International Journal of Agriculture Sciences
 |
Editor-in-Chief : Dr Constantinos A Georgiou | |||
| Publisher : Bioinfo Publications | ||||
| ISSN : 0975-3710 (Print) E-ISSN : 0975-9107 (Online) Frequency : Monthly | ||||
| Index Copernicus Value (ICV) : 90.70; NAAS: 4.58 (2023) CODEN : IJAS | ||||
| DOI : 10.9735/0975-3710 Abbreviation : Int J Agr Sci | ||||
|
Duties Of Reviewers
These guidelines are based on existing Bioinfo Publications policies and Bioinfo Publications Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Reviewers
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the Bioinfo Publications editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the articles. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific or research methodology. Bioinfo Publications shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing process.
Fast Process of Review
Bioinfo Publications selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research details reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality of work
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews report should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Bioinfo Publications Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and details.
Acknowledgement of Sources detail
Bioinfo Publications Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Bioinfo Publications reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Conflict of Interest and Disclosure
Unpublished manuscript, text materials, diagrams, tables, figures, disclosed in submitted articles must not be used in a reviewers own research without the express written consent of the all authors of that manuscript. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Bioinfo Publications Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, organisations or institutions connected to the articles.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the Bioinfo Publications editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the articles. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific or research methodology. Bioinfo Publications shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing process.
Fast Process of Review
Bioinfo Publications selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research details reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.
Confidentiality of work
Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
Standards of Objectivity
Reviews report should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Bioinfo Publications Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments and details.
Acknowledgement of Sources detail
Bioinfo Publications Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. Bioinfo Publications reviewer should also call to the editor's attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
Conflict of Interest and Disclosure
Unpublished manuscript, text materials, diagrams, tables, figures, disclosed in submitted articles must not be used in a reviewers own research without the express written consent of the all authors of that manuscript. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Bioinfo Publications Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, organisations or institutions connected to the articles.