PhytoMycology
Peer Review Policy
Review model, editorial workflow, and ethical oversight.Overview
PhytoMycology is committed to maintaining high standards of academic quality and integrity through a rigorous peer review process.
Type of Peer Review
- The journal operates a single-blind peer review system: reviewers know the authors' identities, while authors do not know the reviewers' identities.
- In special cases, reviewers may choose to sign their reports, enabling open peer review.
Review Process
- Initial assessment: submissions are screened by Editors-in-Chief or Associate Editors for scope, quality, and ethics.
- Reviewer selection: independent experts with relevant subject expertise are invited; at least two reviewers are typically required.
- Review criteria: reviewers evaluate originality, scientific soundness, methodological rigor, clarity, accuracy, and relevance.
- Editorial decision: based on reviewer feedback, the editor may accept, request minor or major revisions, or reject the manuscript.
Reviewer Responsibilities
- Provide fair, constructive, and timely feedback.
- Maintain confidentiality and avoid conflicts of interest.
- Disclose if they feel unqualified to review the manuscript.
Appeals and Complaints
Authors who wish to appeal an editorial decision may contact the Editorial Office with a detailed justification. Appeals will be reviewed by the Editors-in-Chief and, if necessary, an independent editorial board member.
Ethical Oversight
PhytoMycology adheres to the guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). Ethical concerns, including plagiarism, data fabrication, and conflicts of interest, will be investigated according to COPE standards.