• Call for Research paper/short article/ Review paper for October 2026 issue; Submit manuscript through the online system; Any Queries/Feedback, please send an email to gauresj@sdau.edu.in • Call for Research paper/short article/ Review paper/Case study for Special issue on NATURAL FARMING AND SUSTAINABLE AGICULTURE View All arrow_forward
For Authors For Editors For Reviewers

Reviewer Guidelines

The Gujarat Agricultural Universities Research Journal ensures that the peer-review process is completely fair, unbiased, and on time. Reviewers are the backbone of the journal — their comments and evaluations play a vital role in deciding the fate of a manuscript, in consultation with the editors, and are calibrated against factors such as scope & relevance and the impact of the research. The journal follows COPE guidelines for the review process.

Becoming a Reviewer

Researchers with relevant subject expertise can register their interest as a reviewer from the "Register as a Reviewer" option when creating an account.

The Review Process

Reviewers are encouraged to stay in contact with the assigning editors. Critical evaluations related to the content quality of the manuscript need to be submitted to both the author and the editor. The whole review process is confidential, as unpublished content is considered classified. The review should be objective, focused on improving the quality of the journal.

Review Comments

Personal criticism is strictly prohibited inside review comments. Comments should be clear, with supporting references, and should address the strengths, weaknesses, relevance, and impact of the research, as well as the originality of the work presented in the manuscript.

Reviewer Conduct

Reviewers should maintain impartiality and avoid conflicts of interest, disclosing any relationships or affiliations that could bias their assessment of the manuscript. Reviewers should respond promptly to invitations to review and complete their evaluations within the agreed-upon timeframe, typically within two to three weeks. Manuscripts must be treated as confidential documents; their content should not be discussed with others without the explicit permission of the journal's editor.

Confidentiality of the Manuscript

The editor forwards review comments to other potential reviewers in addition to the authors. A reviewer should not cite an unpublished manuscript, to avoid any conflict.

Standard Review Checklist

  • The title and content fall within the aim & scope of the journal.
  • All sections of the manuscript — title, abstract, keywords, methods, and conclusions — are consistent with the objective of the paper, and the controls included in the experimental work are rational and adequate.
  • The writing is easy to comprehend, without distractions and deviations.
  • The methodology is clear and can be repeated by another researcher.
  • The methodology has consent and ethical approvals, as and when appropriate and applicable.
  • The analytical and statistical methods are appropriate and relevant to the study, and the findings and conclusions are adequately supported by the data.
  • The information is not repeated in text, tables, or figures.
  • The references adequately represent the data, and interpretations are up to date without missing key citable information.
  • With regard to the length of the manuscript, precise suggestions can be made for expanding, condensing, merging, or deleting content.