PhytoMycology is committed to maintaining the highest 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, where reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, but authors do not know the reviewers’ identities.
● In special cases, reviewers may choose to sign their reports, enabling open peer review.

Review Process
1. Initial Assessment – All submissions are first screened by the Editors-in-Chief or Associate Editors to ensure that the manuscript fits the journal’s scope and meets basic standards of quality and ethics.
2. Reviewer Selection – Suitable independent experts with relevant subject expertise are invited to review. At least two reviewers are typically required for each manuscript.
3. Review Criteria – Reviewers are asked to evaluate:
● Originality and significance of the research
● Scientific soundness and methodological rigor
● Clarity and accuracy of data, analyses, and conclusions
● Relevance to the journal’s scope and readership
4. Editorial Decision – Based on reviewers’ feedback, the editor may decide to:
● Accept the manuscript
● Request minor or major revisions
● Reject the submission

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). Any ethical concerns, including plagiarism, data fabrication, or conflicts of interest, will be investigated according to COPE standards.