Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The Agrotechnology Research Journal (Agrotech Res J) publishes original empirical research, rigorous review articles, and methodological innovations that advance sustainable agriculture in tropical and subtropical regions. The journal welcomes studies that deliver clear scientific novelty and practical relevance through field, greenhouse, laboratory, and data-driven/modeling approaches.

The journal covers four main domains:

Plant Production Technology and Management
Tropical agronomy, crop physiology, horticulture, organic and climate-smart agriculture, precision/smart farming, crop and irrigation scheduling, post-harvest technology for primary commodities, and sustainable cropping systems.
Plant Breeding and Biotechnology
Plant genetics and genomics, molecular breeding (MAS/genomic selection), high-throughput phenotyping, crop improvement for biotic and abiotic stress tolerance, germplasm conservation and evaluation, tissue culture, seed science and technology, and supporting bioinformatics.
Land and Soil Resource Management Technology
Soil fertility and plant nutrition, soil biology/microbiology, soil and water conservation, land evaluation and GIS/remote sensing for land resources, organic amendments and waste management, biochar, soil carbon and related environmental indicators, and agricultural water management.
Plant Protection Technology
Integrated Pest Management (IPM), plant pathology, agricultural entomology, weed science, biological control agents, biopesticides, pesticide resistance management, and pest/disease monitoring, forecasting, and epidemiology.
Out of Scope Submission Exclusion Criteria
Submissions that fall outside agricultural sciences (e.g., livestock-only studies, socio-economics without a clear agrotechnology component, or advanced food processing/formulation) are generally not considered.

 

Section Policies

Literature Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Research Article

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

Agrotechnology Research Journal (Agrotech Res J) uses a double-blind peer review process to evaluate submitted manuscripts. Under this model, the identities of both the authors and reviewers are kept confidential throughout the review process.

1. Initial Assessment and Desk Review

Submitted manuscripts are evaluated by the Managing Editor and Editorial Board to check:

  • Scope and Relevance: Alignment with the journal's focus in crop production, plant breeding, land management, plant protection, and related agrotechnology fields.
  • Formatting and Guidelines: Compliance with the journal's manuscript template and submission requirements.
  • Similarity Check: Originality screening via Turnitin. Similarity index must be 20% or lower. Submissions exceeding this limit will be returned for revision or desk-rejected.
2. Peer Review Procedure

Manuscripts passing initial screening are sent to at least two (2) independent reviewers in the field.

  • Anonymity: Authors must remove personal names, affiliations, or identifying references from manuscript files.
  • Reviewer Selection: Chosen based on expertise and active research record, free from conflicts of interest.
  • Timeline: Reviewers are requested to complete assessments within 2 to 3 weeks per round.
3. Evaluation Criteria

Reviewers assess submissions based on standard academic criteria:

  • Originality and relevance to agrotechnology.
  • Soundness of research methodology and experimental design.
  • Clarity of data presentation, analysis, and discussion.
  • Quality of references and adherence to ethical research practices.
4. Editorial Decision

Based on reviewer reports, the Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor makes one of the following decisions:

  1. Accept Submission: Accepted without further changes.
  2. Minor Revision: Minor adjustments required (2 to 3 weeks to resubmit).
  3. Major Revision: Significant revision required, subject to re-review (4 to 6 weeks to resubmit).
  4. Decline Submission: Rejected due to major flaws, lack of novelty, or out of scope.
5. Revision Process

When revisions are requested, authors must resubmit:

  • A revised manuscript with changes highlighted or tracked.
  • A point-by-point response letter addressing all reviewer and editor comments.

The final publication decision rests with the Editor-in-Chief.

6. Confidentiality

All submitted manuscripts, reviewer comments, and editorial correspondence are strictly confidential and will not be used or shared for non-editorial purposes.

 

 

Publication Frequency

First published in June 2017, Agrotechnology Research Journal (Agrotech Res J) operates as a peer-reviewed, open-access publication and is published biannually—twice a year, in June and December.

 

Open Access Policy

Agrotechnology Research Journal (Agrotech Res J) is a fully open-access journal. We provide immediate open access to all published content based on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge, in alignment with the principles defined by the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI).

All content is freely available without charge to users or institutions. Users are permitted to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full-text articles without asking prior permission from the publisher or the author, provided that proper academic attribution is given.

