Frontiers in Biotechnology and Genetics (FBG) follows a rigorous and transparent double-blind peer review process to ensure the quality, originality, reliability, and academic integrity of published research. In this process, the identities of both authors and reviewers remain confidential throughout the review procedure. This approach minimizes bias and ensures that manuscripts are evaluated solely on their scientific quality, originality, methodological strength, and relevance to the journal’s aims and scope.
FBG follows a Double-Blind Peer Review System. Under this process:
Each submitted manuscript is evaluated by qualified reviewers selected according to their:
Reviewers are selected by the Editor-in-Chief or assigned editors to ensure an independent and appropriate evaluation process. FBG selects reviewers who can provide objective, constructive, and technically sound assessments.
After submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening followed by external peer review.
The editorial team evaluates manuscripts for:
Manuscripts that do not meet initial requirements may be rejected without external review.
Manuscripts passing initial screening are reviewed by at least two independent external reviewers. Reviewers evaluate manuscripts based on:
Reviewers provide recommendations, including:
Reviewer comments are provided to authors to improve manuscript quality.
The final publication decision is made by the Editor-in-Chief based on:
The Editor-in-Chief may accept, request revisions, or reject manuscripts after considering the complete evaluation process. Editorial decisions are independent and are not influenced by commercial interests, authors’ affiliations, nationality, gender, or personal relationships.
All manuscripts submitted to FBG are treated as confidential documents.
Editors, reviewers, and editorial staff must not:
Reviewers must:
Reviewers should inform the editor if they identify:
Authors receiving revision requests must provide:
Revised manuscripts may undergo additional review when necessary.
Authors may appeal editorial decisions by providing clear academic justification. Appeals are reviewed fairly and confidentially by the editorial team or an independent editor who was not involved in the original decision.
FBG handles all complaints and appeals according to ethical publishing standards and COPE recommendations.
FBG values the contribution of reviewers who support the quality improvement of published research. Reviewer participation may be acknowledged while maintaining confidentiality of individual review assignments.
