Manuscripts submitted to ISPEC Journal of Agricultural Sciences are evaluated under a double-anonymized peer-review model in which authors and reviewers remain anonymous to one another. All submissions first undergo editorial triage by the Editor-in-Chief and/or the assigned Section Editor for format compliance, scope fit, abstract adequacy, language quality, ethical compliance, and similarity screening. Submissions that are not suitable for the journal can be rejected at this stage. A manuscript may be desk rejected without external review if it is outside the journal’s scope; contains an insufficient abstract; is written in language inadequate for scientific evaluation; lacks required ethics committee approval, informed consent, or legal permits; shows plagiarism or a similarity rate above 20%; or constitutes duplicate, redundant, or previously published submission.

Manuscripts that pass editorial triage are assigned for external peer review. Each manuscript is reviewed under a double-blind peer review process by at least two independent external reviewers; a third reviewer may be assigned if deemed necessary based on the editorial decision. Reviewers are asked to assess originality, scientific contribution, methodological rigor, ethical compliance, clarity of presentation, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope. If reviewer recommendations conflict, the Editor may appoint a third independent reviewer. Acceptance requires two positive reviewer reports, or a documented editorial decision based on convergent reviewer and editor assessments within the journal’s stated policy.

Authors may recommend potential reviewers during submission; however, the handling editor has sole discretion over reviewer invitations. Reviewers and editors must disclose any conflicts of interest and maintain strict confidentiality. For manuscripts submitted by editors or editorial board members, an external editor is appointed and the conflicted individual is excluded from all stages of editorial handling and decision-making. The Editor-in-Chief is the final authority for all editorial decisions.

The journal recognizes reviewer contributions through the Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service, an annual Top Reviewer certificate, and a 25% APC discount in the following calendar year for reviewers who complete at least three reviews within one calendar year. Reviewer recognition and financial incentives do not influence editorial decisions.

Last update time: 04.04.2026