Peer Review Policy

Bioresources and Environment (BioEnv) uses a double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality and scientific integrity of all published articles. In this process, authors and reviewers remain anonymous to each other throughout the review.

1. Initial Editorial Screening

The Editor-in-Chief or a Handling Editor reviews each submitted manuscript to determine whether it:

  • Fits the journal's scope.
  • Presents original and significant research.
  • Meets basic scientific and ethical standards.
  • Complies with the journal's submission guidelines.

The editorial team may reject manuscripts that do not meet these requirements without sending them for external review. All submissions are also screened for plagiarism before peer review.

2. Peer Review Process

Manuscripts that pass the initial screening are sent to at least two independent reviewers with expertise in the relevant field.

Reviewers evaluate the manuscript based on:

  • Originality and contribution to knowledge.
  • Scientific quality and methodology.
  • Accuracy and validity of the results.
  • Clarity of presentation.
  • Relevance to the field of bioresources and environmental research.

If reviewer recommendations differ significantly, the editor may invite an additional reviewer or make a decision based on the reviewers' comments and editorial assessment.

3. Reviewer Responsibilities

Reviewers are expected to:

  • Provide objective, constructive, and timely reviews.
  • Maintain the confidentiality of all manuscript information.
  • Declare any conflicts of interest before accepting a review.
  • Decline the review if they cannot provide an impartial evaluation.

Reviewers must not use unpublished information for personal or professional advantage.

4. Editorial Decisions

The Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor makes the final decision based on the reviewers' recommendations and the overall quality of the manuscript.

The possible editorial decisions are:

  • Accept
  • Accept with Minor Revisions
  • Major Revisions Required
  • Reject

Authors receive anonymous reviewer comments to help improve their manuscripts.

5. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors should:

  • Respond to each reviewer comment.
  • Clearly identify the changes made in the revised manuscript.
  • Submit the revised manuscript within the specified deadline.

The editor may send the revised manuscript to the original reviewers for further evaluation.

6. Publication Ethics

BioEnv follows high standards of publication ethics throughout the peer review process. Editors, reviewers, and authors must maintain confidentiality and disclose any conflicts of interest. The journal investigates suspected ethical misconduct, including plagiarism, duplicate publication, data fabrication, and image manipulation, in accordance with the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines.

7. Appeals

Authors may appeal an editorial decision by submitting a written explanation to the Editor-in-Chief. The editorial team will review the appeal, and the Editor-in-Chief's decision will be final.

8. Review Timeline

BioEnv aims to complete the peer review process within 6 to 8 weeks, although the review period may vary depending on reviewer availability and the extent of revisions required.