Peer Review Policy
The practice of peer review is to ensure the quality of published material. It is an objective process at the heart of good scholarly publishing and is the basis of all reputable scientific journals. Our referees, therefore, play a vital role in maintaining the high standards of the International Journal of Livestock Research. All unsolicited manuscripts are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below.
NOTE: Special issues and/or conference proceedings may have different peer review procedures involving, for example, Guest Editors, conference organizers or scientific committees. Authors contributing to these projects may receive full details of the peer review process on request from the editorial office.
Initial manuscript evaluation – The Editors first evaluates all manuscripts. It is rare, but it is entirely feasible for an exceptional manuscript to be accepted at this stage. Those rejected at this stage have serious scientific flaws, or are outside the aims and scope of the journal. Those that meet the minimum criteria are passed on to at least 2 experts for review. Authors of manuscripts rejected at this stage will be informed within 2 weeks of receipt or with recommended reviewer suggestions for resubmission.
Type of Peer Review – This journal employs double blind reviewing, where both the referee and author remain anonymous throughout the process.
How the referee is selected – Referees are matched to the paper according to their expertise. It is expected of the Editorial Board to review several papers; however, we welcome suggestions for referees from the Editorial Board and Author, though these recommendations may or may not be used.
Referee reports – Referees are asked to evaluate whether the manuscript: Is original Is methodologically sound Follows appropriate ethical guidelines Has results which are clearly presented and support the conclusions Correctly references previous relevant work Referees are not expected to correct or copyedit manuscripts. Language correction is not part of the peer review process.
How long does the review process take? Typically the manuscript will be reviewed within 1 to 2 weeks. Should the referees’ reports contradict one another or a report is unnecessarily delayed, a further expert opinion will be sought. All our referees sign a conflict of interest statement. Referees may request more than one revision of a manuscript.
Final report – A final decision to accept or reject the manuscript will be sent to the author along with any recommendations made by the referees, and may include verbatim comments by the referees.
Appeal process – If an author wishes to appeal an outcome of peer review, they should contact the Editors-in-Chief in writing and detail his/her concern. Appeals will only be successful if reviews were inadequate or unjust. Should this be the case, the paper will be sent to alternate reviewers agree to re-review the paper.
Editor’s Decision is final Referees advice the Editors-in-Chief, who are responsible for the final decision to accept or reject the article.
Becoming a Referee for the Journal– If you are not currently a referee for the Journal, but would like to be added to the list of referees for this title, please contact the editorial office. The benefits of refereeing for the International Journal of Livestock Research include the opportunity to see and evaluate the latest work in your research area at an early stage, and to be acknowledged in an annual statement in the Journal.
Copyright Intellectual property-, in particular, copyright (rights in editorial content), trademarks (rights in brands for services or journals), and database rights (rights in compilations of information), form the Pashupati Foundation India (PFI). PFI embraces the opportunities the digital environment offers for communication and access, while at the same time recognizing the new risks that this environment poses: the ease with which unauthorized copies can be made and distributed worldwide.
Our Objective We aim to manage digital rights and brands amidst the structural changes that the “information society” represents, while at the same time recognizing the shared goals we have with our customers and authors. These include providing the widest possible distribution of scientific and medical content and services in a financially sustainable business model. PFI wants to ensure a proper balance between the scholarly rights which authors retain (or are granted/transferred back in some cases) and the rights granted to PFI that are necessary to support our mix of business models. We routinely analyze and modify our policies to ensure we are responding to authors’ needs and concerns, and the concerns generally of the research and scholarly communities. Disclosure Statement for Authors At the end of the text, under a subheading “Disclosure Statement”, all authors must disclose any actual or potential conflict of interest including any financial, personal or other relationships with other people or organizations within three (3) years of beginning the work submitted that could inappropriately influence (bias) their work. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
You can submit Jobs (JRF/SRF/Others relevant) via contact us This will help to find right talent.