Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement

Journal on New Biological Reports (JNBR) follows the Code of Conduct as defined by the Committee of Publication Ethics (COPE) in order to confirming ethics in publication and quality of articles. These ethics includeinformation of editorial board,relevant duties of authors, reviewers, and editors of the journal which are set out below.

1. Editorial Board

  • Contact information:
    Editor-in-Chief, School of Studies in Botany, Jiwaji University Gwalior (MP), India; email:
  • The information of editorial board members is provided as full names and affiliations under editorial board on the journal’s Web site. The editorial board members are recognized experts in the field of biology.

2. Responsibilities of Authors

  • Manuscripts submitted to journal should not been already published, presented and submitted elsewhere.
  • All authors should have significantly contributed to the research.
  • Any potential conflict of interest must be clearly acknowledged.
  • The manuscripts submitted must be original and free from any kind of plagiarism.
  • Proper acknowledgements to other work reported (individual/company/institution) must be given. Permission must be obtained from any content used from other sources.
  • Avoid undue fragmentation of their work into multiple manuscripts
  • Authors must list of references, financial support.

3. Responsibilities of Editors

  • Manuscripts submitted to journal should not been already published, presented and submitted elsewhere.
  • The Journal on New Biological Reports (JNBR) Editor has ultimate responsibility for deciding if a manuscript submitted to Journal should be published, and in doing so is guided by the journal’s policies as determined by the Journal on New Biological Reports editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor may consult with the Associate Editor and other members of the editorial team, as well as with reviewers, in making publication decisions.
  • The editors will evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to the race, color, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the author(s). They will not disclose any information about a manuscript under consideration to anyone other than the author(s), reviewers and potential reviewers, and in some instances the Journal on New Biological Reports editorial board members, as appropriate. Additionally, the editors will make every effort to ensure the integrity of the blind review process by not revealing the identity of the author(s) of a manuscript to the reviewers of that manuscript, and vice versa.
  • When evaluating a manuscript for publication, in addition to considering standard criteria pertaining to the rigor of the manuscript, the quality of its presentation, and its contribution to humanity’s stock of knowledge, the editors will also seek evidence that ethical harms have been minimized in the conduct of the reported research. They will question whether the benefits outweigh the harms in the particular study’s case. Since Journal on New Biological Reports welcomes the submission of manuscripts from any country, it is necessary to recognize that laws and regulations regarding research ethics and ethical approval vary worldwide. As such, the editors may need to seek clarification in this regard with the author(s) and request that they supply a letter from the relevant institutional ethics committee or board that approved the research.
  • The editors will be guided by CORE’s Guidelines for Retracting Articles when considering retracting, issuing expressions of concern about, and issuing corrections pertaining to articles that have been published in Journal on New Biological Reports. They are committed to working closely with research organizations and institutions in line with CORE’s advice on Cooperation between Research Institutions and Journals on Research Integrity Cases.

4. Responsibilities of Reviewers

  • Maintaining the confidentiality of the complete review process and provide a detailed, constructive and unbiased evaluation in a timely manner on the scientific content of the work.
  • Indicating whether the writing is relevant, concise & clear and evaluating the originality and scientific accuracy.
  • Explaining the basis of their decisions clearly so that editors and authors can understand the basis of their comments.
  • Privileged information or ideas obtained by reviewers through the peer review process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
  • Notifying the journal editor about any financial or personal conflict of interest and declining to review the manuscript when a possibility of such a conflict exists.
  • Notifying the journal editor of any ethical concerns in their evaluation of submitted manuscripts; such as any violation of ethical treatment of animal or human subjects or any considerable similarity between the previously published article and any reviewed manuscript.
  • Reviewers who have accepted manuscript assignments are normally expected to submit their reviews within one week.
  • Not to retain the submitted manuscript in any form; to comply with data protection regulations.
  • They should also not accept manuscript review assignments for which they feel unqualified.

Authors will be asked, upon acceptance of an article, to transfer copyright of the article to the Publisher. This will ensure the widest possible dissemination of information under copyright laws.