Nigerian Journal of Biotechnology
Journal / Nigerian Journal of Biotechnology / About the Journal

Subscription enquiries from customer should be sent to:

Business Editor or Editor-in-Chief

Nigerian Journal of Biotechnology

nigjbiotech@yahoo.com

Peer-Review Policy

The Nigerian Journal of Biotechnology (NJB) follows a peer-review policy grounded in international best practices. Peer review is a cornerstone of scientific publishing, ensuring the quality and integrity of scholarly output.

1. Initial Assessment: Upon receiving a manuscript, the Section Editor will evaluate whether it meets the formal requirements outlined in the Author Guidelines and aligns with the aims and scope of the journal.
2. Manuscript Handling: All manuscripts are managed by an Editorial Board member who has no potential conflicts of interest with the authors. The NJB adheres to a double-blind peer-review process to ensure objectivity and impartiality. In this process, both authors and reviewers remain anonymous.
3. Reviewer Selection: The handling editor will select potential reviewers for each manuscript based on the following criteria: (i) Reviewers must not have co-authored publications with the authors. (ii) Reviewers must not be affiliated with the same institution as the authors.

Except for Editorials, all manuscripts will be sent for peer review, and at least two reviewer comments will be obtained per submission. Reviewers are requested to complete their evaluations within two weeks, with the option to extend this timeframe if needed.

4. Reviewer Recommendations: Peer reviewers will provide one of the following recommendations for editorial consideration:

1. Accept without changes: The manuscript meets all standards and requires no revision.
2. Accept after minor revisions: The manuscript is acceptable with minor modifications.
3. Accept after major revisions: Substantial changes are needed before the manuscript can be accepted, potentially requiring another round of peer review.
4. Reject: The manuscript is either flawed or lacks sufficient novelty to warrant publication.

5. Editorial Decisions: Based on the reviewers' comments, the Editor will make one of the following decisions:

• Accept: The manuscript is approved for publication.
• Revision: Authors are required to address reviewers' comments.
• Reject: The manuscript is unsuitable for publication.

6. Revision Process: Revisions may be necessary if the manuscript does not meet language or style standards. To expedite publication, authors will have a maximum of two weeks to complete minor or major revisions, with possible extensions of up to four weeks. The number of revision rounds will depend on the extent of changes required to meet the journal’s quality standards.
7. Publication Process Upon acceptance, authors will receive galley proofs for final corrections. Once finalized, the manuscript will be published online in the "Articles in Press" section of the journal's website. Accepted manuscripts are assigned a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) at the time of online publication, making them immediately citable.

Publication Ethics and Malpractices

Responsibilities of Authors 

Authors must ensure that their research is original, genuine, and has not been previously published or submitted to any other journal. Plagiarism will be rigorously examined by the editorial team to maintain the journal's quality and international standards.

• Citation Manipulation: Authors must not artificially increase citations for personal gain. Any detected citation manipulation may lead to the rejection of the manuscript.
• Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Submitting the same research to multiple journals or publishing overlapping research is unethical and unacceptable. Manuscripts published as copyrighted material elsewhere cannot be submitted. By submitting their work, authors retain the rights under a CC-BY license that permits the use, adaptation, and distribution of their published material.
• Originality, Plagiarism, and Source Acknowledgment: Authors must submit original work and appropriately credit any external sources. Influential publications that shaped the reported work must also be cited.
• Data Fabrication and Falsification: Misrepresentation of research data, whether by creating false data (fabrication) or altering obtained data (falsification), is strictly prohibited.
• Multiple Submissions and Redundant Publications: Authors must avoid submitting the same manuscript to multiple journals simultaneously or publishing several papers based on the same dataset, as this dilutes the integrity of academic research.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

Role of Reviewers Peer reviewers are external experts selected to evaluate submissions and provide constructive feedback. Their reviews contribute to improving the quality and reliability of the research.

• Unbiased Assessments: Reviews must be impartial and focus on the manuscript's content, avoiding any bias that might compromise the review process.
• Confidentiality: All information pertaining to the peer-review process is strictly confidential and must not be disclosed during or after the review process.
• Detailed and Constructive Feedback: Reviewers must provide thorough and constructive critiques that help authors address any issues in their manuscript. Suggestions for revisions should be clear, specific, and supported by citations where applicable.

