Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The Indian Journal of Experimental Biology (IJEB), started in 1963, is a broad-based open access monthly peer-reviewed periodical publishing original research of experimental nature that contributes significantly to knowledge in cell biology, molecular biology, biotechnology, endocrinology, reproductive biology, immunology, developmental biology, comparative physiology, radiation biology, chronobiology, microbiology, pharmacology, toxicology and other biological fields including instrumentation and methodology. The papers having experimental design involving alteration and/or manipulation in biological system(s) providing insight into their functioning are considered for publication.

CSIR-NISCAIR does not levy Article Processing Charges (APCs) or Article Submission Charges.

 

Section Policies

Minireview

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Papers

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Notes

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Rapid Communication (Brief/Pilot Study)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Others

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Review Policy: All submissions in IJEB undergo a rigorous double blind review process to ensure fair assessment/evaluation and maintain a high-quality impeccable global standard in publication. All submitted manuscripts are treated as confidential documents and the peer review process may take a maximum of four months from the date of submission. Submitted manuscripts are generally referred to two experts (reviewers) and in few cases, it may go to 4-8 experts depending upon the reviewer’s response/silence. Cursorial/Superficial reviews are not given weightage. Only critical reviews are considered and preferred for effective evaluation and improvement in the interest of the journal. Authors may submit a list of four experts in the same subject area with complete details including email along with self declaration (about the originality and non-duplicate\parallel submission) at the time of manuscript submission. Such lists may or may not be used for review purpose of that particular manuscript. In double blind review process neither the author(s) nor the reviewers know each other. Portions in the manuscript which may reveal the authorship/origin such as acknowledgment, note on ethical clearance apart from author names and affiliations, are removed to ensure fair unbiased review. Manuscripts that qualify the peer review process will be processed further. The rest are returned to the respective corresponding author with relevant report(s).

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate Open Access to its contents on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange, and thereby promotion of knowledge.

 

Editorial Board

Editorial Board

 

CSIR-NISCAIR Policy on Plagiarism

The system of formal communication in science through publication in primary journals is based on originality and quality of information, being the only criteria for publication. However, there have been tendencies to misuse the system and vitiate the process of science communication for personal benefits. One of the ills, afflicting science communication, is plagiarism. Attempts at plagiarism may range from verbatim copying of extensive material of other authors, misappropriating results/data of others with minor changes in language/presentation without giving credit to original source, and to publishing essentially the same information more than once.

As the premier institution of publishing primary scientific journals in various disciplines of science and technology in India, CSIR-NISCAIR strongly reiterates its policy of discouraging plagiarism of all kinds. All efforts are made to detect and frustrate attempts at plagiarism through editorial screening and rigorous peer review in respect of communications received for publication in the CSIR-NISCAIR publications. Cooperation of the scientific community is sought in our efforts to frustrate all attempts at plagiarism.

In case, any attempt of plagiarism is brought to our attention accompanied with convincing evidence, following steps would be taken:

(a) After consulting the respective Editorial Board Members, authors guilty of plagiarism will be debarred from publishing their papers in CSIR-NISCAIR journals.

(b) Heads of the Departments/Institutes of the offending authors will be intimated of such incidences of plagiarism.

(c) Such incidents of plagiarism will be publicized through the concerned CSIR-NISCAIR journals in consultation with the respective Editorial Board Members.

 

Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Indian Journal of Experimental Biology (IJEB) is committed to publishing and widely disseminating scholarly peer-reviewed content in the broad subject area of experimental biology with the standard publication ethics and publication malpractices. Our policies are closely aligned with COPE’s (Committee on Publication Ethics) Core Practices document, which can be accessed at: COPE Core Practices

Editor’s responsibility

The editor’s chief responsibility is to determine which submissions to the journal will be published. The editor will get evaluated manuscripts received for publication in the journal from the experts of the specific subject area as evidenced by their academic credentials without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality, and clarity, the study’s validity, and its relevance to the journal's scope. Current legal requirements regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.

Confidentiality

The Editor and Editorial staff shall not share article-related information with anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, editorial board members, or the publisher as is required or otherwise appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Reviewers will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Reviewers will withdraw themselves from reviewing manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Reviewer’s responsibility

Purpose of peer review

The peer review process is a crucial component in helping the editor and/or editorial board reach editorial or publishing decisions and may also serve the author in improving the quality of the submission.

Promptness

A potential reviewer should withdraw from the review process if they cannot provide an assessment on time as defined by the editor.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts for review must be considered confidential documents and information concerning the manuscripts should not be shared with anyone except as authorized by the editor.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Editors and editorial board members will not use any unpublished information in a submitted manuscript for their research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Editors will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the editorial board to handle the manuscript.

Objectivity

Reviewers should strive to be objective in their assessments. Reviewers’ comments should be clearly expressed and supported by data or arguments. Personal criticism of the author(s) is inappropriate and not presented.

Acknowledgment of sources

Reviewers should check relevant recent work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Author’s responsibility

Reporting standards

Authors of original research reports should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data access and retention

Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least ten years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release.

Originality, plagiarism, and acknowledgment of sources

Authors will submit only entirely original works and will appropriately cite or quote the work and/or words of others. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work should also be cited.

Multiple, redundant, or concurrent publication

Submitting the same paper to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Manuscripts that have been published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. In addition, manuscripts under review by one journal should not be submitted to other publications while the manuscript is under review. Journals that publish creative works may make exceptions to the previously published rule; please consult the editor.

Acknowledgment of sources

Proper citation of the work done by others earlier must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Readers should be informed about who has funded research and the role of the funders in the research.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her published work, the author must promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

 

Please send questions, concerns, or comments to the Editor-IJEB (ijeb@niscpr.res.in), CSIR-NIScPR.



Indian Journal of Experimental Biology (IJEB)