Review Policy
Peer Review Process
Trends in Animal and Poultry Sciences (TAPS) is committed to upholding the highest standards of academic publishing through a rigorous and transparent peer review process. The journal utilizes an online submission and tracking system to ensure a timely and efficient review process. We strive for a review duration of 4 to 6 weeks, followed by prompt publication of accepted research articles.
The editorial board, in collaboration with the Editor-in-Chief, adheres to strict ethical guidelines, ensuring accountability and integrity throughout the review process. TAPS provides a robust platform for both experienced researchers and emerging scholars in the field of Animal and Poultry Sciences, offering support to those seeking to contribute innovative and meaningful research.
Manuscripts submitted to TAPS undergo a meticulous peer review process to ensure they meet the journal's high standards of quality and relevance. Each manuscript is evaluated for its originality, scientific rigor, and its potential to contribute valuable insights to the field. While the journal welcomes novel and creative research, all submissions must demonstrate clear significance to the field of Animal and Poultry Sciences.
Initial Editorial Evaluation
Upon submission, each manuscript is reviewed by the editorial office to ensure compliance with the journal's guidelines and ethical standards. Manuscripts that pass this initial screening are then assigned to the Editor-in-Chief, who determines whether the submission should proceed to peer review. Manuscripts may be desk-rejected at this stage if they are deemed unsuitable or lack scientific merit. Authors of rejected manuscripts are encouraged to revise and resubmit, incorporating editorial feedback.
Rigorous Peer Review
All manuscripts that pass the initial screening are subject to a single-blind peer review process, where the reviewers remain anonymous to the authors. At least two independent experts from relevant fields are selected to evaluate the manuscript’s scientific quality, clarity, methodology, and relevance. In certain cases, additional reviewers may be appointed to ensure comprehensive coverage of interdisciplinary aspects.
Reviewers are asked to provide detailed, constructive feedback and make one of the following recommendations:
- Accept without revision
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
The Editor-in-Chief, based on the reviewers' comments and recommendations, will make the final decision on the manuscript’s suitability for publication. The corresponding author is promptly notified of the editorial decision via email, with full transparency on the reviewers’ feedback. In cases of rejection, authors may be invited to revise and resubmit, provided they address the concerns raised during the review.
Revision Process
When revisions are requested, authors must submit a point-by-point response to the reviewers' comments, detailing how they have addressed each concern. Revised manuscripts are typically sent back to the original reviewers for re-evaluation, although new reviewers may be consulted if necessary. Authors are expected to return their revised manuscripts within the timeframe provided by the journal to avoid delays in the review process.
Acceptance and Proofing
Once all editorial issues are resolved, and the manuscript is deemed suitable for publication, it is formally accepted. Authors are then sent proofs of their article for final review. Only minor corrections, such as typographical or formatting errors, are permitted at this stage. Major revisions or changes to the content will not be allowed unless approved by the editorial board.
The final version of the manuscript is subject to formatting and style adjustments as per the journal’s publication standards. TAPS reserves the right to make the final decision on the presentation of figures, tables, and any stylistic matters.
