Editorial Policy and Management Manual

1.1. Mission and Vision of the RMF/MJP

1.1.1. Mission

The Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología/Mexican Journal of Phytopathology (RMF/MJP), published by the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. (MSP), has the mission of selecting, evaluating, and disseminating original and unpublished scientific knowledge through high-quality, cutting-edge publications related to plant diseases. The content is distributed under an open-access, bilingual model. The journal seeks to bridge the gap between global laboratory advancements and the practical realities of the agricultural field, with the aim of advancing science in Mexico and Latin America.

1.1.2. Vision

The journal aims to become the leading international scientific publication on plant health for Latin America, consolidating its presence in high-impact indexes and global databases. Its goal is to maintain a multilingual and interactive web platform that serves as a bridge between researchers, technicians, and agricultural decision-makers worldwide.

1.2. Thematic Coverage and Scientific Scope

The RMF/MJP is distinguished by its comprehensive approach to plant health, addressing both the study of diseases and the development of sustainable management alternatives. Its scientific output combines classical phytopathology (taxonomy, etiology, diagnosis, and epidemiology) with cutting-edge applied disciplines (omics, molecular biology, molecular epidemiology, SAR resistance induction, biological control, and bioactive compounds), positioning itself as a bridge between traditional knowledge and emerging technological solutions for plant protection.

1.2.1. Traditional and Cutting-Edge Areas of Knowledge in Phytopathology

The scope of the publications includes rigorous studies focused on:

• Applied Mycology, Bacteriology, Virology, and Nematology: Structural, biological, and phylogenetic analysis of plant pathogens.
• Quantitative epidemiology: Temporal and spatial modeling of disease development under climate change scenarios.
• Biological control and molecular interactions: Mechanisms of action of beneficial bacteria or biostimulants.
  • Institutional example: Articles focused on the use of native strains of Bacillus subtilis or Trichoderma asperellum to curb Fusarium oxysporum wilt in vegetables.

1.2.2. Applied Approach: Solving Health Problems in Agricultural Crops

The journal prioritizes research that offers applicable and sustainable alternatives to phytosanitary crises that decimate agricultural production.

• Example of practical application: Studies on the timely diagnosis and management of anthracnose in avocado (Persea americana) crops or assessments of the severity of root and ear rot in corn. The ultimate goal is to reduce economic losses for primary producers by providing robust experimental support.

1.3. Institutional Affiliation

1.3.1. Institutional Relationship with the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. (MSP)

The RMF/MJP serves as the official and legal vehicle for scientific communication of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. The MSP's general assembly and board of directors appoint and endorse the functions of the Editorial Committee, ensuring that the journal operates independently in its scientific judgments while remaining aligned with the society's overarching objective: to promote and advance phytopathology research in Mexico and Latin America.

1.3.2. Co-funding Mechanisms and Non-Commercial Model

The RMF/MJP operates under a non-profit, solidarity-based co-funding model:

• Society subsidy: The MSP covers the costs of maintaining internet servers, scientific publishing software licenses, and legal representation before indexing agencies.
• Author contributions (non-commercial APC): The fees requested from accepted authors are used entirely to pay for external professional services, including typesetting, bilingual style editing, and Crossref metadata registration. The journal does not distribute commercial profits.

1.4. Author Inclusion and Diversity Policy

1.4.1. Openness to MSP Members and Non-Members

Submission of scientific contributions to the RMF/MJP is open to all:

• Member Authors: They receive the benefits stipulated in the MSP's current bylaws.
• Non-Member Authors: They have exactly the same rights regarding scientific evaluation, response times, and visibility. Membership or payment status with the society never influences—either positively or negatively—the decisions of reviewers or editors.

1.4.2. Guidelines for National and International Authors

The journal actively encourages the submission of manuscripts from institutions worldwide and research centers throughout Mexico. The submission system does not discriminate based on geographic origin, institutional affiliation, or language of origin (Spanish or English), provided that the study meets the scientific quality standards required by the international phytopathology community.

2.1. Open Access Policy

2.1.1. Completely Free Access for Readers and End Users

The RMF/MJP firmly adheres to the Open Access model. All published scientific content is immediately and permanently available to the global community, with no embargo periods.

• No financial barriers: Readers, agricultural producers, students, and scholars can read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the journal's articles free of charge.
• Licensing: Access to digital materials does not require subscriptions, mandatory registration, or pay-per-use fees. The conditions for commercial use or free reuse are specifically regulated under the legal framework of the licenses set forth in this manual (see Chapter 7).

2.2. Frequency and Publication Format

2.2.1. Quarterly Frequency and Continuous Publication Model

The RMF/MJP manages its volumes under a dynamic schedule structured into three four-month periods per year:

• Period I: January–April.
• Period II: May–August.
• Period III: September–December.

The continuous publication process at the RMF/MJP begins with the approval of the document, followed by editing and layout, and finally immediate publication. Each issue is enriched through the open and fluid integration of articles. The DOI is registered immediately upon publication.

2.2.2. Operational Mechanisms of Continuous Publication

To accelerate scientific communication in crop health, the journal employs a continuous publication model.

• End of traditional processes: Manuscripts are not held on waiting lists until a full issue of the journal is completed.
• Immediate publication: Once an individual scientific article successfully completes the stages of peer review, bilingual style editing, layout, and final pagination, it is immediately incorporated into the corresponding volume of the current four-month period in an open-access format.
• Benefits: This system ensures that new findings on epidemiological outbreaks or cutting-edge techniques against agricultural pathogens reach field technicians and researchers more quickly.

2.3. Infrastructure and Technology Platform

2.3.1. Dedicated Website and Editorial Management

Comprehensive document management is carried out exclusively through the journal's website and official email. Web management and editing are handled by specialized staff who are members of the Editorial Board.

• Comprehensive Online Management: The entire editorial process—including receipt of the original manuscript, assignment to the Review Panel, transparent communication with specialist reviewers, submission of revisions, the Editor-in-Chief's final decision, and final layout—takes place via the RMF/MJP platform or official email, while the technological transition currently underway to migrate to a fully digital process is being completed.
• Digital traceability: Submissions or evaluations via email addresses external to the journal or by telephone are not accepted. This ensures a transparent audit trail and the chronological preservation of all relevant files and records.

