Purpose and Scope
Scientific images are part of the evidentiary record. This policy applies to photographs, microscopy, gels, blots, scans, radiological images, graphical outputs derived from primary image data, and other visual research material submitted to Treata journals.
The objective is not to prohibit legitimate image processing but to ensure that processing, assembly, annotation, and presentation do not misrepresent the underlying evidence.
Core Principle: Images as Data
Images used as research evidence should be treated with the same expectations of accuracy, provenance, and responsible record keeping as other research data. Authors are responsible for ensuring that figures accurately represent the source material and the analysis described in the manuscript.
Visual attractiveness, compression, or editorial production must never justify alteration that changes the scientific meaning of an image.
Acceptable Processing
Adjustments such as brightness, contrast, color balance, or noise reduction may be acceptable when applied consistently and when they do not selectively obscure, enhance, remove, or fabricate relevant information. Discipline-specific practices may require more detailed reporting.
Any processing that could materially affect interpretation should be described sufficiently for readers and editors to understand what was done.
Assembly, Splicing and Annotation
Composite figures, spliced lanes, merged panels, cropped images, annotations, and rearrangements should be presented transparently. Boundaries or modifications should be indicated where necessary, and figure legends or methods should explain material assembly steps.
Authors should not combine image elements in a way that falsely implies that observations were obtained together or under conditions different from those actually used.
Prohibited or Misleading Manipulation
Fabrication of visual data, duplication presented as distinct observations, selective removal or addition of features, deceptive cloning, undisclosed replacement, or manipulation that changes the apparent result is inconsistent with Treata standards.
An apparent anomaly does not itself establish intentional manipulation. Assessment should distinguish acquisition artifacts, legitimate processing, production errors, honest mistakes, and deliberate falsification.
Source Files and Record Retention
Authors should retain original or appropriately preserved source image files and relevant metadata for a period consistent with institutional, funder, legal, and disciplinary requirements. Editors may request source files when necessary to evaluate a figure or respond to a credible concern.
Source files should be supplied in a form that permits meaningful assessment while respecting legitimate privacy, security, or proprietary restrictions.
Screening and Automated Analysis
Treata journals may use visual inspection, forensic tools, duplication detection, metadata review, or other screening methods. Such outputs are signals for expert assessment and must not be treated as automatic proof of manipulation.
Editors should consider image type, acquisition method, compression, transformations, figure preparation, and the authors’ explanation before reaching conclusions.
AI-Generated and AI-Modified Images
Use of generative or transformative AI in research images must comply with the journal’s scientific, ethical, disclosure, and evidentiary requirements. AI-generated illustrative material should not be represented as observed experimental or clinical evidence.
Where AI materially modifies or generates visual content, authors remain responsible for accuracy, rights, privacy, provenance, and required disclosure. Additional restrictions may apply to clinical or participant images.
Concerns and Editorial Response
When an image concern arises, editors may request original files, replicate images, metadata, laboratory records, methodological clarification, or specialist assessment. Authors should have an appropriate opportunity to explain the issue.
If the concern suggests broader fabrication or falsification, the matter may be escalated under the Research Misconduct policy and, where necessary, to the relevant institution or competent body.
Post-Publication Action and Journal Implementation
Published image errors that do not invalidate the work may be corrected transparently when a reliable replacement and explanation are available. If manipulated or unreliable images materially undermine the article’s findings, an expression of concern or retraction may be appropriate.
This policy is publisher mandatory. Journals may establish additional discipline-specific image standards and source-file requirements. Material policy 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.