Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

Jurnal Ilmiah Biologi UMA (JIBIOMA) focuses on the publication of the results of scientific research related to fields. This article is published in the internal and external academic community of the University of Medan Area (UMA) especially in the field of Biology. Biolink publishes scientific articles in the scope of biology that includes environmental biology, industrial biology and health biology. Published articles are the results of research articles, studies or critical and comprehensive scientific studies on important issues related to the field of biology.

 

Section Policies

Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

After submit inventions have made a preliminary review of the manuscript by the editor Jurnal Ilmiah Biologi UMA (JIBIOMA). Editor will decide whether the manuscript in accordance with the scope and focus and proper to give to the reviewer. Sometimes, editors may recommend revision before submitting for review. This initial review of activities usually takes a week.

Submissions that pass the initial review will be assigned to at least two reviewers (double-blind peer review). Based on the review editor will first make editorial decisions.

There are five possible editorial decisions (1) the manuscript is accepted, (2) be amended, (3) re-submit, (4) is sent to another publisher, or (5) is rejected.

Typically, the time frame of delivery to the first editor of the average results of 6-8 weeks.

The time to reach a final decision depends on the number of reviews rotation, perceptive writer etc. Typically, the time frame of delivery by an average of 4-5 months a final decision.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

 

Archiving

This journal utilizes the LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration. More...

 

Jurnal Ilmiah Biologi UMA (JIBIOMA)

Jurnal Ilmiah Biologi UMA (JIBIOMA) focuses on the publication of the results of scientific research related to fields. This article is published in the internal and external academic community of the University of Medan Area (UMA) especially in the field of Biology. Biolink publishes scientific articles in the scope of biology that includes environmental biology, industrial biology and health biology. Published articles are the results of research articles, studies or critical and comprehensive scientific studies on important issues related to the field of biology.

 

SCREENING FOR PLAGIARISM

The manuscript that submitted into this journal will be screened for plagiarism using

 

Review Guidlines

Review Process of Manuscript: Initial Review

  1. Read the abstract to be sure that you have the expertise to review the article. Don’t be afraid to say no to reviewing an article if there is the good reason.
  2. Read information provided by the journal for reviewers so you will know: a) The type of manuscript (e.g., a review article, technical note, original research) and the journal’s expectations/parameters for that type of manuscript.; b) Other journal requirements that the manuscript must meet (e.g., length, citation style).
  3. Know the journal’s scope and mission to make sure that the topic of the paper fits in the scope.
  4. Ready? Read through entire manuscript initially to see if the paper is worth publishing- only make a few notes about major problems if such exist: a) Is the question of interest sound and significant?; b) Was the design and/or method used adequately or fatally flawed? (for original research papers); c) Were the results substantial enough to consider publishable (or were only two or so variables presented or resulted so flawed as to render the paper unpublishable)?
  5. What is your initial impression? If the paper is: a) Acceptable with only minor comments/questions: solid, interesting, and new; sound methodology used; results were well presented; discussion well formulated with Interpretations based on sound science reasoning, etc., with only minor comments/questions, move directly to writing up review; b) Fatally flawed so you will have to reject it: move directly to writing up review; c) A mixture somewhere in the range of “revise and resubmit” to “accepted with major changes” or you’re unsure if it should be rejected yet or not: It may be a worthy paper, but there are major concerns that would need to be addressed.

Full Review Process of Manuscript

  1. Writing: Is the manuscript easy to follow, that is, has a logical progression and evident organisation?
  2. Is the manuscript concise and understandable? Any parts that should be reduced,
  3. Eliminated/expanded/added?
  4. Note if there are major problems with mechanics: grammar, punctuation, spelling. (If there are just a few places that aren’t worded well or correctly, make a note to tell the author the specific places. If there are consistent problems throughout, only select an example or two if need be- don’t try and edit the whole thing).
  5. Abbreviations: Used judiciously and are composed such that reader won’t have trouble remembering what an abbreviation represents.
  6. Follows style, format and other rules of the journal.
  7. Citations are provided when providing evidence-based information from outside sources.