Provisions
on review of articles in the collection of scientific papers
of the bulletin of Veterinary biotechnology

These provisions are given in scientific directions of the bulletin which is identified by the Certificate of the state registration. Publications contain articles which are peer reviewed to ensure they meet the quality standards and scientific justification of the bulletin.

All manuscript submitted to the Editorial Board are subject to peer review. The purpose of the review is to facilitate the strict selection of authors’ manuscripts to publish and provide specific recommendations for their improvement. The peer review process is focused on the objective assessment of the scientific article content, its conformity with the bulletin’s requirements and provides a comprehensive analysis of advantages and disadvantages of article’s materials. Only articles which have scientific value and contribute to solving current challenges and tasks of veterinary medicine are accepted for publication. The level of conformity to the manuscript format for publication in the scientific bulletin is considered separately.

The main purpose of the peer review process is to eliminate cases of poorly-practiced researches and to ensure the coordination and balance of interests of authors, readers, Editorial Board, reviewers and the institution where the research was conducted.

Peer review process is anonymous. Providing the manuscript to review the authors entrust editors with the results of their scientific papers and creative efforts, on which their reputation and career can depend. The disclosure of confidential details of the article review violates the rights of the author. Editor shall not disclose any information relating to the article (including information about its submission, content, review process, criticisms of reviewers and final conclusions) to anybody other than authors and reviewers. Violation of confidentiality is possible only in case of the statement of falsity, plagiarism or falsification of materials, in all other cases its adherence is obligatory.

I. The peer review process

1. The main purpose of the peer review process is to increase the scientific value of articles by the formation of objective procedures of manuscripts’ selection and determination the reasonable approaches to the development of recommendations for their improvement.
2. The author provides the manuscript to the Editorial Board, which meets the requirements of the bulletin policy and the rules of articles preparation to publication in hard copy (the last page should be signed by all authors) and electronic form accompanied with the expert conclusions on the possibility of publication and review to the responsible secretary. The manuscripts, which do not meet bulletin’s requirements, do not registered and not accepted for further consideration, and authors will be notified about this. The manuscript is registered by the responsible secretary in the manuscript registration book indicating the date of receipt, title, author’s name, and affiliation. After registration manuscripts are given an individual registration number.
3. The responsible secretary conducts a preliminary assessment for the conformity of the submitted manuscript’s content to the field of science covered by bulletin, forwards them for review to the members of the Editorial Board and scientific editors. All manuscripts are directed to one reviewer or, if necessary, two reviewers according to the research profile.
4. The peer review process is conducted confidentially by the principles of double-blind review (double-blind review is a review when neither the author nor the reviewer knows each other). The interaction between the authors and the reviewers is realized by the responsible secretary of the bulletin. Both members of the Editorial Board of the bulletin of Veterinary Biotechnology and highly skilled specialists of specific scientific field that have required work experience but not the members of the Editorial Board can be reviewers.
5. After submitting manuscript for peer review (within 10 days) the reviewer evaluates the possibility for manuscript assessment based on the relevance of his/her own qualification to the author’s research field and the absence of any conflict of interests. If there are competing interests, the reviewer has a right to refuse reviewing and should inform the Editorial Board about it. And the Editorial Board should choose another reviewer.
6. The assigned reviewer assesses the conformity of the manuscript to the requirements of the State Accreditation Commission and the requirements of the bulletin of Veterinary Biotechnology within 10 days and determines if it applicable to be published, if necessary, makes specific comments on its improvement. In some cases the review time can be changed to achieve the most objective quality assessment but should not exceed one calendar month.
7. After the article analysis the reviewer fills in the standard form (Appendix 1), which contains the final recommendations:
• Publish Unaltered;
• Consider after Minor/Major Changes;
• Rejected.
After that the responsible secretary notifies the author on the review results via e-mail.
8. When the Editor recommends “Publish Unaltered”, the responsible secretary includes the manuscript to the bulletin issue and notifies the author about its acceptance. If the Editor recommends “Consider after Minor/Major Changes”, the manuscript with the review report is forwarded to the author to eliminate the faults noted in the comments and correction of technical errors. Revised manuscript’s hard copy and electronic form should be submitted to the responsible secretary, who forwards it to the reviewer again and, if there are no comments, includes it to the bulletin’s issue. If the Editor recommends “Rejected” the article is rejected without any right to correct. The date of article acceptance for publication is the date when a positive reviewer’s conclusion (or decision of the Editorial Board) regarding the expediency and possibility of article publication is received by the Editorial Board.
9. If there is a recommends “Publish Unaltered” received, the manuscript will be directed to be published in order of priority and urgency.
10. In case of disagreement with the reviewer’s opinion author of the manuscript has the right to provide an argumentative answer to the Editorial Board of the bulletin. In this case the manuscript undergoes revision at the meeting of the working group of the Editorial Board. The Editorial Board can send the manuscript to another specialist for additional or new review. The Editorial Board has the right to reject manuscript if the author can’t or doesn’t want to take into account the recommendations and comments of the reviewers. The Editorial Board does not get into a discussion with the authors of rejected manuscripts.
11. The final decision on the manuscript acceptance is taken at the bulletin’s Editorial Board working group meeting and the authors of manuscripts are notified about its result.
12. The final decision on the manuscripts include to the current issue of the bulletin is fixed by the minutes of the meeting of academic councils of the institutions-co-establishers, the corresponding notification on which one may find on the second page of the title page of the bulletin.
13. Further work with the manuscript accepted for publication is carried out by the Editorial staff according to the technological process of the bulletin preparation.

II. Rights and obligations of the reviewer

1. Reviewers provide a written review of the article, at the end of which the conclusion on the possibility of manuscript publication is given based on the analysis of the provided material.
2. If the reviewer recommends “Consider after Minor/Major Changes” taking into account comments or “Rejected”, the relevant reasons for such decision should be given in the review.
3. The reviewer should evaluate received manuscript during the period agreed with the responsible secretary and send the argumentative refusal of reviewing or review result to the Editorial office (via e-mail).
4. The reviewer determinates the scientific significance, practical value and methodological level of the manuscript. The reviewer also determines the compliance with the ethics principles of scientific publications and recommendations to eliminate violation when they are detected.
5. Reviewers are notified that scientific manuscripts forwarded them are authors’ intellectual property and relate to non-disclosure information.
6. Reviewers are not allowed to make copies of the manuscript given for review or to use the manuscript idea before its publication.
7. The review is based on the principles of confidentiality, when information on the manuscript is not provided anyone except authors and reviewers.

III. Rights and obligations of the author

1. The author should submit the manuscript according to the requirements of the bulletin of Veterinary Biotechnology. The manuscript should be sent to the Editorial Board email in electronic form and hard copy, the latter should be signed by all authors at the last page. The expert conclusion on the possibility of publication and review should be send with the manuscript.
2. The author is provided with the result of the manuscript evaluation.
3. Manuscripts directed to authors for correction should be returned to the Editorial Board not later than 1 week after receipt. If the manuscript is sent later, the date of its publication is changed accordingly.
4. The responsible secretary notifies the authors about the terms of the manuscript publication no later than in one month after positive recommendation regarding publication is accepted.