Peer Review Guidelines

Conflicts of Interest

The journal seeks to avoid assigning reviewers with conflicts of interest; however, reviewers must also actively declare any potential conflicts. Conflicts may include professional collaborations, institutional affiliations, personal relationships, or competitive interests involving the authors or the research.

Reviewers who believe conflicts may compromise impartial evaluation should decline the invitation. If a reviewer believes the conflict does not prevent fair judgment, disclosure to the editorial office is still required so that an informed decision can be made regarding reviewer suitability.

Confidentiality

All manuscripts and associated materials are confidential documents. Reviewers must not share, discuss, or use unpublished data or findings for personal or professional advantage.

If consultation with colleagues is necessary for evaluation, permission must first be obtained from the editorial office. Individuals contributing to the review may be recorded internally for acknowledgement purposes.

Anonymity

The journal operates under a single-blind review model, where reviewer identities remain confidential to authors. Reviewers should avoid revealing personal identity or institutional affiliation in review reports.

All reviewer comments must be submitted through the journal’s submission system rather than communicated directly to authors. Requests to reveal reviewer identity must be managed through the editorial office.

Unbiased Evaluation

Reviewers should evaluate manuscripts objectively and fairly, without influence from nationality, gender, institutional affiliation, political or religious views, or commercial considerations.

The focus of evaluation should remain solely on scientific merit and contribution to the field.

Reporting Misconduct

If reviewers identify potential ethical concerns such as plagiarism, data fabrication, duplicate publication, unethical experimentation, or other misconduct, they should immediately inform the editorial office. Early reporting helps maintain publication integrity.

Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers are encouraged to assess manuscripts based on the following criteria:

Novelty

• Does the study present new ideas, methods, or findings?
• Does the work advance knowledge in the field?

Significance

• Is the topic relevant and timely?
• Does the work make a meaningful contribution to environmental or biological sciences?

Scientific Soundness

• Is the study design appropriate and technically sound?
• Are analyses conducted properly?
• Do data adequately support conclusions?
• Are methods described clearly enough to allow reproducibility?

Clarity and Presentation

• Is the manuscript logically organized and clearly written?
• Are figures and tables accurate and informative?
• Do conclusions accurately reflect findings?

Language Quality

• Is the manuscript written in understandable and professional English?
• Does language quality permit effective communication of results?

Preparing the Review Report

Reviewer reports assist editors in making publication decisions and guide authors in improving manuscripts. Reports should include:

★ Detailed comments on novelty, significance, methodology, clarity, and presentation, including both strengths and areas needing improvement.

★ Specific suggestions to address weaknesses or improve clarity.

★ An overall recommendation, selecting one of the following options:

• Acceptance – Suitable for publication without modification.
• Minor Revision – Requires limited revisions.
• Major Revision – Requires substantial revisions or additional analyses.
• Rejection – Contains major flaws or lacks sufficient originality or scientific merit.

Reviewers who wish to evaluate revised versions should indicate this preference in their report.

Recognition for Reviewers

The journal recognizes the essential contributions of peer reviewers and offers several forms of acknowledgment:

★ Annual public acknowledgement of reviewer contributions;

★ Issuance of Reviewer Recognition Certificates;

★ Encouragement to register reviews through Publons for professional recognition;

★ Recommendation to link Publons activity with ORCID profiles for automatic record integration.