2.3.2. Dual Interface (Spanish / English)

RMF/MJP has two fully bilingual platforms:

• Dual navigation and interaction: The website provides two fully interchangeable interfaces for users (Spanish and English). This includes everything from navigation menus, guidelines, and editorial policies to the submission system screens for authors and reviewers.
• Metadata Display: Each published article displays its titles, abstracts, and keywords natively in both languages, optimizing visibility in international search engines.

2.4. Identifiers and Metadata

2.4.1. DOI Assignment and Management through Crossref

RMF/MJP is a member of and receives support from the international registration agency Crossref.

• Permanent Identification: Every scientific article that is approved and published on an ongoing basis is mandatorily assigned a unique and unchanging Digital Object Identifier (DOI).
• Metadata Activation: The journal's technical team formally deposits the XML metadata with Crossref immediately after the article goes online. The DOI ensures the stability of academic citations and prevents the loss of links or the appearance of broken web pages when the MSP's servers are restructured.

2.5. Long-Term Digital Preservation Policy

To safeguard the phytopathological intellectual heritage against technological obsolescence, accidental loss of information, or critical server failures, the RMF/MJP uses stable storage formats. Articles are published in highly compatible, standardized digital formats such as PDF and scientific markup XML (under the JATS standard). This prevents setbacks resulting from the long-term obsolescence of commercial software. RMF/MJP is formally indexed in both the SciELO México database and the SciELO Citation Index of Web of Science (WoS). The digital preservation of RMF/MJP is directly supported by the servers of the national collection operated by UNAM (SciELO México), as well as by the backups maintained by the Sociedad Mexicana de Fitopatología A.C. on its official portal. Within SciELO México, when a journal ceases its operations voluntarily, due to financial crises within the publishing institution, or by a decision of the network, its status changes to 'interrupted' or 'concluded'; however, the prior digital record is not deleted. The publications remain active within the SciELO México database. Nevertheless, backed by the solid support of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, founded in 1958, RMF/MJP is guaranteed to maintain its leadership at both the national and regional levels.

2.6. Self-Archiving and Repository Policy

The RMF/MJP actively encourages the institutional dissemination of knowledge generated by its authors through clear self-archiving regulations:

• Deposit Permitted: Authors are authorized (and encouraged) to deposit all versions of their document in institutional repositories, independent phytopathology-specific repositories, or personal academic profiles.
• Conditions for the versions:
  • Preprint: Self-archiving of the original version submitted prior to peer review is permitted, provided it is clearly indicated that the document is under review.
  • Post-print: Self-archiving of the document that has already been reviewed, corrected, and accepted by the Editorial Board is permitted.
  • Version of Record: Self-archiving of the final bilingual PDF formatted by the journal is strongly encouraged. It is mandatory to include the complete formal citation of the RMF/MJP and the permanent Crossref DOI link to trace the primary source of the discovery.

3.1. Submission of Manuscripts and Language Criteria

The Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología (RMF/MJP) accepts original scientific manuscripts written in either English or Spanish. Regardless of the language of submission, all accepted articles must be published in full in both languages to ensure maximum dissemination and global impact on plant health.

3.2. Translation Process and Use of Authorized Artificial Intelligence

To optimize publication times without compromising scientific rigor, the RMF/MJP operates under a hybrid, supervised model of bilingual scientific translation, whereby the approved document in its original language goes through the following phases:

3.2.1. Phase I: Initial Translation by Certified Translators or AI-Assisted Translation with a License

Document translation is performed by a certified translator; in addition, the journal authorizes and uses Artificial Intelligence and machine translation tools with certified institutional licenses for document processing (e.g., DeepL Pro, SDL Trados Studio).

• Privacy and Confidentiality: The use of commercially licensed software ensures that the data and content of approved phytopathological documents are not stored or used to train external public models, thereby safeguarding the authors' intellectual property.
• Specialized Glossary: AI platforms are configured with translation memories specialized in phytopathology (taxonomy of fungi, bacteria, viruses, nematodes, and technical terms such as "resistance induction" or "polycyclic epidemics") to ensure accurate technical translation.

3.2.2. Phase II: Post-Editing and Human Certification

AI-generated translations are required to undergo a thorough technical review (post-editing) by professional translators with verifiable experience in agricultural sciences or phytopathology. The certified translator refines the style, adjusts the syntax, and validates the technical accuracy of the document. In all cases, the author and the editorial board conduct a final review.

3.3. Layout and Bilingual Format

The final publication is produced using a bilingual template designed specifically for the RMF/MJP:

• Structural Layout: Articles are formatted in PDF and XML JATS formats, presenting the content in a symmetrical or sequentially structured manner (e.g., titles, abstracts, materials and methods, results, and discussions in both languages).
• Metadata Consistency: We verify that the metadata deposited in Crossref and international indexes contains identical information in English and Spanish to avoid academic citation issues.

3.4. Cross-Validation of Text to Prevent Errata

To prevent the issuance of errata after continuous publication, the journal applies a strict four-level validation and quality control protocol:

• Technical-Scientific Comparison: The Technical Associate Editor conducts a cross-check between the original and translated versions. Their task is to verify that numerical data, units of measurement (e.g., colony-forming units, pesticide concentrations, severity percentages), and scientific names remain identical and unchanged in both languages.
• Proofreading by the authors: Before the article is permanently uploaded to the web platform, the authors receive the formatted proofs. They are required to thoroughly review the Spanish and English versions, provide feedback if necessary, and approve the document.
• Validation by the Editor-in-Chief: Once the necessary adjustments indicated by the authors have been made, the final version is reviewed and validated by the Editor-in-Chief in critical areas to ensure the quality of the format, content, and translation.
• Closure and Digital Finalization: The final version, validated by all parties involved in the editorial process, is published on a rolling basis, preventing any subsequent manual edits that could compromise the integrity of the indexed scientific record.

4.1. Organizational Structure of the Editorial Committee

The RMF/MJP Editorial Committee operates under a hierarchical and collegial model designed to ensure scientific excellence, institutional transparency, and international representation. It is composed of specialists with clearly defined roles and lines of responsibility for managing the editorial workflow.

4.2. Definition of Roles and Responsibilities

4.2.1. Editor-in-Chief

• Institutional Role: The highest scientific and administrative authority of the RMF/MJP, appointed in coordination with the Board of Directors of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C.
• Responsibilities:
  • Ensure strict compliance with this editorial policy manual and international standards (COPE).
  • Conduct an initial screening of manuscripts to verify alignment with the journal's scope.
  • Assign manuscripts approved in the initial screening to the appropriate Associate Editor, based on the subject matter of the document.
  • Issue the final and binding decision on the acceptance or rejection of articles, critically justifying the decision based on the technical reports provided by the review panel.

