AGU requires that the underlying data needed to understand, evaluate, and build upon the reported research be available at the time of peer review and publication. For more information and guidance, visit the Data and Software for Authors page.

Code and Data Statements All data used in the analysis must be available to any researcher for purposes of reproducing or extending the analysis. Data must be available in the paper or deposited in a community special-purpose repository or a general-purpose repository such as Dryad (see Data and Code Deposition). Exceptional circumstances requiring special treatment, such as protection of personal privacy or purchase of datasets from third-party sources, should be discussed with the editor as early as possible (no later than at the manuscript revision stage) and spelled out explicitly in the acknowledgments. Problems in obtaining access to published data are taken seriously by the Science journals and can be reported at science_data@aaas.org.

Analytic methods (code) transparency In general, all computer code central to the findings being reported should be available to readers to ensure reproducibility. If the software used is commercially available or the source code is already publicly archived, it should be referenced in an appropriately formatted citation (with the version included, if necessary for accurate replication). Author-written source code that is not yet publicly available should be archived in a permanent public repository prior to publication and likewise cited (see Data and Code Deposition). In exceptional cases where for example, security concerns, legal restrictions, or proprietary hardware preclude sharing of custom code, an alternate means of ensuring reproducibility must be arranged with the editor. Our preferred option in such exceptional cases is for the Materials and methods section to include pseudocode that fully clarifies the underlying algorithms; this pseudocode will be subject to peer review and may require further elaboration in accord with reviewers’ feedback. As with data, the reason(s) for the code restrictions in these special cases should be explained clearly in the acknowledgments.

A condition of publication in a Nature Portfolio journal is that authors are required to make materials, data, code, and associated protocols promptly available to readers without undue qualifications. Any restrictions on the availability of materials or information must be disclosed to the editors at the time of submission. Any restrictions must also be disclosed in the submitted manuscript. Authors of research articles in the life sciences, behavio& social sciences and ecology, evolution & environmental sciences are required to provide details about elements of experimental and analytical design that are frequently poorly reported in a reporting summary that will be made available to editors and reviewers during manuscript assessment. The reporting summary will be published with all accepted manuscripts.

Nature journals undertake peer review of custom code or mathematical algorithm, and software, when it is central to the manuscript. For code/algorithm peer review, we require sharing of code/algorithm during the peer review process with editors and reviewers and inclusion of a Code Availability section in the manuscript upon publication. Journals offer an optional free service to support authors in sharing their code for peer review and publication via Code Ocean.

“Frontiers is a gold open access publisher. At the point of publication, all articles from our portfolio of journals are immediately and permanently accessible online free of charge. Frontiers’ articles, Research Topics, and ebooks are published under the CC-BY license, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original authors and the source are credited.G old open access publishing services, which include end-to-end support – from research integrity and peer review, through to innovations in technology and artificial intelligence as well as global dissemination – are supported through Article Processing Charges (APCs). APCs enable the long-term stability of our program, and facilitate equal opportunity to seek, share and create knowledge that benefits all society without restriction. Quality is maintained through rigorous peer review and support through technological innovations, such as our Artificial Intelligence Review Assistant (AIRA).Open access to the results of publicly funded research is of huge value, offering significant social and economic benefits. The open access publishing model, defined by the Berlin Agreement in 2003, improves the pace, efficiency, and value of research to society. By its very nature, it improves the visibility of authors’ work and enables better scholarly exchange, and therefore, the potential impact of that work.By eliminating the barriers that block the free distribution of knowledge, open access enables scientists to collaborate better, innovate faster, and deliver the solutions we need for healthy lives on a healthy planet.”

Fish and Fisheries expects that data supporting the results in the paper will be archived in an appropriate public repository. Authors are required to provide a data availability statement to describe the availability or the absence of shared data. When data have been shared, authors are required to include in their data availability statement a link to the repository they have used, and to cite the data they have shared. Whenever possible the scripts and other artefacts used to generate the analyses presented in the paper should also be publicly archived. If sharing data compromises ethical standards or legal requirements then authors are not expected to share it.

To foster transparency, you are required to state the availability of any data at submission. Ensuring data is available may be a requirement of your funding body or institution. If your data is unavailable to access or unsuitable to post, you can state the reason why (e.g., your research data includes sensitive or confidential information such as patient data) during the submission process. This statement will appear with your published article on ScienceDirect.

We require supporting data and information, including source code and other digital research materials, to be made available at the time of submission so that reviewers and Data Editors can assess your work and confirm that the archive is useful and complete. This is in line with our policies to promote greater openness in scientific research and to allow, as well as encourage, other researchers to perform full replications of published studies. For more information please refer to our data sharing policies. In order to make it as easy as possible to comply with this policy, the Proceedings B submission system is fully integrated with the Dryad data repository. We also cover the cost of submitting data to Dryad.

Where ethically feasible, Integrative & Comparative Biology encourages authors to make all data and software code on which the conclusions of the paper rely available to readers. Data availability allows verification of results, re- and meta-analysis, and allows other researchers to build on existing results without duplicating effort unnecessarily.

We suggest that summary data are presented in the main manuscript with more detailed information available as additional supporting files (Supplementary Data), or deposited in a public repository whenever possible. For information on general repositories for all data types, please see a list of recommended repositories by subject area.

Where specialised, subject-specific public repositories are available, we encourage authors to deposit data in these facilities and make the availability of data clear in the published paper. Otherwise, authors can upload their datasets as ‘supplementary data’ with their paper for publication. Where neither of these options is feasible, authors are required to make data available upon reasonable request.

Where ethically feasible, the Journal strongly encourages authors to make all data and software code on which the conclusions of the paper rely available to readers. Whenever possible, data should be presented in the main manuscript or additional supporting files or deposited in a public repository. Visit OUP’s Research data page for information on general repositories for all data types, and resources for selecting repositories by subject area. When data and software underlying the research article are available in an online source, authors should include a full citation in their reference list. For details of the minimum information to be included in data and software citations see the OUP guidance on citing research data and software.

All DNA sequence data must be submitted to GenBank before the paper can be published. In addition, all alignments (regardless of whether or not they include insertion/deletion events or manual adjustments) must be submitted to GenBank, Dryad, TreeBASE, or included as Supplementary Data to be archived with the published manuscript. Museum catalog numbers for all voucher specimens (including associated tissue) examined must be included in the manuscript (in an Appendix if numerous). Any newly collected raw qualitative or quantitative morphological data must be submitted as either Supplementary Data or deposited to a third-party public repository. Summary statistics, e.g., means, must also include sample sizes, standard deviations, range, etc., to facilitate future analyses.

Molecular Ecology Resources supports open research, therefore as a condition for publication, requires that the data supporting the results in the paper will be archived in an appropriate public repository. Authors are required to adhere to the guidelines outlined in this viewpoint article when archiving their data.

Upon submission, the journal requires authors to provide all data, metadata and code for review by editors and referees. A data accessibility statement will be required during submission, which clearly outlines where data has been deposited. Authors are encouraged to use Private for Peer Review features, if offered by the repository, for the review process. At acceptance, data must be formally archived and the Data Accessibility Statement completed with permanent links to all data from the manuscript.