Journal of Life Science Agriculture and Technology

Duties of Authors

1. Authors must certify that the submitted manuscript is an original work and has not been previously published or disseminated elsewhere.
2. Authors must present truthful research data, free from distortion, fabrication, embellishment, or the creation of false data.
3. Authors must clearly identify sources and accurately and completely cite the work of others whenever it is used in the manuscript, and every cited work must appear in the reference list at the end of the article.
4. Authors must prepare the manuscript in strict compliance with the journal’s prescribed template and submission requirements.
5. In the case of research involving human subjects, the study must receive approval from a Human Research Ethics Committee, and the certificate of approval number (COA/IRB) must be clearly stated in the manuscript.
6. All authors and co-authors must have genuinely participated in the conduct of the research, and all must be fully informed of and jointly consent to the submission of the manuscript for consideration for publication in the Journal of Biological Sciences, Agriculture and Technology.
7. Authors must not engage in copyright infringement or violate academic ethics, such as plagiarism, data fabrication, or falsification.
8. Authors must not submit the manuscript simultaneously to another journal for consideration (duplicate submission) while the journal’s review process is ongoing, up to and including the stage of publication.
9. Authors must specify the name(s) of the institution(s) or funding source(s) that supported the research in the Acknowledgements section.
10. Authors must disclose any conflicts of interest in the manuscript if there are any relevant competing interests.
11. If any ethical or academic misconduct is identified in any case, the Editor and the Editorial Board reserve the absolute right to terminate the review process or withdraw the article from publication.

Duties of Editors
1. Initial screening and preliminary quality assessment: The Editor is responsible for reviewing the manuscript’s format, completeness, and academic quality at the initial stage in order to determine whether the manuscript should be selected for the peer-review process.
2. The Editor must not disclose any information whatsoever to unauthorized or non-involved parties during the review process, under strict confidentiality.
3. The Editor makes the final decision to accept or reject a manuscript after the completion of the review process, based on its significance, academic accuracy, timeliness, and consistency with the objectives of the journal.
4. The Editor is responsible for preparing the guidelines for authors and for continuously updating the article formatting to ensure that it remains current and aligned with international standards.
5. The Editor must not accept for publication any manuscript that has already been published in another journal or any other source (duplicate publication).
6. The Editor must check the manuscript for similarity using a reliable plagiarism-detection software and must communicate with the author(s) in a fair manner if any case of copyright infringement is identified.
7. The Editor must have no conflicts of interest whatsoever with the author(s) or peer reviewers, in order to ensure transparency in the decision-making process.
8. The Editor must not reject a manuscript for publication based solely on suspicion without evidence, but must first seek clear empirical evidence prior to making a decision.
9. The Editor has a duty to take appropriate measures if it is found that an author has committed research ethics violations, engaged in duplicate use of data, or committed any form of academic misconduct.

Duties of Reviewers
1. Reviewers must maintain strict confidentiality of the manuscript and the author(s)’ information and must not disclose, use any part of the information for personal benefit, or share it with any external parties throughout the entire review process.
2. Reviewers must have no conflicts of interest with the author(s), such as co-authorship, personal relationships, or any other involvement that may affect the independence and impartiality of their decision-making in the evaluation of the manuscript.
3. Reviewers should accept manuscripts for review only in fields in which they have expertise, and should evaluate manuscripts primarily on the basis of academic quality, significance, currency, and coherence of content. Reviewers must provide objective feedback, free from bias or personal opinions that lack academic evidence.
4. Reviewers may suggest important and relevant references or research works that the author(s) may not have included in the manuscript, in order to make the manuscript more complete and of greater academic value.
5. If reviewers identify, with clear empirical evidence, that a manuscript exhibits significant duplication or similarity with other works, they must immediately notify the Editor for consideration and further action in accordance with appropriate procedures.