Ethical Principles and Peer Review Process

Animal Ethics

Research involving experimental animals should be carried out following animal ethics and welfare. The experimental animals must be appropriately treated, minimizing the pain that might arise during the treatment. The utilization of experimental animals must be following local, national, and international regulations. The authors are required to make a statement confirming that the study has been approved by an ethical committee, including the name of the ethical authority and the consent number; the trial is carried out in compliance with animal ethics and welfare.

Publication Policy

Peer-Review Process

The journal performs double-blind peer reviews, which means that reviewer names and authors are hidden from each other. Briefly, the editor-in-chief and editorial team will assess the manuscripts submitted at the prequalification stage based on the format suitability and to scan for instances of plagiarism. The corresponding author will automatically receive a confirmation email after successfully submitting the manuscript. If the journal format is not respected, the manuscript will be sent back to the corresponding author to be rewritten under the JASAB format. Manuscripts with insufficient originality, serious scientific flaws, methodology failures, or not included in JASAB scope are rejected before proceeding for formal peer review. The editor-in-chief will inform the corresponding author about the decision.

Manuscripts that are found suitable for potential publication are assessed by the editor-in-chief and the editorial team, focusing on the quality of the submitted manuscripts. After the prequalification, manuscripts will be evaluated by two or three external reviewers determined by the editorial team. The manuscripts reviewed for publication in the JASAB are performed in a double-blind review. The double-blind peer review process is a way to ensure impartiality and prevent any bias when reviewing. Therefore, neither the author nor the reviewer knows who wrote the paper. The reviewers' comments are sent to the authors anonymously and never posted publicly.

The chief editor handles all correspondence with the corresponding author and the reviewer and leads the final decision on whether the manuscript is recommended to be accepted, rejected, or needs to be returned to the corresponding author for revision. If one of the two reviewers rejects the manuscript, then the paper will be sent to a third reviewer.

Accepted without revisions

If the manuscript is declared accepted, the editor-in-chief will notify the corresponding author by e-mail, and the author will immediately receive the payment bill (if applicable). Then, the manuscript passes on to the editors for editing and layout. If payment has been made by the corresponding author or his/her institution, and the editing process is completed, the editor-in-chief will send a proof to the corresponding author via email for final correction and approval. The maximum time to approve is limited to a month. Proof that has been approved by the corresponding author is published online in the next volume and number. This process is repeated until reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript. Manuscripts are accepted on the basis of quality, originality, significance, novelty, and importance for the field.

Manuscript accepted with minor revisions or major revisions, or must be rewritten.

Manuscripts that require revision will be returned to the corresponding author via email, and the corresponding author must resubmit the revised manuscript via the email of the editor-in-chief within the specified time period. Then, the revised manuscript from the corresponding author is sent to the editorial team to check whether the manuscript has been revised according to the reviewers' suggestions. The editorial team provides recommendations to the editor-in-chief if the manuscript can be accepted or must be returned to the corresponding author to be revised again or rejected.

 Rejected

Manuscripts are rejected without any explanation to the corresponding author. This decision may come from

- The corresponding author did not revise the manuscript as suggested by the reviewers and did not respond to the suggestion

- Absence of originality and novelty in manuscripts

- Data is incomplete to prove the research hypothesis or the methodology used is incorrect

- Inconsistencies between objectives, research methods, results, and conclusions.

Deadlines

At the Journal of Animal Sciences and Applied Biology, the entire process from submission to publishing lasts 10 to 12 weeks.

1. First editorial review and decision: 6 days
2. The review process by the peer reviewer: 21 to 30 days
3. Revisions by the corresponding author:
4. If minor revisions: no more than 6 days
5. If major revisions: a maximum of 30 days. Manuscripts exceeding the revision deadline will be canceled. Optionally, the corresponding author can request an extension of time from the editor-in-chief before the revision period ends.
6. The editing and layout process will take a maximum of 14 days.
7. Approval of proof of the manuscript's final version by the corresponding author: a maximum of 2 days.

The Journal of Animal Science and Applied Biology publishes four issues in one volume per year.