Responsibilities of Editors

Editors are key stakeholders responsible for maintaining the journal's standards and ethical integrity. Their responsibilities include:

• Accountability: Editors must ensure fair and unbiased handling of all submitted manuscripts and take full responsibility for published content.
• Maintaining Integrity: Editors are tasked with safeguarding the academic record by issuing corrections and retractions when necessary and investigating allegations of misconduct.
• Transparency and Fair Review: Editors must implement policies that promote transparency, ensure honest reporting, and prevent editorial conflicts of interest.

Guidelines for Retractions

The Nigerian Journal of Biotechnology (NJB) has a strict policy for addressing ethical violations, including plagiarism, data manipulation, and fraudulent authorship claims. Actions taken to address misconduct are guided by COPE Retraction Guidelines and may include:

• Expression of Concern: Issued to alert readers to potential issues with published content without reprimanding the authors.
• Corrections or Retractions: Depending on the nature of the error or misconduct, articles may be corrected or retracted. Retractions are clearly marked on the original publication, and corrections ensure the scientific content remains accessible and accurate.

Authors requesting corrections will not be charged additional fees. However, if measures such as retraction are taken without author consent, Article Processing Charges (APC) will not be reimbursed.

Editorial Policy

Editorial Policy

Ethics and Consent

1. Ethics Approval Research involving human subjects, materials, or data must adhere to the Declaration of Helsinki and receive approval from a recognized ethics committee. Manuscripts must include a statement indicating such approval, detailing the ethics committee's name and reference number (if applicable). For studies exempted from ethics approval, this exemption—including the granting committee's name—must also be mentioned. Authors must follow the International Council for Laboratory Animal Science (ICLAS) guidelines concerning the care and welfare of experimental animals. The full guidelines are accessible here (https://iclas.org/guidelines-for-researchers/). Authors should be prepared to provide supporting documentation upon the Editor's request. The Editor reserves the right to reject manuscripts that do not meet ethical research standards.
2. Informed Consent For research involving human subjects, informed consent must be obtained from participants or their legal guardians in cases involving minors (below age 16). Manuscripts should include a statement confirming this consent.
3. Non-Experimental Studies Field and other non-experimental research involving humans must comply with institutional, national, or international guidelines. Ethics committee approval, where applicable, should be noted in the manuscript.
4. Animal Studies Research involving vertebrates or regulated invertebrates must follow institutional, national, or international ethical guidelines. Such studies must also secure ethics committee approval when available. The fundamental principles to adhere to are outlined in Basel Declaration. Manuscripts must document compliance with guidelines and include ethics approval details or exemption information. For client-owned animal studies, authors must provide proof of informed consent from owners and ensure adherence to the highest veterinary care standards. Non-experimental animal research must also conform to ethical guidelines and licensing requirements.
5. Research Involving Plants Plant research must adhere to institutional, national, or international regulations. Field studies should follow local legislation, and manuscripts must specify permissions or licenses obtained. Voucher specimens should be deposited in public herbaria, with identification details included in the manuscript.
6. Consent for Publication Manuscripts featuring participant details, images, or videos require written informed consent for publication from participants or their legal representatives. For deceased participants, next-of-kin consent is necessary. Consent forms must be available to the Editor upon request. In cases of unidentifiable imagery with no personal details, consent may not be required.

Clinical Trial Registration

We advocate for the registration of clinical trials in publicly accessible databases in line with ICMJE guidelines. Trials reported in manuscripts must include their registration number and date as the abstract's final line. Unregistered trials should seek retrospective registration, noting the registration number, date, and "retrospectively registered" status in the abstract. Authors are encouraged to consult the AllTrials campaign, the Public Accounts Committee and the Department of Health, for more information. The trial registration number, date of registration and the words 'retrospectively registered’ should be included as the last line of the manuscript abstract.

Registration of Systematic Reviews

Authors conducting systematic reviews are encouraged to register them in appropriate registries (e.g., PROSPERO). Registration numbers should be included as the final line of the abstract.

Availability of Data and Materials

Authors submitting manuscripts must ensure materials, including relevant raw data, are available for scientific use without breaching participant confidentiality. Datasets critical to conclusions should be accessible to readers. Manuscripts must specify the location of external datasets in public repositories.