4.2.2. Technical Associate Editor

• Institutional Role: Operational, technological, scientific, and methodological liaison between the Editorial Board and the Editor-in-Chief.
• Responsibilities:
  • Conduct an initial screening of documents for compliance before forwarding them to the Editor-in-Chief.
  • Validate the technical and scientific integrity of accepted manuscripts, including bilingual comparison (Spanish/English), stylistic editing, and verification of article databases or metadata (XML, DOI).
  • Coordinate plagiarism prevention protocols and oversee audits of individual files.
  • Review the final galleys prior to validation and approval by the Editor-in-Chief.

4.2.3. Associate Scientific Editors Specializing in Phytopathology

• Required Profile: Established researchers with an outstanding track record in traditional and cutting-edge subdisciplines of phytopathology (mycology, virology, bacteriology, nematology, plant epidemiology, etc.). Must have an active record of scientific publications with international peer review.
• Role and Areas of Responsibility: They lead the evaluation of manuscripts falling within the scope of pure or clinical phytopathology.
• Specific Responsibilities:
  • Directly manage the double-blind peer review process for manuscripts focusing on etiology, classical or molecular taxonomy, diagnosis, population dynamics, and integrated management of plant pathogens.
  • Example of an intervention: Evaluate and coordinate the peer review of a manuscript describing a new variant of a virus (e.g., Tobamovirus fructirugosum) or the molecular characterization of a native plant-pathogenic fungus, where rigorous validation of compliance with Koch's postulates and correct international taxonomic nomenclature is required.
  • Select and convene three suitable specialist reviewers for each case.
  • Synthesize the panel's evaluations and issue a formal technical recommendation to the Editor-in-Chief.

4.2.4. Transdisciplinary Scientific Associate Editors

• Required Profile: Leading-edge scientists working in convergent or cross-disciplinary fields that directly impact phytopathology, but whose primary methodologies stem from adjacent disciplines (computer science, nanotechnology, synthetic biology, materials chemistry, agroecology, agricultural economics, etc.).
• Role and Areas of Assistance: They assist in the evaluation and review of publications in fields converging with phytopathology, where cutting-edge technological tools or holistic approaches are central to the study.
• Specific Responsibilities:
  • Evaluate complex manuscripts of a transdisciplinary nature, ensuring that both the phytopathology component and the convergent discipline meet identical scientific standards of rigor.
  • Example of a review in Artificial Intelligence: Coordinate the peer review of an article proposing a new convolutional neural network model for the automated detection of rust severity using drones. The transdisciplinary editor verifies that the AI's algorithmic architecture is methodologically sound and, at the same time, suitable for the phytopathology phenomenon in question.
  • Example of an intervention in Nanotechnology or Biotechnology: Evaluating the use of biologically modified silver nanoparticles for the in vitro and in vivo control of plant-pathogenic bacteria, ensuring that the physicochemical analyses (FTIR characterization, scanning electron microscopy) possess the appropriate methodological rigor.
  • Invite reviewers specializing in both the technological/convergent field and phytopathology to form a balanced review panel.

4.3. Representativeness, Diversity, and Institutional Governance

To avoid editorial inbreeding and ensure a global perspective aligned with scientific transparency policies, the composition of the RMF/MJP Editorial Board follows the following mandatory governance guidelines:

• Institutional Diversity: No single institution of higher education or research center (national or international) may account for more than 15% of the active members within the body of Associate Editors.
• International Participation Quotas: At least 40% of the Associate Editors (both specialists and transdisciplinary experts) must be affiliated with institutions outside the Mexican Republic, reflecting the journal's global and bilingual character.
• Renewal Mechanisms: Associate Editors shall serve for a term established by the MSP bylaws, subject to performance evaluations based on metrics of timeliness, objectivity in reviews, and scientific rigor in the selection of reviewers.

5.1. Review Method: Double-Blind Peer Review

The RMF/MJP mandatorily adopts the double-blind peer review system to assess the scientific quality of all submitted manuscripts.

• Strictly Bidirectional Anonymity: The identities of the authors are kept completely hidden from the reviewers throughout the evaluation process. Similarly, the identities of the members of the evaluation panel remain strictly anonymous to the authors.
• Elimination of Bias: This mechanism ensures that the scientific evaluation focuses exclusively on the technical merit, originality, and methodological rigor of the work, preventing biases associated with the researchers' gender, nationality, career background, or institutional affiliation.

5.2. Operating Rules of the Review Panel (The Three Blind Reviewers)

Once a manuscript passes the initial relevance screening, the assigned Associate Editor (Specialist or Transdisciplinary) will form a review panel under the following operating rules:

• Panel Composition: Each manuscript must be assigned to a panel of three (3) external reviewers who are experts of recognized standing in the field of the scientific document under review.
• Eligibility Criteria and Anti-Endogamy Measures:
  • Reviewers must hold a doctoral degree and have a verifiable track record of scientific publication in the specific subject area of the article.
  • None of the reviewers may belong to the same institution as the authors of the manuscript.
  • The simultaneous use of more than one reviewer from the same research institution for a single manuscript will be avoided.
• Response Times: Reviewers will have a maximum of 21 calendar days to issue their formal technical report.
• Structure of the Review: Each reviewer must evaluate the manuscript and issue a reasoned recommendation under one of the following categories:

• Accept the manuscript without modifications.
• Accept the manuscript with minor revisions (does not require a new round of peer review).
• Accept with major revisions (requires a mandatory re-evaluation).
• Reject the manuscript.

5.3. Integration of Reviews and Internal Communication Workflow

The internal review process follows a strict hierarchical chain designed to ensure scientific consensus, institutional rigor, and editorial quality.

5.3.1. Role of the Assigned Associate Editor in Integration

Upon receiving the three independent reviews, the assigned Associate Editor will integrate them into a single technical report. Their role is not merely statistical; they must critically evaluate the panel's arguments and draft a unified technical report that harmonizes the observations and clearly guides the authors on the required changes they must make.