Licensing and Reuse Rights (CC BY-SA 4.0)

All articles published in Agrotechnology Research Journal are distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International (CC BY-SA 4.0) license. This license allows users to share, remix, adapt, and build upon the material for any purpose (including commercial), provided that appropriate credit is given and derivative works are distributed under the exact same license terms.

Author Rights and Copyright Retention

Authors who publish with Agrotechnology Research Journal retain full copyright over their work and grant the journal the right of first publication.

Self-Archiving Policy

Authors are permitted and encouraged to deposit the published version (Version of Record) of their article in institutional repositories, subject repositories, or personal websites. This archiving should include a proper citation and a direct link to the published article via the journal’s DOI. No embargo period applies.

 

Archiving

Agrotechnology Research Journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for preservation and restoration. For further details, please visit the LOCKSS official website.

LOCKSS Logo

The LOCKSS system has permission to collect, preserve, and serve this Archival Unit.

 

Publication Ethics

Agrotechnology Research Journal is a peer-reviewed, open-access journal founded to support and disseminate research in the field of agrotechnology. We believe that maintaining publication ethics is a shared responsibility. Therefore, all participants in the publishing process—authors, editors, peer reviewers, and the publisher—work together to uphold these ethical publication.

This statement is guided by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Core Practices and draws upon established publishing ethics frameworks, including those from Elsevier.

  • Fair Play & Editorial Independence: Editors evaluate submissions based on academic merit, validity, and relevance to the journal's scope, independent of the authors' background, beliefs, or institutional affiliations.
  • Confidentiality: Editorial team members ensure that details of a submitted manuscript are shared only with those actively involved in the evaluation process (such as reviewers and the publisher).
  • Conflicts of Interest: Editors recuse themselves from handling manuscripts where potential conflicts of interest exist, and they do not use unpublished work for personal research without explicit consent.
  • Publication Decisions: Editorial decisions are driven by the academic value and peer-review feedback of the work, ensuring a fair and thoughtful review process.
  • Constructive Contribution: Peer review helps editors improve manuscripts and assists authors in refining their scholarly work through objective feedback.
  • Timeliness & Expertise: Reviewers who feel unequipped for a specific topic or unable to complete the review promptly are kindly asked to notify the editors so alternative arrangements can be made.
  • Confidentiality: Manuscripts shared for review are treated as privileged, confidential documents.
  • Objectivity: Reviews are conducted respectfully and objectively, supporting authors with clear arguments and appropriate literature references.
  • Originality & Reporting: Authors present accurate accounts of their original research alongside objective discussions, ensuring proper citation of existing literature.
  • Data Transparency: Authors are encouraged to make underlying data accessible when appropriate and retain records for a reasonable period following publication.
  • Exclusive Submission: Manuscripts submitted to the journal should be original, unpublished work not currently under consideration elsewhere.
  • Authorship: Authorship is thoughtfully designated to those who have made meaningful contributions to the study, with all co-authors approving the final submission.
  • Disclosures: Authors transparently share any potential conflicts of interest, funding sources, or support received for the research.

Generative AI tools may be used to assist with language clarity or structuring content. However, AI tools cannot be listed as authors, as true accountability rests with the human researchers. Authors are kindly asked to be transparent about any AI assistance used in their work.

  • Handling Ethical Concerns: In cases where ethical concerns or potential misconduct arise—such as data fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or any possible misconduct—the journal approaches the situation with care and handles it in accordance with COPE guidelines.
  • Retractions & Corrections: When adjustments or retractions are necessary, the primary goal is to maintain the accuracy and reliability of the scientific record, rather than assigning blame.
  • Ethical Oversight: Research involving agricultural field trials, biological agents, chemical hazards, genetically modified organisms (GMOs), or human participants (such as farming socio-economic interviews) is expected to follow relevant national and international ethical standards, including appropriate institutional approvals where applicable.

Our ethical framework draws inspiration from standard global practices and guidelines provided by:

 

Policy on Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies

Generative Artificial Intelligence (AI) and AI-assisted technologies are increasingly adopted across research and scholarly publishing to enhance manuscript clarity, structure content, assist with code, and streamline literature exploration. Responsible use of these tools requires strict standards to maintain transparency, research integrity, and academic accountability. This policy aligns with international publishing ethics standards established by STM, Elsevier, and COPE.

