Editorial Process

Journal Information

Contents

Initial Check

All submitted manuscripts undergo an initial screening conducted by the Managing Editor to ensure that submissions meet the journal’s basic requirements before entering peer review. This step evaluates:

★ Suitability of the manuscript with respect to the journal’s scope;
★ Compliance with submission and formatting requirements;
★ Similarity of the manuscript to existing literature using plagiarism detection tools such as iThenticate or equivalent systems.

Manuscripts failing to meet required standards may be rejected at this stage or returned to authors for necessary corrections prior to further consideration.

Manuscripts passing the initial check are assigned to an Academic Editor, typically the Editor-in-Chief. In certain cases, another Editorial Board Member, Guest Editor, or qualified expert may be appointed as Academic Editor after disclosing any conflicts of interest according to journal policies.

The Academic Editor evaluates submissions for originality, scientific quality, ethical compliance, and relevance to the journal. Manuscripts judged insufficient in quality or outside the journal’s scope may be rejected without external review. Suitable manuscripts proceed to full peer review.

Peer Review

Frontiers in Environmental Biology employs a single-blind peer review system, in which reviewers are aware of author identities while reviewer identities remain confidential.

Following initial screening, manuscripts are sent to independent experts in the relevant field. Reviewer selection follows criteria outlined in the journal’s Peer Review Policy.

Reviewers are generally requested to submit reports within 14 days of accepting the invitation. Reviewers evaluate:

  • Scientific validity and methodology
  • Originality and significance
  • Clarity of presentation
  • Ethical compliance
  • Contribution to the field

Review reports include detailed comments and one of the following recommendations:

  • Acceptance
  • Minor Revision
  • Major Revision
  • Rejection

Normally, at least two independent reviewer reports are obtained before editorial decisions are made.

Special Issue submissions are held to the same quality standards as regular submissions and undergo full peer review, except for invited editorials. Oversight of Special Issues remains under the responsibility of the Editor-in-Chief.

Editorial Decision

After receiving reviewer reports, the Academic Editor evaluates the manuscript and makes one of the following recommendations:

★ Acceptance – The manuscript proceeds to production and publication.

★ Revision – Authors are requested to revise the manuscript according to reviewer and editorial comments. Revised submissions may undergo further evaluation or additional peer review if necessary.

★ Rejection – The manuscript is declined for publication.

Final Decision Oversight

If the Academic Editor handling the manuscript is not the Editor-in-Chief, decisions recommending acceptance or rejection may undergo additional review by the Editor-in-Chief. This oversight ensures adequacy of peer review, editorial consistency, and maintenance of publication standards.

If concerns remain after provisional acceptance, manuscripts may undergo further revision or, in rare cases, be rejected at this stage.

Post-Acceptance Production

Accepted manuscripts enter the production stage, which includes:

  • Language and technical editing
  • Copyediting and formatting
  • Typesetting and proof preparation
  • Author proof correction
  • Final publication and indexing preparation

Articles are published online upon completion of production processes.

Appeals and Complaints

Authors may appeal editorial decisions or raise concerns regarding the peer review or editorial process. Appeals should be submitted to the editorial office via the journal’s official contact email.

Complaints related to editorial handling or publication ethics are investigated by the responsible editor or publisher, following Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines. If the editor is directly involved in the complaint, matters are handled by the publisher to ensure impartial resolution.