5.3.2. Internal Validation Chain (Editor-in-Chief and Technical Editor)

Before the panel's comments and the analytical synthesis are sent to the authors, the Associate Editor will forward the complete file of recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief and the Technical Associate Editor for official validation:

• The Technical Editor: Will verify that the process complies with institutional timelines and double-blind anonymity guidelines, and that the methodological documentation in the file is in order.
• The Editor-in-Chief: Will evaluate the scientific soundness of the synthesis. In the event of significant discrepancies among the reviewers (for example, two acceptance opinions and one strong rejection), the Editor-in-Chief, supported by their technical team, will make a compromise decision or request a fourth review if the complexity of the case warrants it. Once validated by mutual agreement, the official notification is sent to the corresponding author.

5.4. Authors' Response Mechanism and Re-review Protocol

When a manuscript is reviewed with recommendations for revisions (minor or major), the institutional response process is strictly governed by the following procedure:

5.4.1. Obligations of the Corresponding Author

The corresponding author will be the sole authorized channel of communication. The author must submit the requested files within the allotted timeframe (usually 15 to 30 business days):

• The revised manuscript with changes highlighted or tracked.
• A supplementary response document (explanatory letter) without a handwritten signature or any personal or institutional identifying marks. This file must list in detail, point by point, how each of the comments from the three reviewers and the Associate Editor was addressed. If the author disagrees with any criticism, they must provide a strong justification based on experimental evidence or supporting scientific literature.

5.4.2. Protocol for Hierarchical Re-evaluation of Responses

The supplementary response document and the revised manuscript will undergo a rigorous three-tiered review process before any acceptance is confirmed:

• First Level (Assigned Associate Editor): The Associate Editor thoroughly reviews the unsigned response letter. He or she verifies that no critical comments from the original panel have been omitted or evaded by the authors. If the Associate Editor considers the responses to be scientifically satisfactory, he or she issues an endorsement of approval.
• Second and Third Levels (Editor-in-Chief and Technical Editor): The re-evaluated file is simultaneously forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief and the Technical Editor.
  • The Technical Editor confirms that the revisions maintain the required methodological structure and that the files are free of metadata identifying the author.
  • The Editor-in-Chief performs the final review. Once both have granted their approval and confirmed that the manuscript meets the standard of excellence for agricultural crop health, the article is formally accepted.

5.5. Communication Infrastructure and Editorial Channels

• Current Transition Phase: Currently, all communication and document exchange between Authors, Associate Editors, Reviewers, the Technical Editor, and the Editor-in-Chief takes place formally via the journal's institutional email.
• Technological Migration: The RMF/MJP is in the midst of an active technological transition. Soon, the entire editorial workflow will be managed exclusively, centrally, and automatically within the Revista Mexicana de Fitopatología's own web platform, permanently eliminating the use of email for these purposes.
• Exclusion of OJS: It is established as institutional policy that the RMF/MJP does not and will not use the external Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform, prioritizing the development, control, and security of its own native digital infrastructure.

5.6. Document Preservation and Management (Individual Files)

To ensure the journal's transparency and auditability and to respond to potential appeals or audits by international indexing organizations (such as SciELO or COPE), the RMF/MJP maintains a strict archiving protocol:

• Single, Individual File: The entire editorial process for each submitted manuscript, without exception, is archived in a single, individualized digital file organized chronologically (initially on institutional email/storage servers and subsequently migrated to the journal's own platform database).
• Minimum Required Content of the File:
  • Original version of the submitted manuscript (with date and time of registration).
  • Plagiarism detection software reports.
  • Communications and assignments from the Associate Editors.
  • Information on the three assigned blind reviewers and the deciding reviewer.
  • Technical integration of comments approved by the Editor-in-Chief and Technical Editor.
  • Unsigned response document submitted by the authors.
  • Revised versions and final decision on acceptance or rejection.
• Permanent Confidentiality: These individual files are strictly confidential and protected from public access. Only the Editor-in-Chief, the Associate Technical Editor, and the assigned Associate Editor have access and reading privileges for these files.

6.1. Economic Model and Non-Commercial Nature of the Journal

The RMF/MJP is a scientific, non-commercial publication. The journal operates under a solidarity-based co-funding model, where the primary objective is to recover the operational costs of editing, layout, and international visibility, while ensuring free and open access for all readers worldwide.

6.2. Publication Cost Contribution Fees (Non-Commercial APC)

The technical editorial processes applied to accepted manuscripts are partially funded by direct contributions from authors, structured as follows:

• Base Publication Fee: Once a scientific article has been officially approved by the Editorial Board, authors must pay a fixed fee of $1,000.00 MXN (one thousand pesos) as a contribution toward publication costs.
• Additional Bilingual Processing Fee: In addition to the base fee, a variable charge is applied to cover certified professional translation and linguistic validation services (detailed in Chapter 3). This amount is entirely dependent on the word count of the final manuscript.
• Impartiality of the Review Process: Payment is collected solely and exclusively after the manuscript has been accepted. No payment is requested in advance (there are no submission or review fees), ensuring that financial considerations never influence the reviewers' scientific judgment.

6.3. Subsidies, Infrastructure, and Support from the MSP

The Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. (MSP) bears and covers most of the financial burden of the RMF/MJP, guaranteeing the journal's long-term continuity and stability. The society's contributions cover the following operational expenses:

6.4. MSP Funding Sources and External Support

In order to provide the aforementioned subsidies to its official publication, the MSP diversifies its revenue through the following legitimate mechanisms:

• Membership Dues: Periodic contributions from active national and international members of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology.
• Scientific Events: Surplus funds obtained from the organization of academic conferences, symposia, courses, and workshops organized by the Society.
• Support from Scientific Councils: From time to time, the journal submits institutional applications for funding calls and project competitions issued by Mexican scientific councils (such as CONAHCYT) or other public agencies that promote science. Funding obtained through this channel is earmarked in its entirety for the modernization of digital systems or the strengthening of the RMF/MJP's international indexing.

6.5. Financial Governance, Volunteer Work, and Treasury Management

The administration of the journal's financial resources follows a strict protocol of transparency and separation of duties:

• Honorary Work of the Editorial Board: The Editor-in-Chief, the Technical Associate Editor, the Specialist Associate Editors, and the Transdisciplinary Associate Editors perform their management, evaluation, and peer-review duties on a completely honorary basis. No member of the editorial board receives salaries, royalties, bonuses, or financial compensation of any kind for their editorial work.
• Centralization of Resources: The RMF/MJP does not directly operate or manage financial resources. The journal does not have its own bank accounts or accounting department.
• Role of the MSP Treasury: The Treasury of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. is the sole legal and administrative entity authorized to manage the journal's finances. This body is responsible for:

• Collecting the corresponding author contribution fees.
• Issuing the tax invoices required by researchers or their affiliated institutions.
• Making payments to external suppliers of the RMF/MJP (translators, programmers, layout designers, and server providers) following approval by the Editor-in-Chief and the Technical Editor.

