Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications

An Open Access International Journal

P-ISSN: 0974-6455 E-ISSN: 2321-4007

Bioscience Biotechnology Research Communications

An Open Access International Journal

JOURNAL POLICIES

The following files need to be submitted with every article

Cover letter: A letter stating the originality of research and why you think it should be published in Biosc.Biotech.Res.Comm.

Article Text: The full manuscript containing first page with names, affiliation and the corresponding author details, followed by full text of the MS file in word format not exceeding 20 pages.

All data/tables/figures/Images (images must be submitted with the MS in high resolution.

Article Types

Submission of the following article types is considered.

  1. Original Research Articles
  2. Systematic Reviews / Meta-Analysis (Not Simple Reviews)
  3. Case Reports with Discussion
  4. Rapid /Special / Short Communications
  5. Letters to the Editor/Editorials / Perspectives / Correspondence

1. Original Research Articles

Manuscript must be written in good English, typewritten using Times New Roman font size 12 only, double-spaced with one inch margin on all sides. All manuscripts must be accompanied by author declaration with ethical certificate signed by the corresponding author and all co -authors that they have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and that the article has NOT been published or submitted to any other journal for publication. The corresponding author is responsible for obtaining permission from the copyright owner for the use of any copyrighted material in the submitted article.

Each original article must contain the following in the order as:

Title page:

  1. Title page should contain the following information:
  1. Complete title of the article followed by short running title
  2. Name(s) of author(s) with ORCID

link of the corresponding author (https://orcid.org/login)

  1. Department(s)
  2. Institution(s)   with City/ Code and Country at which the work was performed
  3. Official /personal e-mail address of the corresponding author
  1. Abstract: Abstract should be factual summarization of the entire work and should NOT exceed 250 words and must be written under the following subheadings:
  1. Objectives /Rationale
  2. Methods
  3. Results
  4. Conclusion
  1. Main Text

Text must be arranged under the following headings:

  1. Introduction
  2. Material and Methods
  3. Results (Including Tables/Fig/Images)
  4. Discussion
  5. Conclusion(s)
  6. Ethics approval and consent to participate
  7. Competing interests
  8. Funding Statement
  9. Authors’ contributions
  10. Acknowledgements (if any)
  11. References

Introduction provides a brief survey of literature, purpose of the study etc.; the rationale of the study undertaken should be given with proper clarity.

Material and Methods: This section of material, methods and procedures should be concise but detailed enough to enable the reader to reproduce the experiments/ methodology. Commonly used procedures and methods in detail need not be described, but require a reference to the original source.

Results Section: Give only brief  findings, presented in the form of tables or figures, should be included without duplication of presentation and no discussion of the significance of the data, either tables or figures be given, no duplication of data ( both tables / figures) should be submitted.

Discussion should present the significance of the present data under the prevalent understanding and interpretation of the phenomenon. Speculative discussion is allowed but it should be concise and corroborated by the presented data.

Conclusion summarizes the study and is drawn from the results and discussion. Acknowledgements, if any, should be placed at the end of the text and before References.

References: References in text of the manuscript  should be written using last author name (s) without their initials with year in PARENTHESES (  ). The final bibliography  in the References section should be arranged alphabetically using last name of the author and written in Harvard Style as mentioned below:

All reference items must be in 11 point font, do not use any Italic styles except for the scientific namesof organisms,  genera, species  in the References section.All references should be checked minutely, for theirappearance in text as well as in References,incomplete or missing references in the text will not be accepted and the MS will be returned.

Standard journal article:

Ali SA, S Salim,Sahani T, Peter J and Ali AS (2012c)Serotinergic receptors as novel target for optimizingskin pigmentary responses in Indian bullfrog Hoplobatrachustigerinus British Journal ofPharmacology Vol 165 No 5 Pages 1515-1525

Referring a book:

Falconer DC(1960) Introduction to Quantitative Genetics.Oliver & Boyd Edinburgh 165-185

Reference from article in a book:

Simonsen B (1989) In: Processing of Poultry Pp 221-250 (Edited by) GC Mead. Elsevier Applied Science

Tables and Figures (or Images)

Tables and figures, complete with legends and footnotes, should be on separate pages. The tables and figures pages should be consecutively numbered at the end of the article. Position of the tables or figures in the text must be indicated.

Instructions for Preparation of Images:

Please note: An image can refer to the following: Graphs, photographs, maps, charts, paintings, drawings, diagrams, etc.

Images must be embedded within the manuscript text of the article. Once the article accepted for publication, the author may be asked for an image in high resolution file format.

It is strongly recommended before embedding images in the manuscript, images must be prepared as mentioned below in the image specifications section.

