Editorial Policies
Rigorous, transparent editorial policies protect research integrity and author trust.
Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are based on scientific merit, methodological quality, and relevance to transgenic research. Commercial interests do not influence acceptance decisions.
Core Policy Areas
Standards we uphold
Peer Review
Independent expert evaluation for quality and validity.
Ethics
Human and animal research must meet approved protocols.
Conflicts
Disclosures required for authors, editors, reviewers.
Integrity
Plagiarism screening and corrections protect trust.
Peer Review Workflow
How decisions are made
Screening
Scope and compliance check.
Reviewer Selection
Experts evaluate rigor and impact.
Decision
Editors synthesize feedback.
Post Publication
Corrections or updates issued when needed.
Corrections and Retractions
Maintaining the record
| Issue | Action | Outcome |
|---|---|---|
| Minor Error | Correction notice | Clarifies record. |
| Major Error | Expression of concern | Alerts readers. |
| Ethical Breach | Retraction | Protects integrity. |
Publish With Integrity
Submit to JTR and benefit from transparent editorial standards.
Submit via ManuscriptZoneSimple SubmissionAppeals and Complaints
Authors may appeal decisions with a reasoned response and supporting evidence. Complaints are reviewed with transparency and addressed promptly by the editorial office.
Data Integrity
Editors may request original data or documentation to resolve concerns about data reliability. Authors are expected to cooperate with investigations to protect the scientific record.
Authorship Standards
All listed authors must meet authorship criteria and approve the final manuscript. Contribution statements are required to clarify roles and accountability.
Plagiarism and Redundant Publication
Submissions are screened for similarity. Manuscripts must be original and not under consideration elsewhere. Redundant publication or undisclosed overlap may result in rejection.
Conflict of Interest
Authors, editors, and reviewers must disclose financial or personal conflicts. Transparent disclosures protect reader trust and the integrity of the review process.
Ethics Oversight
Human and animal studies require ethical approval and informed consent where applicable. For transgenic work, biosafety approvals and regulatory compliance must be documented.
Reviewer Confidentiality
Reviewers must treat manuscripts as confidential and avoid using information for personal advantage. Breaches of confidentiality may lead to removal from the reviewer pool.
Preprints and Transparency
Preprint posting is permitted when disclosed at submission. Authors should update preprints with the published DOI to support citation tracking.
Use of AI Tools
If AI assisted tools are used for language editing or analysis, authors must disclose the tool and confirm responsibility for accuracy and interpretation.
Data Sharing Expectations
Authors should provide data availability statements and repository links when possible. Transparent data sharing supports reproducibility and enhances trust in published results.
Publication Ethics Investigations
Suspected misconduct is reviewed according to established ethics guidelines. The journal may request documentation and coordinate with institutions to resolve concerns.
Editorial Independence
Editorial decisions are separate from commercial considerations. Advertising or sponsorship does not influence peer review outcomes or acceptance decisions.
Peer Review Model
JTR uses expert peer review to evaluate rigor, originality, and relevance. Editors synthesize reviewer feedback to provide clear, evidence based decisions.
Corrections and Retractions
When errors are identified, the journal issues corrections or retractions as appropriate. These actions are communicated transparently to protect the integrity of the scientific record.
Confidential Data Handling
Editors and reviewers handle data and manuscripts with confidentiality. Sensitive information should be clearly identified, and access is limited to those directly involved in review.
Reviewer Recognition
Reviewers may receive acknowledgement and certificates for timely, high quality reviews. Recognition supports community engagement and accountability.
Post Publication Updates
Authors should notify the journal of significant errors discovered after publication. Updates, corrections, or retractions are issued to maintain accuracy and transparency.
Timely Review Expectations
Editors and reviewers are expected to respond within standard timelines. Prompt review supports authors and keeps the publication pipeline efficient. Authors are notified of delays and may request status updates through the editorial office to maintain transparency. We strive to balance speed with rigorous evaluation to preserve quality. Editors may invite additional reviewers when reports conflict or further expertise is required. This ensures fair decisions and consistent standards across all submissions. Authors will receive clear reasoning with the final decision letter and guidance for next steps when needed.