7.1. Adoption of the Creative Commons Licensing Model

The RMF/MJP adheres to global policies on open science and the democratization of phytosanitary knowledge. To regulate the use, distribution, and exploitation of scientific works, the journal mandatorily and consistently adopts the international Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 (CC BY-NC 4.0) license.

7.1.1. Scope of the CC BY-NC 4.0 License for Readers and Users

Under this legal framework, any user or reader of the journal is free to:

• Share: Copy, download, and redistribute the formatted scientific articles in any digital or print medium or format. This makes it easier for agricultural technicians or producers to download epidemiological guidelines or management protocols directly to their devices, including PDF, HTML y XML.
• Adapt: Remix, transform, extract, and create new academic or technical outreach materials based on the data or texts published by the journal, including PDF, HTML and XML.

7.1.2. Mandatory Conditions of Use

The above permissions are strictly subject to the following two clauses:

• Attribution (BY): The user must properly credit the original authors, provide a link to the license, and indicate whether any changes were made to the original document. The complete formal bibliographic citation of the RMF/MJP and the permanent Crossref DOI link must be included.
• Non-Commercial (NC): Published articles, figures, databases, or text excerpts may not be used in any way for commercial purposes, direct profit, or the direct sale of information by third parties without the express written authorization of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C.

7.2. Copyright and Retention of Rights

The RMF/MJP protects the moral and economic rights of the scientific community as follows:

• Retention of Rights by Authors: Authors who publish in the RMF/MJP permanently retain their copyright in their research. The journal does not require the transfer or exclusive assignment of economic rights for publication.
• Non-Exclusive Publication License: By accepting the publication of their bilingual manuscript, authors grant the RMF/MJP and the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. a non-exclusive, indefinite, and royalty-free license to format, reproduce, transmit, index, publicly display, and distribute their work in print, electronic, and international database formats.
• Protection Against Third-Party Plagiarism: By retaining their rights under the CC BY-NC 4.0 license, authors retain the legal right to take action against infringements or misuse of their texts by external commercial entities.

7.3. Policies on Reuse, Distribution, and Anthologization of Content

Institutional regulations regarding the reuse and subsequent distribution of the journal's articles are established under the following guidelines:

• Secondary Publications by Authors: Authors are free to enter into independent and additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the version of the article published by the journal (for example, including it as a chapter in an academic book, depositing it in their university's repository, or publishing it in research anthologies). The only mandatory requirement is to explicitly acknowledge that the work was originally published in the RMF/MJP, specifying the volume, issue, year, and corresponding DOI.
• Use in Teaching and Plant Health Outreach: The use of the journal's bilingual articles as teaching materials in undergraduate and graduate courses, phytopathology laboratories, and similar settings, as well as in training workshops for the agricultural sector, is actively encouraged. Prior authorization from the journal is not required to compile these manuscripts into student anthologies for internal and free distribution.
• Exclusivity of Graphic Format: Although authors retain the rights to the text and data from their research, the graphic design, typography, institutional logos, and final bilingual layout (the "Registration Version") are part of the RMF/MJP's identity and may not be modified or visually altered for alternative distributions.

8.1. Institutional Commitment to International Standards

The RMF/MJP assumes responsibility for safeguarding the integrity of phytopathology. The journal formally adopts the principles and guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).

In order to avoid legal conflicts that could result in financial costs or damage the moral standing of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C., the journal implements a comprehensive policy of prevention and proactive education. This approach mitigates poor editorial practices before they occur, protecting both the institution and the national and international scientific community.

8.2. Communication and Induction Models for Young Researchers

Recognizing the institutional pressure to publish actively that graduate students and early-career researchers face, the RMF/MJP has launched an ongoing induction program on best practices:

• Integrity Workshops: As part of the national conferences organized by the MSP, the Editorial Committee conducts informational sessions on responsible authorship, the ethical handling of experimental data, the structuring of methodologies, and the prevention of inadvertent plagiarism.
• Pre-Submission Consultation Channel: The RMF/MJP provides an open channel for communication and guidance where young researchers can consult the Editor-in-Chief and Technical Associate Editor regarding specific ethical questions before formally submitting a manuscript, thereby promoting a culture of transparency based on mentorship rather than punitive sanctions.

8.3. Formal Matrix of Ethical Responsibilities by Role

In accordance with COPE guidelines, the obligations and duties of participants in the RMF/MJP editorial workflow are governed by the following matrix:

8.3.1. Obligations and Duties of the Journal and the Technical Team

• Legal and Moral Protection: The technical and administrative support team must safeguard editorial processes to prevent intellectual property claims or authorship disputes that could lead to legal action against the MSP.
• Guarantee of Confidentiality: Maintain absolute confidentiality of manuscripts under review, preventing the authors' content or ideas from being leaked, plagiarized, or used for personal gain by any journal staff member prior to their formal publication.
• Record Traceability: Ensure a digital audit trail of every formal communication exchanged during the article review process.

8.3.2. Obligations and Duties of the Editor-in-Chief and Associate Editors

• Neutrality of Origin: Evaluate the scientific quality of contributions without prejudice or distinction based on the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, geographic origin, nationality, institutional affiliation, or scientific views.
• Independence in Review Decisions: The Editor-in-Chief and their team must base their editorial decisions strictly on the phytopathological relevance, originality, and clarity of the manuscript, resisting pressure from external scientific, institutional, political, or commercial influences.
• Management of Conflicts of Interest: The assigned Associate Editor must immediately recuse themselves from coordinating the review of a manuscript if they have personal, commercial, recent co-authorship, or academic competitive relationships with the authors of the manuscript.

8.3.3. Obligations and Duties of Panel Reviewers (3 Blind Reviewers)

• Constructive and Rigorous Review: Provide objective, clear, specific, and non-hostile feedback. Criticisms must be expressed using academic and scientific language that contributes to improving the work, especially when evaluating early-career researchers.
• Alerting to Misconduct: Immediately inform the Associate Editor if any signs of plagiarism, digital manipulation of images (such as electrophoresis gel photographs or altered leaf severity ratings), duplication of data, similarity to publications in the RMF/MJP or other journals, or undeclared use of artificial intelligence for scientific writing are detected.
• Meeting Deadlines: Adhere to the 15-day review period. If a reviewer realizes that they are unable to meet the assigned deadline or discovers a hidden conflict of interest, they must immediately notify the assigned Associate Editor to avoid delaying the editorial process.

