Initial Check
The first stage of the manuscript review process at Journal of Plant Biota involves an initial check conducted by the Managing Editor to assess:
· The suitability of the manuscript with respect to the journal’s scope.
· The adherence of the manuscript to the journal’s formatting guidelines.
· The similarity between the manuscript and existing literature using iThenticate.
Manuscripts that do not meet the required standards at this stage will be rejected or returned to the authors for modifications.
Manuscripts passing the initial check are assigned to an Academic Editor, usually the Editor-in-Chief. In certain cases, the Editor-in-Chief may designate an Editorial Board Member, a Guest Editor, or another expert in the field as the Academic Editor, ensuring the disclosure of any conflicts of interest as per the journal’s guidelines. The Academic Editor assesses the manuscript’s novelty, scientific rigor, and ethical considerations. If the manuscript is deemed unsuitable for peer review due to quality or scope misalignment, it will be rejected without further processing. Accepted manuscripts proceed to the peer review stage.
Peer Review
Journal of Plant Biota follows a single-blind peer review process, meaning that reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but authors do not know the reviewers’ identities. All accepted manuscripts undergo a thorough and rigorous review, except for select Editorials issued by the Editors.
Following the initial check, experts in the relevant field are invited to review the manuscript. Further details on reviewer selection are outlined in the journal’s Peer Review Policy.
Reviewers are generally required to complete their evaluation within 14 days of accepting the invitation. The review process involves assessing the manuscript’s scientific validity, originality, and significance, culminating in a review report with specific comments and an overall recommendation:
· Acceptance
· Minor Revision
· Major Revision
· Rejection
At least two review reports are collected and forwarded to the Academic Editor for final consideration. Detailed reviewer guidelines are available under Peer Review Guidelines.
Special issue manuscripts must adhere to the same rigorous quality standards as regular submissions. All special issue manuscripts—whether invited or unsolicited—undergo full peer review, except for select Editorials released by the Editors. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for overseeing the content of all special issue articles and supervising Guest Editors. More details are available under Guest Editor Guidelines.
Editorial Decision
Upon receiving the review reports, the Academic Editor makes one of the following recommendations:
· Acceptance: The manuscript proceeds to the production stage.
· Revision: The authors are invited to submit a revised manuscript incorporating reviewer and Academic Editor feedback. The revised submission is reassessed for acceptance, further revision, or rejection. If necessary, it may undergo additional peer review.
· Rejection: The manuscript is declined for publication.
Note:
· If the Academic Editor is not the Editor-in-Chief, all acceptance and rejection decisions undergo further review by the Editor-in-Chief, who ensures the adequacy of the peer review, the comprehensiveness of the Academic Editor’s comments, and the overall quality and publication value of the manuscript before issuing a final decision.
· If a manuscript does not meet the required criteria at this stage, it may be sent for additional review or revisions. If the provisional acceptance is overturned, the manuscript will be rejected.
Post-Acceptance Process
Once accepted, manuscripts undergo production, which includes:
· Language and copy editing
· Formatting adjustments
· Final proofreading and conversion into the required publication format
Appeals and Complaints
Authors may appeal editorial decisions or peer review reports by contacting the editorial office at editor@researchfloor.org. Complaints regarding the editorial process or publication ethics should also be directed to the editorial office and will be handled by the responsible journal Editor.
If the complaint involves an Editor, authors may escalate their concerns to the publisher at info@researchfloor.org. Ethical complaints will be handled in accordance with the guidelines established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).