Image specifications

Images must be prepared in accordance with the instructions mentioned on the PubMed Central website: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/pub/filespec-images/

The key factor for preparation of images for sufficient quality is images must have a minimum resolution of 300 dots per inch (dpi) for the grayscale (or black and white) and at least 600 dpi for colour scale. The acceptable image formats are tiff, jpeg, gif, psd or png.

Image Copyright

For any image that the authors have not made themselves, the authors will need to have written permission to reproduce that image, even if the image is posted on the internet. It is the authors responsibility to obtain permission to use the images, not the publishers. Permission must be obtained in writing before the article can be submitted.

For complete information, please visit the Copyright Agency Limited website: http://www.copyright.com.au/get-information/about-copyright

2.  Systematic Reviews / Meta-Analysis (Not Simple Reviews)

Systematic Reviews or Meta-Analysis should be systematic, critical assessments of most  recently updated literature and data sources pertaining to basic biological or bio-medical science topics that include a statistical technique for quantitatively combining the results of multiple studies that measure the same outcome into a single pooled investigation. Data must be searched for and selected systematically for inclusion and critically evaluated, and the search and selection process for compiling the review must be mentioned. The text should NOT exceed 6000 words excluding abstract, references, tables and figures.

Each of the sections of these articles should include specific sub-sections as follows:

 Structured Abstract: (Not exceed 250 words):

  1. Objectives 
  2. Methodology
  3. Results
  4. Conclusion

Introduction:

  1. Rationale
  2. Objectives
  3. Research questions

Methodology:

  1. Study design
  2. Participants, interventions, comparators
  3. Systematic review protocol
  4. Search strategy
  5. Data sources, studies sections and data extraction
  6. Data analysis/ Statistical tools used

Results:

  1. Provide a flow diagram of the studies retrieved for the review
  2. Study selection and characteristics
  3. Synthesized findings
  4. Risk of bias

Discussion:

  1. Summary of main findings
  2. Limitations
  3. Conclusions

 For all other information’s including title page, typing and reference style, please follow the original articles instructions.

3.  Case Reports With Discussion

The case reports must contain genuinely new interpretational information, discussed with up to date literature. The reports should have clinical significance, new adverse effect(s) of a drug or other unique first time observations, etc. Patient consent for publication must be obtained from the patient in written or, if this is not possible, the next of kin before submission. The author(s) must have been involved in the care of the patient.

Case Report/case series should contain a single paragraph summary and text should not exceed 1500 words (excluding summary, references, tables and figures) with maximum 10 bibliographic references and either three figures or three tables. Each case report/case series must contain:

  1. Brief Abstract (should not exceed 120 words)
  2. Introduction
  3. Case Presentation
  4. Discussion
  5. Conclusion
  6. Patient consent
  7. Availability of data and material (Details – https://authorservices.taylorandfrancis.com/data-sharing-policies/data-availability-statements/)
  8. Competing interests
  9. Funding Statement
  10. Authors’ contributions
  11. Acknowledgements (if any)

For all other information including title page, typing and reference style, please follow the instructions for original articles.

4.  Rapid/Special/Short Communications

Rapid/Special/Short communication should be original work, such as complete results of a short pilot study, not merely a preliminary report and should not exceed 2000 words with one or two figures and/or one table. An editorial decision will be provided rapidly without reviews. For writing and references style, follow the same instructions listed above.

5.  Letters to the Editor/Editorials / Perspectives / Correspondence

Opinions on topics and articles recently published in the journal will be considered for publication if they are objective and constructive in nature and provide academic interest to the readers. These letters may also be forwarded to the author of the cited article for possible response. The editor reserves the right to shorten these letters, delete objectionable comments, make other changes, or take any other suitable decision to comply with the style and policies of the journal. For writing and references style, follow the same instructions listed above.

Editorial will be written by one member of the editorial board as solicited by the Editor-in-Chief. The editorial is generally a scientific review on one or two of the current topics pertaining to biomedical sciences.

Plagiarism and Ethical Issue Statements

Plagiarism is the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and representing them as one’s own original work. Within the academia, it is considered dishonesty or fraud and offenders are subject to academic censure. Plagiarism can be unintentional or intentional, reproducing academic material without appropriate credit to the original authors. Similarly self -plagiarism is the re-use of significant, identical or near identical portions of one’s own work without citing the original work. This is also known as recycling fraud. Worst form of plagiarism is to steal the whole article from some journal and publish it under one’s own name in another journal. The Editorial Committee of Biosc. Biotech. Res.Comm will blacklist any author found to be guilty of plagiarism. The name of author(s) committing plagiarism will also be disseminated to editors of other journals.