8.3.4. Authors' Obligations and Responsibilities

• Originality and Experimental Rigor: Unanimously guarantee that the submitted manuscript is completely original and unpublished. Field or laboratory experimental data (e.g., colony-forming unit counts, analysis of variance for fungicides, DNA sequencing of pathogens) must be accurate, verifiable, and reproducible.
• Responsibility in Co-authorship: The corresponding author must ensure that all individuals listed as co-authors have made a significant intellectual contribution to the planning, experimentation, or writing of the article. Furthermore, the corresponding author must certify that all co-authors have read and approved the final bilingual version and consent to its submission to the RMF/MJP. It is not possible to designate more than one corresponding author; however, it is possible to request that the Editor-in-Chief (Form FO2) recognize that the first and second authors made an equivalent scientific contribution.
• Declaration of Funding Sources: Specify in the acknowledgments any financial support received from scientific councils (such as SECIHTI), universities, or private companies for the execution of the project, to prevent bias in the interpretation of the results.

9.1. Protocol for the Prevention and Detection of Plagiarism

The RMF/MJP maintains a rigorous commitment to the originality of scientific literature in Phytopathology. To identify and eradicate any attempt at plagiarism before, during, or after the peer review process, the journal operates under a dual protocol that combines open-access technological tools with the critical expertise of its editorial board.

9.1.1. Technological Screening Using Open-Source Software

Submitted manuscripts may undergo a textual similarity analysis coordinated by the Editor-in-Chief and the Technical Associate Editor. Decision criteria are based on content structure, techniques used, the "accuracy" of data and statistical analyses, verification of genomic sequence accession numbers, and other criteria based on editorial experience.

• Open-access tools: Free similarity-detection software (such as Plagiarisma, DupliChecker, and PlagScan) is used to search for matches on the web and in open-access academic databases.
• Supplementary Scanning: The technical team performs cross-searches for exact phrases or suspicious paragraphs directly in global search engines to identify duplicate texts in institutional repositories, theses, or conference proceedings.

9.1.2. Expert Review and Knowledge of the Scientific Literature

Complementing the digital analysis, RMF/MJP bases its detection capabilities on the intellectual capital of its Editorial Board and its Associate Editors, who are specialists in phytopathology or converging transdisciplinary fields:

• Scientific expertise in the field: Due to their high level of specialization and active careers in phytopathology, the Associate Editors possess in-depth knowledge of the scientific literature, key authors, and current lines of research in their respective subdisciplines (e.g., Mycology, Bacteriology, Nematology, Virology, Epidemiology).
• Identification of paraphrasing and self-plagiarism: Specialist editors are able to empirically identify cases of improper paraphrasing, the appropriation of uncited methodologies, the use of previously published data, or the segmentation of research—elements that automated open-source software algorithms often overlook.

9.2. Tolerated Similarity Thresholds and Evaluation Criteria

The journal does not determine plagiarism based exclusively on an automated percentage or evidence detected by members of the Editorial Board; however, it establishes the following analytical guidelines for the editorial staff:

• Permitted Overall Textual Similarity: Similarity is recognized and accepted up to a maximum threshold of 80% similarity in partial sections with other sources, provided that these correspond to standard methodological descriptions (e.g., PCR protocols, fungal isolation techniques, or statistical formulas) and are properly cited.
• Zero Tolerance: No verified case of duplication of a document with a publication associated with any journal will be tolerated. In such cases, the editorial process is halted, and the author is notified in writing. Depending on the severity of the case, action is taken in accordance with the guidelines in Chapter 11.
• Procedure for Excessive Similarity: If a manuscript shows partial similarity to critical sections of another document, the manuscript is held. The Editor-in-Chief will notify the corresponding author of the evidence found for clarification, correction, or definitive rejection of the submission.

9.3. Regulations on Artificial Intelligence (AI) in Scientific Writing

The emergence of generative language models requires strict guidelines to safeguard the veracity of agricultural findings:

• Prohibition of AI for Generation Without Experimental Support: The use of Artificial Intelligence to artificially create, alter, or simulate scientific text, numerical data, or experimental interpretations is strictly prohibited. The journal considers the use of AI to fill information gaps or substitute the results of field and laboratory trials to be serious scientific fraud.
• Guidelines for Limited Legitimate Use: AI is recognized solely as a technological tool to support initial assisted translation tasks (under the terms stipulated in Chapter 3). Its use as a linguistic assistant must be transparently disclosed in a methodological note or in the acknowledgments section of the manuscript, specifying the software and version used. AI is accepted only for the generation of Conceptual Models in accordance with the Author Guidelines (see main menu).
• Unchanging Author Responsibility: AI tools do not meet COPE's criteria for scientific authorship; therefore, no AI may be listed as a co-author of a manuscript. Human authors assume full and legal responsibility for the accuracy and veracity of every word expressed in the final bilingual article.

9.4. Management of Scientific Fraud and Data Fabrication

Scientific fraud is defined as the intentional fabrication, manipulation, alteration, or falsification of any component of the research process. In the field of phytopathology, this includes, but is not limited to:

• Fabricating or altering data on mycelial or bacterial growth curves, disease severity percentages, nematode counts, colony-forming units, etc.
• Digitally manipulating images of diseased plant tissues, electrophoresis gels, or colonies in Petri dishes to simulate nonexistent results.
• Claiming to have conducted pathogenicity tests (Koch's postulates) that lack verifiable experimental logs and records.
• Falsifying the origin of biological collections used in research and reporting nonexistent accession numbers in specialized genomic banks.

In the event of any well-founded suspicion of fraud or data falsification raised by the three blind reviewers or the Associate Editor, the journal will immediately activate the administrative investigation protocol and exceptional sanctions detailed in Chapter 11 of this manual.

10.1. Institutional Safeguard and Commercial Governance Policies

To shield RMF/MJP from the dynamics of the predatory scientific publishing market, the journal establishes a framework of absolute institutional safeguards. These regulations prevent the commodification of agricultural knowledge and safeguard the moral prestige of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C. (MSP) in accordance with COPE's integrity guidelines.

