Two articles of a striking similarity appeared towards the end of 2002 in Interciencia (Vol. 27, November) and Ecología Austral (Vol. 12, December). Although the two papers are not strictly identical, the information used, the methods employed and the conclusions presented lead to the deduction that both convey the same message to the reader.

The problem is not new. Prestigious journals such as Oikos (Malmer N, Oikos 77: 3, 1997) have already alerted about their concern regarding the increase in this kind of "self-plagiarism" and have assumed severe positions in this regard. In relation to the two articles in Interciencia and Ecología Austral, and to avoid making an unfounded warning, we carried out a quantitative and qualitative analysis of the two papers and confirmed that they correspond to what Malmer called "duplicate publications". Our conclusion in this particular case is that if the authors of one of the two articles would have seen the other one in another journal under different authorship, no doubt they would have considered it a case of plagiarism. In this instance, of course, the authors are the same, with small differences in the authorship order.

Although the two articles are not identical, as Editors of the two journals we consider that the degree of similarity is so high that the established requirement of being original papers is not fulfilled. In this case, it cannot even be considered that one of the papers is an overview, as to consider acceptable that one might be "included" in the other. Scientific publishing implies an enormous non-remunerated effort by a variety of specialists, and by editors and their assistants, not to mention the cost involved and the limited space availability of the journals. The respect due to our readers is also of utmost importance. They will be frustrated by finding the degree of similarity between these two articles, particularly at present times, when international indexing systems permit to find papers such as these two "copies" in an almost immediate manner. Any reader who gets these two references as the result of a bibliographic database search would be surprised by the degree of similarity and become disappointed with the seriousness of both journals, thus affecting their prestige. Therefore, and to be respectful of the previous Editors who with so much effort and care cultivated the prestige of Ecología Austral and of Interciencia, we have considered it necessary to make public the situation and warn about the harm caused.

We believe that this problem is an additional evidence of the undesirable reactions sometimes produced as a response to the pressure to publish. Certainly, it is not the only way to respond. With increasing frequency, it is usual to find phenomena such as the subdivision of research work in multiple papers, reduced to what Malmer has called "the smallest publishable units". It is also relatively frequent, and practically impossible to prove, the inclusion as authors of researchers who have not participated in the actual research process nor in the writing (at times not even in its reading) as part of an exchange of "mutual favors".

In all these cases, not even taking into account the economic aspects, there are serious consequences of this type of problems. On the one hand, it is no doubt a wasted space that could have been fruitfully used by other papers that fulfill the requirements of originality and that reflect the true participation of the authors. But, additionally, duplication infringes ethical principles that constitute the essence of academic activity and of scientific research. On the other hand, it seriously damages the confidence base that should exist among editors, authors and readers. Inasmuch as authors trust the honesty of editors and the impartiality and technical seriousness of the peer review process, the editors should also be able to trust that authors honor the conditions imposed by the publications. These are fundamental for the confidence that, in turn, readers will have in the responsibility and rigor of scientific journals.

While it is true that modern electronic methods make it easier to detect this type of transgressions, we expect that authors who trust the scientific quality of Ecología Austral and Interciencia will maintain the excellent behavior that they have shown, and we appeal to the continuation of the ethical conduct that is so critical to the scientific research activity.

Jorge Rabinovich. Editor, Ecología Austral

Miguel Laufer. Editor, Interciencia