Generative AI tools, chatbots, or Large Language Models (LLMs) cannot be credited as authors, co-authors, or contributors. Authorship requires uniquely human responsibilities, including accountability for research integrity, legal consent to publishing agreements, management of copyright, and direct response to peer-review assessments—obligations that AI systems cannot assume. Authors remain fully accountable for the complete content, accuracy, factual validity, and ethical soundness of their work.

To ensure scientific integrity and transparency, the use of AI tools in manuscript preparation is categorized as follows:

  • Allowed without Mandatory Declaration: Basic spelling, grammar, and readability adjustments performed using standard document editing tools.
  • Allowed WITH Mandatory Disclosure:
    • Drafting, expanding, rewriting, or summarizing text content.
    • Translating manuscript text into another language.
    • Refining data presentation or formatting tables.
    • Generating non-empirical explanatory or illustrative diagrams.
    • Visualizing actual research datasets into charts or graphs.
    • Formatting or improving the readability of code scripts.
    • Assisting with literature search and reference discovery.
  • Prohibited Uses:
    • Generating synthetic or fabricated data to substitute missing empirical observations.
    • Creating non-existent or fabricated literature citations.
    • Manipulating or generating scientific images/figures to misrepresent research outcomes.
    • Submitting automated text or code without rigorous human review, critical interpretation, and verification.

Authors utilizing AI for activities requiring disclosure must declare its use. This disclosure should be included in a dedicated section titled “Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation” placed before References, or integrated into the Methods or Acknowledgements section (or via the submission portal):

"Declaration of Generative AI and AI-Assisted Technologies in Manuscript Preparation: During the preparation of this manuscript, the author(s) used [Name of Tool, Version, and Developer] in order to [Specify Purpose, e.g., improve readability, format code, or draft initial sections]. After using this tool/service, the author(s) thoroughly reviewed, edited, and verified all content and take full responsibility for the accuracy and validity of the published manuscript."
Peer Reviewers:

Reviewers are forbidden from uploading unpublished manuscripts, datasets, or graphics into external or public AI tools. Doing so violates author confidentiality, data privacy, and intellectual property rights. Evaluation reports and recommendations must reflect the reviewer's independent professional expertise.

Editors:

Editors must protect manuscript confidentiality and refrain from uploading confidential submissions into unsecure AI platforms. While internal AI screening tools may assist administrative workflows (e.g., plagiarism screening or reviewer matching), all editorial decisions (accept, revise, reject) must remain fully human-driven.

Undisclosed or improper use of AI tools may result in manuscript rejection, post-publication retraction, submission bans, or other appropriate actions required under this policy.

 

Screening for Plagiarism Policy

Agrotechnology Research Journal is committed to upholding research integrity by screening all submitted manuscripts for plagiarism. We use Turnitin to check the authenticity of submissions. The maximum allowable Turnitin similarity threshold is 20%. Authors must ensure that their work is original, has not been published previously, and is not currently under consideration for publication elsewhere.

 

Retraction Policy

The primary purpose of a retraction is to correct the scientific literature, rather than to punish authors. Papers published in Agrotechnology Research Journal will be considered for retraction based on the following criteria:

  1. There is clear evidence that the findings are unreliable, whether due to major error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error), data irregularities, fabrication, or falsification (e.g., image manipulation).
  2. The manuscript constitutes plagiarism or contains an unacceptable level of content overlap with previously published work.
  3. The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper attribution, disclosure to the editor, permission to republish, or justification (i.e., redundant or duplicate publication).
  4. Any form of misrepresentation is identified, including identity theft, fictitious authorship, unverified authorship accountability, paper mill involvement, or undisclosed involvement of Artificial Intelligence (AI).
  5. The manuscript contains material, data, or figures without proper authorization for use, the removal of which invalidates the results or conclusions.
  6. Copyright has been infringed or there are other legal issues (e.g., libel, privacy violations).
  7. The publication reports unethical research practices.
  8. The author(s) failed to disclose a major competing interest (conflict of interest) that, in the editor's view, unduly affected the interpretation of the work or recommendations by editors and reviewers.
  9. The article is a meta-analysis or systematic review whose primary conclusions rely on content or studies that have subsequently been corrected or retracted.
Compliance with COPE Standards

The retraction mechanism and editorial decisions follow the official COPE Retraction Guidelines (Version 3, August 2025), which can be accessed at: https://doi.org/10.24318/cope.2019.1.4