10.1.1. Absolute Prohibition of Predatory Business Models

The journal prohibits any abusive commercial practices or editorial fraud:

• No "fast-track" fees: Under no circumstances will the journal accept additional or extraordinary payments to expedite the peer review or publication process. The review panel's turnaround time (50 calendar days) and internal validation time are identical and fixed for all authors.
• Prohibition of third-party advertising: The journal's own website is dedicated exclusively to scientific and bilingual content. The rental of advertising space, commercial banners, or sponsorships from agrochemical or agricultural input companies on the site is prohibited. However, in 2025, the MSP approved the rental of advertising space to scientific input companies recognized for their business ethics. This is to cover part of the journal's operating costs, in accordance with the guidelines set forth in Chapter 6.
• Separation of financial functions: Since the journal does not directly manage funds (a mechanism regulated in Chapter 6), no member of the Editorial Committee is aware of authors' payment status during the peer review process, thereby preventing financial considerations from influencing a review decision.

10.2. Management Protocol and Declaration of Conflicts of Interest

A conflict of interest is defined as a situation in which personal, institutional, financial, or professional competitive interests may bias the objectivity and impartiality required in research or scientific peer review.

10.2.1. Obligations and Actions for Authors

• Mandatory Disclosure: When submitting a manuscript via the journal's bilingual interface, the corresponding author must include an explicit section titled "Declaration of Conflicts of Interest."
• Transparency in Funding: Employment relationships, consulting arrangements, or direct grants provided by commercial biotechnology or agrochemical companies that could benefit from or be affected by the study's results must be reported (for example, when evaluating the field efficacy of a specific commercial fungicide against tomato powdery mildew). If no such ties exist, the following must be formally stated: "The authors declare that they have no conflicts of interest related to this research" (see Authors' Guidelines in the main menu).

10.2.2. Obligations and Recusal of Reviewers (The 3 Blind Reviewers)

The panel of experts convened via institutional email or the journal's own platform must act in accordance with the strictest professional ethics:

• Recusal in the Event of a Potential Conflict of Interest: An assigned reviewer has a moral and professional obligation to immediately decline to review a manuscript if they identify that the work belongs to a close collaborator with whom they have ongoing projects, or if the work represents direct competition for a patent or their own ongoing research.
• Ethical use of information from a document under review: Reviewers may not, under any circumstances, use knowledge derived from an article under evaluation to advance their own projects or alert third parties prior to the official publication of the revised manuscript in both languages.

10.2.3. Obligations and Governance of the Editorial Board

• Exclusion of Manuscripts by Committee Members: If the Editor-in-Chief, Technical Editor, or an Associate Editor submits a scientific article to RMF/MJP as an author or co-author, the manuscript undergoes the established editorial process. However, the submitting editor will not have access to the email correspondence or database related to their submission. In fact, the RMF/MJP web platform will assign personalized passwords to Editors, granting them exclusive access to their assigned documents. The coordination of the double-blind peer review and final validation are delegated to an external Associate Editor or an international Guest Editor who is not involved in day-to-day management, ensuring a balanced and equitable review process.

10.3. Prevention and Monitoring of Predatory Practices by Third Parties

In order to safeguard the legal and scientific identity of RMF/MJP, the Editorial Committee carries out the following preventive monitoring measures in a coordinated manner:

• Audit of Clone Sites: The Technical Editor conducts periodic checks on search engines to ensure that there are no apocryphal or fraudulent websites impersonating the RMF/MJP for the purpose of financially extorting researchers. If such a site is detected (as has occurred in the past), the responsible parties are identified, and a request for rectification is made in the first instance, explaining the ethical and legal implications.
• Authentic Indexing Validation: The Technical Committee maintains direct communication channels with recognized indexing systems (e.g., SciELO). It is constantly verified that institutional links point exclusively to the journal's official domain and that editorial information is up to date.

11.1. Preventive Approach and Safeguards Against Editorial Errors

The RMF/MJP operates under an iterative quality assurance model. The journal's institutional goal is to minimize the need to publish addenda, corrections, or errata after manuscripts are published online. To optimally finalize the "Registration Version" digitally, two mandatory validation and cross-checking filters are applied:

11.1.1. Iterative Validation Protocol (Editor–Author)

Once the corresponding author submits the revised manuscript and the unsigned explanatory letter (a procedure outlined in Chapter 5), a series of thorough reviews is initiated:

• Associate Editor's Filter: Verifies that all phytopathological or transdisciplinary objections raised by the original panel of three blind reviewers have been fully resolved.
• Escalation to the Technical Steering Team: The file is forwarded to the Editor-in-Chief and the Technical Editor for simultaneous revalidation of methodological and linguistic quality control.
• Cyclical Iteration Mechanism: If the Editorial Committee determines that the author's responses are incomplete, ambiguous, or that the revisions have unintentionally altered the consistency of the phytosanitary data, the manuscript is immediately returned to the authors. This process of submission, review, and revision will be repeated consecutively as many times as necessary until the manuscript meets the journal's requirements for absolute technical soundness.

11.1.2. Mandatory Use of the Bilingual Proof

Before proceeding with Crossref DOI registration or publication on the journal's own web platform, the galley proof stage is invariably carried out:

• Authors receive the final layouts in a bilingual format (Spanish and English).
• They are strictly required to perform a typographical quality check, verify the correct translation of cutting-edge terms, and ensure that numerical data (such as severity percentages, fungicide doses, or inoculum loads) remain identical in both languages.
• Authors must return the PDF proof to the journal with corrections marked directly in the document. Upon receipt of this approval, the final version is officially locked, eliminating the need for a errata notice due to human error or oversight.

11.2. Exceptional Protocol for Article Retractions

The rigorous application of the preventive filters described above is intended to ensure that the retraction of a scientific article is an extraordinary and exceptional measure, reserved solely and exclusively for addressing serious breaches of scientific integrity or proven scientific misconduct.

In accordance with COPE's international guidelines, the RMF/MJP will activate the immediate retraction protocol upon confirmation of any of the following three fraudulent scenarios: confirmed plagiarism, data fraud or falsification, or unethical use of AI.