Ethical Issues

Clinical trials and studies conducted on  patients and animals  respectively, must have been approved by an Institutional Review Committee (IRC). In the absence of such a formal ethics review committee, the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 and/or the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, as adopted and promulgated by the United States National Institutes of Health or Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) India  must be followed. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. In case of any study involving clinical trial, taking of informed consent of patients is mandatory.

PEER REVIEW PROCESS

  1. Manuscript Processing

Upon initial submission of the manuscript, the author will be acknowledged of the receipt via e-mail. Initially an article will be reviewed by one member of the Editorial team to judge the quality of the paper. Articles written in poor English language or not conforming to Biosc. Biotech. Res.Comm guidelines will either be rejected or returned to the authors to rectify the shortcomings. Manuscripts deemed proper should be forwarded to at least two subject experts to provide their unbiased input. Acceptable manuscripts will be checked for data analysis and verification of references before the author will be notified about the status of the paper with any suggestions for modifications. Finally accepted articles should be forwarded to the printer for typeset and formatting, etc. and the proof will be sent to the authors for proof reading, before publication.

2. Peer Review Policy

Unbiased, independent, critical assessment is an intrinsic part of all scholarly work, including the scientific process. Peer review is the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are not part of the editorial staff, and is, therefore, an important extension of the scientific process. Each article submitted to Biosc. Biotech. Res. Comm for publication is reviewed by at least two specialist reviewers of the concerned area. The   dual review process is strictly followed and in certain controversial cases, the opinion of a 3rd reviewer can also be sought.

3. Conflict of Interest

Conflict of interest exists when as author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influence (bias) his or her actions (such relationship are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties). However, conflicts can also occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion. Increasingly, individual studies receive funding from commercial firms, private foundations, and the government. The conditions of this funding have the potential to bias and otherwise discredit the research. When authors submit a manuscript, they are required to disclose all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly whether potential conflicts do or do not exist. It is the discretion of editorial committee of   Biosc. Biotech. Res.Comm   to resolve any conflict of interest between the author(s) and reviewers. Editors may choose not to consider an article for publication if they feel that the research is biased by the sponsors funding the research project.

4. Plagiarism

Plagiarism is the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and representing them as one’s own original work. Within the academia, it is considered dishonesty or fraud and offenders are subject to academic censure. Plagiarism can be unintentional or intentional, reproducing academic material without appropriate credit to the original authors. Similarly self -plagiarism is the re-use of significant, identical or near identical portions of one’s own work without citing the original work. This is also known as recycling fraud. Worst form of plagiarism is to steal the whole article from some journal and publish it under one’s own name in another journal. The Editorial Committee of Biosc. Biotech. Res.Comm will blacklist any author found to be guilty of plagiarism. The name of author(s) committing plagiarism will also be disseminated to editors of other journals.

5.  Ethical Issues

Clinical trials and studies conducted in animals (or not) must have been approved by an Institutional Review Committee (IRC). In the absence of such a formal ethics review committee, the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 and/or the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, as adopted and promulgated by the United States National Institutes of Health or Indian Council of Medical Research (ICMR) India  must be followed. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. In case of any study involving clinical trial, taking of informed consent of patients is mandatory.

6.  Editorial Committee

The Editorial committee consisting of the Editor- in-Chief, Associate Editor, Editors, Assistant Editor(s) and the editorial secretaries meet frequently to expedite the business of the journal. The editorial committee follows the guidelines provided by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication which can be downloaded from http://www.icmje.org/

7. Advisory Board

An advisory board comprising of members with significant professional experience in different fields of biological and biomedical sciences helps the Editorial Committee in policy matters when needed. Senior advisory board members from India as well as abroad are members of the journal.

Open Access Policy

Biosc.Biotech.Res.Comm.  is an open access journal which means that all the contents are easily available and accessible to any of the explorers without any charge. Users are allowed to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of the articles in this journal free of cost. This is in accordance with the BOAI definition of open access.Biosc. Biotech. Res.Comm provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports for global exchange of knowledge.

Article Withdrawal Policy

Submission of an article to Biosc. Biotech. Res.Comm implies that the work has NOT been published or submitted elsewhere, therefore, the journal is strongly against unethical withdrawal of an article from the publication process after submission. Once the article is submitted, the author grants the editorial board full publishing rights and it is the absolute right of the editorial board to decide on article withdrawals. For genuine withdrawal, the corresponding author should submit a request which must be signed by all co-authors explaining the explicit reasons of withdrawing the manuscript. Accepted articles in final stages of publication if are withdrawn, will entail withdrawal fees. The request will be processed by the editorial board and only serious genuine reasons will be considered if possible. The decision of the editorial board will be final and not negotiable. Unethical withdrawal or no response from the authors to editorial board communication will be subjected to sanction a ban to all authors, and their institute will also be notified.

