's paper, it is essential to treat the manuscript as a confidential document. Reviewers must not upload any part of the submitted manuscript into a generative AI tool, as doing so may violate the authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights. Additionally, if the paper contains personally identifiable information, this may also infringe on data privacy rights.
- This requirement for confidentiality applies to the peer review report, as it may include sensitive information about both the manuscript and the authors. Therefore, reviewers should refrain from uploading their peer review reports to any AI tool, even if the intention is solely to enhance language and readability.
- Peer review is a fundamental part of the scientific ecosystem, and Jurnal Perlindungan Tanaman Indonesia is committed to maintaining the highest standards of integrity throughout this process. Reviewing a scientific manuscript comes with responsibilities that can only be fulfilled by humans. Generative AI or AI-assisted technologies should not be used by reviewers to aid in the scientific review of a paper. This is because the critical thinking and original assessments required for peer review are beyond the capabilities of such technologies, which may produce incorrect, incomplete, or biased conclusions about the manuscript. Ultimately, the reviewer is responsible and accountable for the content of the review report.
For Editors
- A submitted manuscript must be regarded as a confidential document. Editors should not upload any part of a submitted manuscript into a generative AI tool, as doing so may violate the authors' confidentiality and proprietary rights. Additionally, if the manuscript contains personally identifiable information, it could breach data privacy rights.
- The confidentiality requirement applies to the peer review report, as it may include sensitive information about the manuscript and its authors. Therefore, reviewers should refrain from uploading their peer review reports into any AI tool, even if the intention is merely to enhance language and readability.