11.2.1. Operating Procedure for Cases of Plagiarism or Data Fabrication

If, after an article has been published, a reader, reviewer, or member of the technical committee provides documentary evidence demonstrating substantial plagiarism, misappropriation of third-party discoveries, or data falsification (fabrication of statistics or digital alteration of phytopathological images):

• The Editor-in-Chief will convene an investigative panel consisting of the Technical Editor and two Associate Editors who are not involved with the document in question.
• The corresponding author will be formally notified of the findings and given a non-extendable deadline of 15 business days to submit documentary evidence—such as original field or laboratory logs—to support the legitimacy of their work.
• If the authors do not respond, fail to justify the anomalies, or if scientific misconduct is confirmed, the Committee will order the formal retraction of the article.

11.2.2. Procedure for Unethical Use of Artificial Intelligence

In accordance with the restrictions set forth in Chapter 9, if the covert use of generative AI is verified for the simulation or invention of scientific text, false methodological descriptions, or analytical interpretations lacking real and verifiable empirical support:

• The journal will treat the incident with the same level of severity as scientific fraud involving data fabrication.
• The article will be immediately removed from the journal's website upon confirmation that the basic principle of reproducibility in agricultural science has been violated.

11.3. Mechanism for Publicizing the Retraction

To safeguard the transparency of international indexing systems and prevent the scientific community from citing flawed literature, the retraction will be carried out in accordance with the following visual and technical guidelines:

• Maintenance of the Digital Record: The original article will not be physically removed or deleted from the journal's own platform servers, in compliance with digital preservation standards.
• Invariant Watermark: The corresponding bilingual PDF file will be replaced by a modified version that displays the indelible legend "RETRACTADO / RETRACTED" on all pages, in a cross-page layout and in high-visibility typeface. This document will be permanently and bidirectionally linked to the document's original DOI via Crossref.
• Linked Retraction Notice: An official retraction notice, signed by the Editor-in-Chief and stating the reasons for the retraction, will be published in the current quarterly volume.

11.4. Institutional Administrative Sanctions

In addition to the public retraction of the scientific article, the RMF/MJP, with the legal backing of the Board of Directors of the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C., will impose the following punitive sanctions on violators:

• Temporary or Permanent Editorial Ban: All co-authors who signed the retracted manuscript will be barred from submitting, reviewing, or evaluating new scientific contributions to the RMF/MJP for a period of 3 to 5 years; this ban may be permanent in cases of flagrant repeat offenses.

Institutional Notification: The Editor-in-Chief will send a detailed formal letter informing the authorities at the authors' affiliated institutions (General Administration, Institutional Ethics Committees, or Graduate Studies Offices) about the scientific misconduct, the evidence analyzed, and the journal's decision, as well as to the national scientific councils (e.g., SNII SECIHTI) that fund their projects, thereby absolving the MSP of any future legal or civil liability.

12.1. Philosophy of Selective and Relevant Indexing

The RMF/MJP bases its visibility policy on the principle of curation and strategic indexing, rejecting mass or indiscriminate inclusion in repositories of low technical rigor. The journal exclusively selects those platforms, databases, and indexes that enjoy undisputed recognition at the national and international levels within the agricultural sciences and plant health. The primary objective is to ensure that bilingual scientific output is integrated into information ecosystems that provide real value in terms of academic citations, scientific accessibility, and applicability to global crop health.

12.2. Criteria for Retention in SciELO Mexico

As one of the pillars of its international visibility under the Open Science model, the RMF/MJP prioritizes its consolidation within the Scientific Electronic Library Online (SciELO Mexico) network. To ensure its uninterrupted membership in this system, the Editorial Committee and the technical team strictly enforce the following operational criteria for continuous evaluation:

• Methodological Rigor and Transparent Peer Review: Maintain the double-blind peer review policy based on a mandatory panel of three blind reviewers and subsequent revalidation at hierarchical levels (as outlined in Chapter 5).
• Absolute Punctuality under Continuous Publication: Rigorously comply with the submission deadlines for the three established four-month periods, ensuring that the flow of articles is not subject to institutional delays.
• High-Quality XML Markup: Process 100% of accepted articles using the XML metadata structure in accordance with the international JATS standard. Meticulous care is taken to ensure the bilingual consistency of metadata (titles, authors, affiliations, abstracts, and keywords) deposited in parallel on the journal's own web interface.
• Control of Editorial Inbreeding: Ensure that authors affiliated with the Mexican Society of Phytopathology, A.C., or with the same national educational institution do not monopolize the annual publication volume, maintaining international participation quotas above 40% as established in this manual.

12.3. International Expansion Strategy: Scopus and Web of Science (WoS)

The RMF/MJP is in an advanced stage of institutional strengthening to expand its global reach. The short- and medium-term strategy includes the formal submission of applications for inclusion in the two most rigorous international reference indexes: Scopus (Elsevier) and Web of Science (WoS / Clarivate Analytics).

12.3.1. Technical Actions to Meet Inclusion Requirements

To ensure a successful application and avoid embargo periods due to rejection, the following technical guidelines must be strictly followed:

• Full Guarantee of Bilingual Coverage: Continuous publication in dual formats (Spanish and English) across all sections of the article ensures that the Scopus and WoS selection committees can audit the rigor of the data in their native languages.
• International Diversity of the Editorial Board: Strengthen global representation within the Editorial Board by ensuring that Specialist and Transdisciplinary Associate Editors have active publication and citation records within the Scopus and WoS systems themselves.
• Reference Traceability: Require that lists of cited literature mandatorily include active Crossref DOI identifiers, facilitating automated citation tracking and increasing the journal's impact factor in the SciELO Citation Index of the Web of Science.

12.4. Sovereignty, Editorial Independence, and National Identity

Despite actively pursuing inclusion in global citation indexes such as Scopus and WoS, the RMF/MJP strongly reaffirms the institutional principles that govern its governance:

• Independence from Commercial Publishing Consortia: The RMF/MJP maintains a vision of absolute independence from large transnational oligopolistic publishing consortia. The journal refuses to hand over its archive, metadata, or platform administration to firms that subject access to knowledge to commercial barriers or paywalls.
• Commitment to Open and Sustainable Science: As a publication jointly funded and supported by the MSP, the journal operates under a strictly public, academic, and nonprofit model (non-commercial APC), ensuring that editorial decisions remain the exclusive domain of the scientific community and are not subject to corporate financial interests.
• Promoter of National and International Phytopathology: The journal takes pride in its roots and its historical role in regional agricultural development. It reaffirms its commitment as a Mexican platform of excellence that showcases phytopathology to the world. Its bilingual infrastructure seeks to give voice—with the same rigor—both to critical research addressing epidemiological outbreaks in Mexico and to cutting-edge technological innovations developed at international research centers.