Copyright Notice &  Privacy Statement

Authors must agree to the following terms:

  1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work in its original publication form (pdf) with an acknowledgement of the work’s authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal’s published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
  3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) as it can lead to productive exchange and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in the journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of the journal and will not be made available for any other purpose and will not be shared to any other party.

Checklist For Authors

As part of the submission process, authors should require checking of their submission’s compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.

  1. The submission has not been previously published, nor is it before another journal for consideration, an author declaration / ethical statement and plagiarism-check form is enclosed with the manuscript. It must be filled completely and signed by all authors Link of copy right form  and Plagiarism Check Statement  
  2. The submission file is in ˜Microsoft Word document file format.
  3. The text is double-spaced; uses a 12-point font; employs italics only for scientific names, rather than underlining (except with URL addresses); and all illustrations, figures, and tables are placed within the text at the appropriate points, rather than at the end.
  4. A  single manuscript  word file  has been submitted that contains title page, abstract, all text files (introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion(s), ethics approval and consent to participate, availability of data and material, competing interests, funding statement, authors’ contributions, acknowledgements (if any), ORCID link of the corresponding author), figures, tables, and references.

References should be written in text as AUTHOR LAST NAME WITH YEAR IN PARENTHESES (  ) as per Harvard Style. The final bibliography in the last REFRENCES SECTION using only the first author’s last name should be arranged in alphabetical order and must be written in Harvard style.

Guidelines For Reviewers

  1. An unpublished manuscript is a privileged document. Please protect it from any form of exploitation. Don’t cite a manuscript or refer to the work it describes before it has been published and don’t use the information that it contains for the advancement of your own research or in discussions with colleagues.
  2. Adopt a positive, impartial attitude toward the manuscript under review, with the aim of promoting effective and constructive scientific communication. If you believe that you cannot judge a given article impartially, please return it immediately to the editor.
  3. Reviews must be completed within 3 weeks. If you know that you cannot finish the review within that time, immediately return the manuscript to the editor.
  4. In your review, consider the following aspects of the manuscript: –
  1. Significance of research question or subject studied.
  2. Originality of work: It should be checked through plagiarism software.
  3. Appropriateness of approach or Methodology.
  4. Adequacy of experimental techniques.
  5. Soundness of conclusions and interpretation.
  6. Relevance of discussion
  7. Adherence to style as set forth in instructions to authors.
  8. Adequacy of title and abstract.
  9. Appropriateness of figures and tables.
  10. Length of article.
  11. Adherence to correct nomenclature (genetic, enzyme, drug, biochemical etc.).
  12. Appropriate literature citations with updated references.
  1. Any help you can give in clarifying meaning will be appreciated. If you wish to mark the text of the manuscript, use a pencil or make a photocopy, mark it, and return it together with the original.
  2. You can be particularly helpful in pointing out unnecessary illustrations and data that are presented in both tabular (and graphic) form and in detail in the text. Such redundancies are a waste of space and readers time.
  3. A significant number of authors have not learnt how to organize data and will be benefit from your guidance.
  4. Do not discuss the paper with its authors.
  5. In your comments intended for transmission to the author, do not make any specific statement about the acceptability of a paper. Suggested revision should be stated as such and not expressed as conditions of acceptance. Present criticism dispassionately and avoid offensive remarks.
  6. Organize your review so that an introductory paragraph summarizes the major findings of the article, gives your overall impression of the paper and highlights the major shortcomings. This paragraph should be followed by specific numbered comments which if appropriate may be subdivided into major and minor points.
  7. Confidential remarks directed to the editor should be typed (or handwritten) on a separate sheet, not on the review form. You might want to distinguish between revisions considered essential and those judged merely desirable.
  8. Your criticisms, arguments and suggestions concerning the paper will be most useful to the editor and to the author if they are carefully documented. Do not make dogmatic, dismissive statements, particularly about the novelty of work. Substantiate your statements.
  9. Reviewer’s recommendations are gratefully received by the editor. However, since editorial decisions are usually based on evaluations derived from several sources, reviewers should not expect the editor to honour every recommendation.
  10. Categories of recommendation: accept, reject, modify, or convert to some other form. Very few papers qualify for acceptance upon original submission for publication except for minor style changes.

