Peer Review Policy

Overview

At ABNJ, we are committed to the highest standards of academic rigor, ethical responsibility, and scientific relevance. The peer review process is central to ensuring that all published research is original, methodologically sound, ethically compliant, and scientifically impactful. All submitted manuscripts undergo a double-blind peer review process to uphold objectivity and fairness.

???? Review Model: Double-Blind Peer Review

  • Author Anonymity: Reviewers are not provided with the identity of the authors.

  • Reviewer Anonymity: Authors do not know the identity of reviewers.

This double-blind approach guarantees that evaluations are based purely on scientific merit, without influence from the authors' affiliations, background, or nationality.

???? Peer Review Workflow

1. Submission & Initial Editorial Screening

Once submitted through the ABNJ online portal, each manuscript is assessed by the editorial office for:

  • Relevance to biological and environmental sciences

  • Adherence to formatting and submission requirements

  • Ethical approval for research involving animals, humans, or sensitive data

  • Plagiarism screening using Turnitin or similar tools (≤15% similarity index required)

Submissions that fail to meet the baseline standards are desk-rejected without external review.

2. Reviewer Selection

Eligible manuscripts are sent to at least two independent reviewers who are selected based on:

  • Subject-matter expertise in biology, ecology, biotechnology, zoology, botany, etc.

  • Publication record and peer review experience

  • Absence of conflicts of interest with the authors or affiliated institutions

3. Review Criteria

Reviewers evaluate submissions according to the following:

  • Originality and contribution to biological knowledge

  • Methodological validity (e.g., experimental design, sampling, statistical rigor)

  • Data accuracy and reproducibility of findings

  • Clarity of scientific writing and logical flow

  • Relevance to current research trends or ecological challenges

  • Ethical compliance with animal/human subject research standards

Reviewer recommendations may include:

✅ Accept
✏️ Minor Revisions
???? Major Revisions (may require re-review)
❌ Reject

4. Editorial Decision

The handling editor compiles reviewer comments and makes one of the following decisions:

  • Accept

  • Request revisions (minor/major)

  • Reject

Authors receive:

  • A formal decision letter

  • Anonymized reviewer comments

  • Clear revision instructions (if applicable)

  • A revision deadline (typically 2–4 weeks)

⏱️ Review Timeline

  • Average peer review duration: 4–6 weeks

  • Delays may occur due to article complexity, reviewer availability, or multiple revision cycles

  • Authors are advised to submit revisions promptly to avoid publication delays

✅ Reviewer Ethics & Responsibilities

All ABNJ reviewers must:

  • Maintain strict confidentiality of the manuscript

  • Provide objective, constructive, and respectful feedback

  • Declare any conflict of interest

  • Avoid bias based on gender, nationality, or affiliation

Reviewers must not:

???? Use or share unpublished data
???? Contact the authors directly
???? Discuss the manuscript outside the review process

???? Appeals Process

If an author disagrees with the editorial decision:

  • A formal appeal may be submitted to the Editor-in-Chief

  • The appeal must include a detailed justification and supporting documentation

  • The editorial board may consult an independent reviewer or advisor

  • Final decisions rest with the Editor-in-Chief and are not open to further appeal

⚖️ Ethical Standards & Compliance

ABNJ upholds the ethical guidelines of:

  • COPE (Committee on Publication Ethics)

  • Higher Education Commission (HEC) of Pakistan

  • International standards for responsible scholarly publishing

???? Reviewer Recognition

ABNJ acknowledges the vital role of peer reviewers through:

  • Annual publication of reviewer names (with consent)

  • Certificates of recognition upon request

  • Invitation to join the Editorial Advisory Board for top reviewers

✅ Conclusion

The peer review process at ABNJ is designed to protect scientific credibility, encourage constructive academic dialogue, and enhance the quality of published research. By maintaining double-blind review, ethical oversight, and transparent communication, ABNJ ensures that all manuscripts meet global standards of scholarly excellence in the biological and environmental sciences.