Biological Materials

We encourage the deposition of biological materials (e.g., plasmids, mutant strains, cell lines) in public repositories. Authors should verify cell lines against the the International Cell Line Authentication Committee (ICLAC) misidentification list.

Software and Code

New software applications or custom code should be accessible to reviewers while maintaining anonymity, accompanied by a link to the software's most recent and archived versions. Repositories like Zenodo are recommended for archiving software and ensuring DOIs or unique identifiers. Manuscripts should focus on underlying methods if software or code is not freely available.

Standards of Reporting

We strongly recommend that authors adhere to the minimum reporting guidelines for health research provided by the EQUATOR Network when preparing their manuscripts. For biological and biomedical research, the BioSharing Portal  offers relevant reporting checklists. We advocate for complete and transparent reporting in biomedical and biological research. Authors are encouraged to refer to the Minimum standards of reporting when drafting their manuscripts, as these guidelines will be used by peer reviewers during evaluations.

Authors of systematic reviews must include a supplementary file from the "Methods" section, detailing the complete search strategy. An example of a well-documented search strategy can be found in the Cochrane Reviewers' Handbook.

Statistical Methods 

Manuscripts must provide comprehensive details of the statistical methods employed, including justification for the chosen tests. Authors must specify whether p-values are 1-tailed or 2-tailed.

Resource Identification 

To enhance the traceability of key resources in biomedical literature, authors must include detailed descriptions that uniquely identify all resources used in their research. As part of the Resource Identification Initiative (RII), we encourage authors to employ unique Resource Identifiers (RRIDs) within their manuscript to specify their model organisms, antibodies, or tools.

Cell Line Authentication 

For studies involving human cell lines, the following information is required: (i) Source of the cell line, including when and where it was obtained. (ii) Authentication status, including the method used and whether testing was conducted recently. (iii) Testing for mycoplasma contamination.

Gene Nomenclature 

Standardized gene nomenclature must be used consistently throughout the manuscript. Human gene symbols and names can be referenced in the HUGO Gene Nomenclature Committee (HGNC) database. Alternative aliases may be provided but should not replace the standardized symbols. Requests for new gene symbols should be submitted to http://www.genenames.org/cgi-bin/request. For other species, authors may consult nomenclature committees listed in http://www.genenames.org/about/faq#otherspecies. 

Reporting of Sequence Variants 

We endorse the Human Variome Project Consortium's recommendations for reporting sequence variants (Human Genome Variation Society) and phenotypes (Human Phenotype Ontology).

Competing Interests 

All manuscripts must include a "Competing Interests" section. Authors must declare any potential conflicts, financial or non-financial, that could influence their interpretation of data or presentation. If no competing interests exist, the statement should read: "The author(s) declare(s) that they have no competing interests."

Authorship 

To ensure appropriate credit, authors must specify their individual contributions in the manuscript. Authorship should be based on the following ICMJE guidelines: (i) Substantial contributions to the conception, design, acquisition, analysis, or interpretation of data. (ii) Involvement in drafting or critically revising the manuscript. (iii) Approval of the final version for publication. (iv) Agreement to take accountability for all aspects of the work. Once a manuscript is accepted, changes to authorship (e.g., addition or removal of authors) will not be permitted.

Acknowledgements 

Contributors who do not meet authorship criteria should be acknowledged under the "Acknowledgements" section. Funding sources must also be recognized, including the name of the funding body and grant numbers where applicable. Any external assistance with manuscript preparation must be noted following the European Medical Writers Association (EMWA)  guidelines.

Duplicate Publication 

Submissions must be original and not under consideration by other journals. Manuscripts must not have been previously published in any journal or cited format. Authors must disclose any overlapping publications and cite them where necessary. Cases of suspected plagiarism or duplicate submission will be managed in accordance with COPE guidelines and ICMJE guidelines.

Corrections and Retractions 

To preserve the academic record's integrity, necessary corrections or retractions will be issued via Erratum or Retraction articles, accompanied by prominent links. Retractions will be clearly marked on the affected articles' PDFs. Material may only be removed in exceptional cases (e.g., infringement of rights or defamatory content), following COPE guidelines.

Appeals and Complaints 

Authors retain the right to appeal editorial decisions. Complaints will be addressed in adherence to COPE guidelines.