Keep a copy of the review in your files. The manuscript may be returned to you for a second review. You might require this copy to evaluate the author’s responses to your criticisms.

Peer Review Process

  1. Manuscript Processing

Upon initial submission of the manuscript, the author will be acknowledged of the receipt via e-mail. Initially an article will be reviewed by one member of the Editorial team to judge the quality of the paper. Articles written in poor English language or not conforming to Biosc.Biotech.Res.Com guidelines will either be rejected or returned to the authors to rectify the shortcomings. Manuscripts deemed proper should be forwarded to at least two subject experts to provide their unbiased input. Acceptable manuscripts will be checked for data analysis and verification of references before the author will be notified about the status of the paper with any suggestions for modifications. Finally accepted articles should be forwarded to the printer for typeset and formatting, etc. and the proof will send to the authors for proof reading, before publication.

2.  Peer Review Policy

Unbiased, independent, critical assessment is an intrinsic part of all scholarly work, including the scientific process. Peer review is the critical assessment of manuscripts submitted to journals by experts who are not part of the editorial staff, and is, therefore, an important extension of the scientific process. Each article submitted to Biosc.Biotech.Res.Comm for publication is reviewed by at least two senior experts of the concerned specialty. The dual external review process is strictly followed and, in certain controversial cases, the opinion of a 3rd reviewer can also be sought.

3.  Conflict of Interest

Conflict of interest exists when as author (or the author’s institution), reviewer, or editor has financial or personal relationships that inappropriately influences (bias) his or her actions (such relationship are also known as dual commitments, competing interests, or competing loyalties). However, conflicts can also occur for other reasons, such as personal relationships, academic competition, and intellectual passion. Increasingly, individual studies receive funding from commercial firms, private foundations, and the government. The conditions of this funding have the potential to bias and otherwise discredit the research. When authors submit a manuscript, they are required to disclose all financial and personal relationships that might bias their work. To prevent ambiguity, authors must state explicitly whether potential conflicts do or do not exist.

It is the discretion of editorial committee of Biosc.Biotech.Res.Comm to resolve any conflict of interest between the author(s) and reviewers. Editors may choose not to consider an article for publication if they feel that the research is biased by the sponsors funding the research project.

4.  Plagiarism Link of Ethical Statement and Plagiarism Check Form

Plagiarism is the unauthorized use or close imitation of the language and thoughts of another author and representing them as one’s own original work. Within the academia, it is considered dishonesty or fraud and offenders are subject to academic censure. Plagiarism can be unintentional or intentional, reproducing academic material without appropriate credit to the original authors. Similarly self -plagiarism is the re-use of significant, identical or near identical portions of one’s own work without citing the original work. This is also known as ‘Recycling fraud. Worst form of plagiarism is to steal the whole article from some journal and publish it under one’s own name in another journal. The Editorial Committee of Biosc.Biotech.Res.Com will blacklist any author found to be guilty of plagiarism. The name of author(s) committing plagiarism will also be disseminated to editors of other medical journals.

5.  Ethical Issues

Human clinical trials and studies conducted in animals (or not) must have been approved by an Institutional Review Committee (IRC). In the absence of such a formal ethics review committee, the Helsinki Declaration of 1975, as revised in 2000 and/or the Guide for the Care and Use of Laboratory Animals, as adopted and promulgated by the United States National Institutes of Health or ICMR India  must be followed. If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. In case of any study involving clinical trial, taking of informed consent of patients is mandatory

6.  Editorial Committee

The Editorial committee consisting of the Editor- in-Chief, Associate Editor, Editors, Assistant Editor(s) and the editorial secretaries meet at least twice a month to expedite the business of the journal. The editorial committee follows the guidelines provided by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors in ‘Uniform Requirements for Manuscripts Submitted to Biomedical Journals: Writing and Editing for Biomedical Publication which can be downloaded from http://www.icmje.org/

7.  Advisory Board

An advisory board comprising of members with significant professional experience in different fields of  biotechnological and biomedical sciences helps the Editorial Committee in policy matters when needed. Senior specialists from India as well as professionals from foreign countries are members of the Board.

8.  Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

9.  The Journal cover

For a copy of the full resolution journal cover of Biosc.Biotech.Res.Comm please click here

      
 A New Edition of Web of Science
Thomson Reuters ISI Web of Science Now
Clarivate Analytics ESCI Wos USA

Cross Reference USA

Biosc. Biotech. Res. Comm.  Referenced in NCBI DBs NCBI National Library of Medicine (NLM)  USA.

NLM ID: 101703647(Serial)
NLM Title Abbreviation :Biosc. Biotech.Res.Comm.
      Google Scholar Citations