Editorial Policy

Editorial board members of Advances in Agriculture and Biology (AAB) in connection with Editor-In-Chief are bound with an ethical and honest accountability to support the researchers and interested individuals. We want to provide a wide platform with a humane support to newer researchers and creative individuals living in different parts of this world. We also want to develop a warm connection with such individuals who knows something special, novel and unusual about the scientific aspects of varied agricultural and biological sciences areas.

The manuscripts submitted to AAB will be subjected to peer-review and are therefore expected to be of high quality. Manuscripts submitted for publication consideration must have the ability to make a contribution to the field of agricultural and biological sciences. AAB applies a very vigorous review process in determining which articles are accepted and eventually being published. We strive for a rapid review and subsequent publication of high-quality manuscripts. Articles published in AAB have an exceptionally wide impact, both among scientists and, frequently, among the general public.   

Editorial policy

All submitted articles are sent to the Editor-in-Chief after final checking (manuscript format according to the journal pattern) who examines the manuscript in depth. If he feels that the manuscript does not cover the aspects as per the journal guidelines or out of scope of the journal and with insufficient features to be submitted for review or of low quality, he may directly reject paper without any further processing, typically within a week. Concerned author will be informed through e-mail as early as possible about such failure to conformity and will always be supported for a newer submission. If the Editor-in-Chief observes that the submitted manuscript is of enough quality and within the journal scope, then it is sent to two experts of the field who have agreed in advance to assess the paper rapidly. If the manuscript receives reports by two experts, then the reviews are usually conveyed to the authors. Based on reviewers’ recommendations, four decisions are taken by the Editor-in-Chief: (i) publish manuscript as it is (ii) publish manuscript with minor changes (iii) revise manuscript for major changes. If the editor has invited the authors to resubmit, authors must ensure that all the referees’ technical comments have been satisfactorily addressed (not just some of them), unless specifically advised otherwise by the editor in the letter, and must accompany the resubmitted version with a point-by-point response to the referees’ comments. Editors will not send resubmitted papers to the reviewers if it seems that the authors have not made a serious attempt to address all the referees’ criticisms (iv) reject manuscript. The decision/report letter is sent to the corresponding author who will be accountable to carry out all the changes suggested by the Editor-in-Chief. If minor revision is required, authors are requested to return a revised copy within the shortest possible time, while for major revision authors should return an adapted version within 10 days.

The paper is rejected with no offer to reconsider a resubmitted version. Under these circumstances, authors are strongly advised not to resubmit a revised version as it will be declined without further review. If the authors feel that they have a strong scientific case for reconsideration (if the referees have missed the point of the paper, for example) they can appeal the decision in writing. But in view of AAB's extreme space constraints and the large number of papers under active consideration at any one time, editors cannot assign a high priority to consideration of such appeals. The main grounds for a successful appeal for reconsideration are if the author can identify a specific technical or other point of interest which had been missed by the referees and editors previously. Appeals written in general or vague terms, or that contain arguments not relevant to the content of the particular manuscript, are not likely to be successful. Manuscripts cannot be submitted elsewhere while an appeal is being considered. In replying to the referees’ comments, authors are advised to use language that would not cause offence when their paper is shown again to the referees, and to bear in mind that if a point was not clear to the referees and/or editors, it is unlikely that it would be clear to the non-specialist readers of AAB.

Authors are requested to be patient, and the accepted manuscripts will be published in turn. Continuous reminders and back-up in any form for the urgent publication may exclude the manuscript before publication in the journal. As per AAB editorial policy, all the accepted papers will remain in line for publication. The whole process from submission to publication may take minimum of 2 months and maximum of 5 months which is definitely less time period as compared with other publishers of present years. Authors are requested not to re-submit the rejected article to AAB.