Review process policy

Suggested reviewers
On submission, the Author will be asked to suggest a minimum of 2 reviewers in the manuscript submission system, including their full names and email addresses. Reviewers from the Authors’ own department or those who published a paper with any of the co-Authors during the previous 3 years may not be suggested. It is also possible to provide up to 3 names of nonpreferred reviewers who should not be invited to review the manuscript.

Peer review process
All manuscripts are initially reviewed by the editors (initial in-house review takes up to 5 working days). Manuscripts considered to be unsuitable for the journal will be rejected without peer review. Manuscripts deemed to have sufficient priority and quality will be forwarded to our external referees for peer review. Manuscripts that do not comply with the Instructions for Authors will be returned for revision prior to peer review.

Review process
After manuscript submission the pre-evaluation by Editorial Board expert takes place. Basing on the novelty of the study, subject, methods and obtained results, the Editor-in-Chief decides whether to reject the manuscript or to accept it for further processing. Upon acceptance, the manuscript undergoes peer review process which is based on Double Blind Reviews i.e. the reviewers (usually 2) and the Author are anonymous to each other, so all names and other personal data of the Authors are deleted before sending to reviewer. Referees also remain anonymous – the Authors receive no information about the referees reviewing their articles.

The reviewers are asked to submit a review and fill the ‘referee evaluation sheet’ in the JAFS Editorial System within 3 weeks. Next, the manuscript is revised by the Authors (3 weeks). After positive second reviews made by previous reviewers or editor, the paper is directed to language and editorial corrections (if required). The final decision about publishing the paper in the Journal belongs to the Editor-in-Chief.

Instructions for Reviewers
An invitation is sent to the reviewer should be accepted within 5-7 days. When the invitation is accepted, within 21 days the reviewer should prepare and submit the review in JAFS Editorial System. If a referee requires more time to prepare a reliable review, the information should be sent to the editorial office instantly. The remaining e-mails are sent to the reviewer 5 days and one day before the final deadline.
A review should be prepared in English and submitted by JAFS Editorial System (http://www.editorialsystem.com/JAFS). The reviewers are asked to complete a review form with special space for additional comments. There is also a possibility to attach separate files with comments (or article with marked amendments).
Referees are asked to prepare a detailed, reliable and clear review evaluating the content of the article. The insufficient level of English, making the paper difficult to understand should be reported by a referee, nevertheless it should not be a main factor to reject the paper.
During the review submission, the referee is asked to answer the following questions in the review form:
1. Is the contribution new and original? Does it expand existing knowledge?
2. Are the methods appropriate to achieve the objective of the study?
3. Are the interpretations and conclusions sound, proven by the data, and consistent with the objectives?
4. Does the title of this manuscript clearly reflect its content?
5. Is the abstract sufficiently informative, especially when read in isolation?
6. Are the keywords sufficiently informative?
7. Is the formulation of the objectives adequate and does it conform to the subject matter?
8. Are the illustrations and tables all necessary and complete?
9. Are the results evaluated statistically and described properly?
10. Is the discussion of the results carried out correctly with the use of the current literature?
11. Are all of the references necessary and in agreement with the guidelines for Authors?
12. Is the spelling correct and the style of the language proper?
13. Can you suggest changes or brief additions (words, phrases) that will increase the value of this manuscript?

If the answers to points 1, 2 and/or 3 are negative, and if the scientific meaning of the manuscript is poor, the reviewer should not hesitate to reject the paper. If the answer to point 12 is negative, the reviewer does not need to revise the language style.
Making a final decision reviewer should choose from:
a. Accept in present form
b. Accept after minor changes suggested by reviewer
c. Accept after major changes
d. Reject

The reviewer should be prepared that, the manuscript corrected by the Authors will be sent to them for revision (several revisions are possible). In such cases the reviewer is asked to submit comments concerning the publication of the article within 21 days through Journal of Animal and Feed Sciences Editorial System.
Next, the paper with positive reviews is resent to Authors for corrections. The Authors should improve the manuscript according to the reviewers’ remarks and should answer all of the questions and comments in a separate letter. The corrected version should be sent in two copies: one as a final text (plain text) and the second with all of the amendments clearly marked.
The editor and publisher kindly request all Authors to carefully follow the recommendations laid down in these Instructions.