Purpose and Scope
This policy applies to research involving live vertebrate animals and other animals subject to applicable ethical, legal, institutional, or journal requirements. It covers experimental procedures, husbandry-related interventions, field studies, and other research contexts in which animal welfare may be affected.
Authors must comply with applicable legislation, institutional requirements, ethical approvals, and discipline-specific standards in the jurisdiction where the work was conducted.
Ethical Review and Authorization
Research requiring approval by an animal ethics committee, institutional animal care and use committee, or equivalent body should receive appropriate authorization before the work begins. Manuscripts should identify the approving body and relevant approval information where required.
If formal review was not required, authors should be prepared to explain the ethical and regulatory basis for that determination.
Scientific Justification and the 3Rs
Animal use should be scientifically justified and should consider replacement of animal methods where suitable alternatives exist, reduction in the number of animals consistent with valid scientific design, and refinement of procedures to minimize pain, distress, and lasting harm.
Application of the 3Rs should be meaningful rather than formulaic and should be considered alongside the scientific validity of the study.
Animal Welfare and Humane Procedures
Housing, handling, anesthesia, analgesia, monitoring, endpoints, euthanasia, and other welfare-related procedures should be appropriate to the species, study, and applicable standards. Avoidable suffering is inconsistent with responsible research.
Where severe procedures are scientifically claimed to be necessary, the ethical justification and welfare safeguards should be sufficiently clear for editorial assessment.
Study Design and Reporting
Poorly designed animal research can expose animals to harm without producing reliable knowledge. Authors should therefore use appropriate design, randomization, blinding, sample-size reasoning, inclusion and exclusion criteria, and statistical methods where relevant.
Treata journals may require reporting aligned with recognized animal-research reporting frameworks such as ARRIVE, including its essential reporting elements, where appropriate to the journal and article type.
Species, Source and Biological Variables
Manuscripts should report species, strain or stock, sex, age or developmental stage, source, health status, and other characteristics relevant to interpretation. Important biological variables should not be omitted without justification.
Field and wildlife research may require additional permits, conservation safeguards, capture and release procedures, or local approvals.
Images, Data and Record Integrity
Animal images, histology, microscopy, and other visual or quantitative evidence must comply with Treata standards for image and data integrity. Authors should retain appropriate source records and provide supporting information when legitimately requested.
Selective presentation or exclusion of animals or observations should not create a misleading account of the experiment.
Euthanasia, Humane Endpoints and Unexpected Harm
Methods of euthanasia and predefined humane endpoints should comply with applicable standards and should be reported where relevant. Unexpected morbidity, mortality, or adverse welfare events should not be concealed when they materially affect ethical or scientific interpretation.
Editors may request clarification or specialist ethical advice when reported procedures appear inconsistent with accepted welfare expectations.
Editorial Assessment and Concerns
Editors may request approval documents, protocols, permits, welfare information, or clarification when ethical compliance is uncertain. Approval documentation does not prevent further assessment if the reported conduct appears inconsistent with the authorization or fundamental welfare principles.
Serious concerns may be referred to the relevant institution, ethics body, or competent authority while the journal independently considers what editorial action is required.
Post-Publication Action
If significant ethical non-compliance is identified after publication, the journal should assess its effect on the legitimacy and reliability of the work. Depending on severity, a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or other action may be appropriate.
Post-publication action should focus on the scholarly record while recognizing that institutions or authorities may have separate responsibilities for investigation or enforcement.
Journal Implementation and Version Control
This policy is publisher mandatory. Journals may establish stronger species-specific, discipline-specific, reporting, or documentation requirements. Such requirements should be stated in journal instructions.
Material changes should be versioned and preserved.
Version Control
Version 1.0. This page is the canonical publisher-level text for the current version. Material revisions should be versioned and dated, while superseded versions remain identifiable so that historical applicability can be determined.