We are still accepting manuscripts for COVID 19 Special Issue “Methods to Facilitate SARS CoV 2 and COVID 19 Research”
The Journal of Biological Methods (JBM) (ISSN 2326-9901) is a multidisciplinary and open-access journal committed to publishing peer-reviewed papers on cutting-edge and innovative biological techniques, methods and protocols. Manuscripts submitted for consideration are expected to describe original research on novel biotechnology, biological methods and experimental techniques, significant optimization and modification of existing methods, development of step-by-step protocols based on established methods and technologies, and reviews on technical aspects of a particular biological field. JBM covers all biological sciences including, but not limited to, the following areas:
Peer Review Policy
JBM is committed to providing authors with fast, rigorous, constructive and fair reviews. JBM uses single blind peer review, where reviewers remain anonymous. The peer review process is made up of several stages.
Initial Quality Check
The journal staff perform an initial quality check to ensure minimum formatting requirements stated in Author Guidelines are met. At this stage, we also check for potential issues such as competing interest and incompliance with editorial policies and ethical standards.
Once the manuscripts have passed the quality check, they will be initially evaluated by the Editors-in-Chief or Deputy Editor to determine whether they should be sent out for review by external referees based on scientific merit and technical quality of the manuscripts. If the manuscripts are out of scope or fall short of scientific standards set by JBM, they may be rejected outright without being reviewed any further.
Manuscripts that successfully go through the initial assessment will be assigned to a subject expert in our team of Editors to oversee the review process. At least three external referees will be invited and assigned the manuscript based on their expertise. At submission, authors are encouraged to suggest editorial members and at least five potential reviewers who are qualified to provide an independent assessment of the manuscript. Authors should not suggest colleagues who work in the same institution as themselves or recent collaborators. In the cover letter, authors may also identify individuals who should be excluded as a reviewer and give the reason for the exclusion. External peer reviewers typically have 14 days to submit their reviews.
Submissions determined not to be reviewed by editors will be returned to authors and will in general not be considered again unless substantial revision has been made. Resubmitted papers will be considered as a new submission. For peer-reviewed papers, a decision of either acceptance, acceptance after revision, reconsideration after revision, or rejection will be made by editors based on the evaluation of referees. The handling editor sends a decision email to the corresponding author along with reviewers’ comments.
If a manuscript has been determined to be acceptable pending major revision, the authors will have 30 days to revise their manuscript unless extension request is granted by the editor.
It is typical that multiple rounds of reviews may be needed for authors to address concerns raised by reviewers. When all issues have been satisfactorily addressed, the handling editor will issue an editorial accept and the manuscript is ready to move on to production phase.
Pre-submission inquiries are welcome but not required if authors would like to find out if their paper is suitable for publication in JBM before submitting a full manuscript for peer review.
Individual articles will be published as soon as they are ready and will be added to the "current" volume's Table of Contents.
Article processing charge
JBM charges the article processing charge (APC) of $1000 USD to cover a range of publishiing services we provide. Corresponding author is responsible for making or arranging the payment upon editorial acceptance of the manuscript. We consider individual waiver requests on a case-by-case basis.
This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.
For manuscripts reporting studies involving human subjects, statements identifying the committee approving the studies and confirming that informed consent was obtained from all subjects must appear in the appropriate section. All experiments on live vertebrates or higher invertebrates must be performed in accordance with relevant institutional and national guidelines and regulations. In the manuscript, a statement identifying the committee approving the experiments and confirming that all experiments conform to the relevant regulatory standards must be included.
Informed consent is required for manuscripts reporting studies involving human subjects. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication.
JBM requires all authors to disclose any financial and personal conflict of interest that might influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. Authors must declare any such conflict during the submission process and in the section following author affiliations of the manuscript. The corresponding author will be asked to sign on behalf of all the authors a Conflict of Interest declaration form upon acceptance of their paper. Any affiliation associated with a payment or financial benefit exceeding $10,000, or 5% ownership of a company or research funding by a company with related interests would constitute a conflict and must be declared.
Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement
Journal of Biological Methods (JBM) follows the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE)’s Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors, and ICMJE's the Code of Conduct for Journal Publishers
The following responsibilities outlined for editors, authors, reviewers, and the publisher are based on the Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (COPE 2011).
Confidentiality: The JBM editorial team will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, editorial board members, and the publisher. The identities of the peer reviewers must be kept confidential.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript shall not be used by an editor or an editorial board member for their own work without written consent of the author. Editors must refrain themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships with any of the authors, companies or institutions associated with the manuscripts.
Fair Review: JBM editors evaluate submitted manuscripts according to their intellectual content (impact, originality, validity, clarity) and its relevance to the journal's scope, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy or institutional affiliation of the author(s).
Involvement and Cooperation in Investigations: JBM editors will take responsive measures to assess all allegations or suspicions of research, publication, or other academic misconduct raised by readers, reviewers, or other editors. Such misconduct may include but is not limited to plagiarism, duplicate or redundant publication, and unethical publishing behavior. JBM editors follow the COPE recommendations when dealing with cases of suspected misconduct.
Publication Decisions: JBM editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts undergo initial review by in-house editors and peer-review by at least two external reviewers who are expert in the field before they are accepted for publication. The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, and the reviewers' comments. The Editor-in-Chief may consult with other editors or reviewers in making the editorial decision. Based on the reports provided by peer reviewers, the editors can accept, reject, or request revision to the manuscript.
Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge the work of others and properly cite publications that have been influential in research work.
Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be given to those who have made a signification contribution to conception, design, execution, or interpretation and writing of the reported study. For individuals who have participated in other aspects of the project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors in “Acknowledgement” section of the manuscript. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript prior to submission.
Data Access and Retention: Authors should be prepared to provide raw data related to their manuscript if requested for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available and ensure accessibility of such data for at least 10 years after publication, provided that the legal rights concerning propriety data do not preclude their release.
Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: Authors should disclose any conflicts of interest (COI) that might influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of COI include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers' bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, stock ownership, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, and non-financial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript.
Disclosure of Financial Support: Any sources of financial support or funding for research and writing must be clearly disclosed including the grant number or other reference number, if any.
Fundamental Errors in Published Works: Authors have the obligations to report to the editor immediately to retract or correct the article at any time if the authors(s) discovers a significant error in submitted manuscript.
Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Authors must confirm that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere. Submitting manuscripts describing the same research to more than one journals constitutes unethical publishing behavior.
Originality: Authors must ensure that their work is original. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
Protection of Human and Animal subjects: If the work involves the use of animals or human subjects, the authors should ensure that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant regulations and institutional guidelines and approved by the appropriate institutional committee(s). Authors should also state in the manuscript that formed consent was obtained for experimentation with human participants.
Reporting Standards: Authors should accurately present their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Authors must follow the submission guidelines
Acknowledgement of Sources: Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge must be immediately brought to the editors’ notice.
Confidentiality: Reviewers must keep all manuscripts received confidential.
Conflict of Interest: Reviewers should not review manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the manuscripts. Any conflicts of interest that might compromise the integrity of the peer review process, the reviewer must inform the editor of this situation and decline the invitation to serve as a reviewer.
Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Reviewers are expected to assist the editors in making editorial decisions and assist the author in improving the manuscripts.
Promptness: Any invited reviewer who feels it is impossible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within assigned time should notify the editor so that alternative reviewers can be contacted.
Standards of Objectivity: Reviews must be done objectively, and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments so that the authors can use them for improving the manuscript.
Access to Journal Content: The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with organizations and maintaining our own digital archive. For details on JBM's archiving policy, please visit http://www.jbmethods.org/jbm/about/editorialPolicies#archiving.
Handling of Unethical Publishing Behavior: In cases of alleged or proven scientific misconduct, fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the JBM editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question including the publication of an erratum, clarification or the retraction of the affected work.
Part of the
PKP Publishing Services Network