Scribd
Upload
27 views3 pages

Rev IJPSS 111760

This review form is for a manuscript submitted to the International Journal of Plant & Soil Science titled "EFFECT OF SOAKING AND GERMINATION ON ANTINUTRITIONAL FACTORS OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa)." The form includes sections for compulsory revision comments, minor revision comments, ethical/competing interest issues, an overall evaluation score, and reviewer details. Reviewers are asked to comment on the manuscript's importance, title, abstract, structure, scientific correctness, and references. They are also directed to the journal's editorial policy and given freedom to provide additional suggestions.

Uploaded by

Fajri Febrini Aulia
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
27 views3 pages

Rev IJPSS 111760

This review form is for a manuscript submitted to the International Journal of Plant & Soil Science titled "EFFECT OF SOAKING AND GERMINATION ON ANTINUTRITIONAL FACTORS OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa)." The form includes sections for compulsory revision comments, minor revision comments, ethical/competing interest issues, an overall evaluation score, and reviewer details. Reviewers are asked to comment on the manuscript's importance, title, abstract, structure, scientific correctness, and references. They are also directed to the journal's editorial policy and given freedom to provide additional suggestions.

Uploaded by

Fajri Febrini Aulia
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
We take content rights seriously. If you suspect this is your content, claim it here.
Available Formats
Download as DOC, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 3

Review Form 1.

Journal Name: International Journal of Plant & Soil Science


Manuscript Number: Ms_IJPSS_111760
Title of the Manuscript:
EFFECT OF SOAKING AND GERMINATION ON ANTINUTRITIONAL FACTORS OF QUINOA (Chenopodium quinoa)

Type of the Article

General guideline for Peer Review process:

This journal’s peer review policy states that NO manuscript should be rejected only on the basis of ‘lack of Novelty’, provided the manuscript is scientifically robust and technically sound.
To know the complete guideline for Peer Review process, reviewers are requested to visit this link:

(https://www.journalijpss.com/index.php/IJPSS/editorial-policy )

Created by: DR Checked by: PM Approved by: MBM Version: 1.7 (15-12-2022)
Review Form 1.7

PART 1: Review Comments

Reviewer’s comment Author’s comment (if agreed with reviewer, correct


the manuscript and highlight that part in the
manuscript. It is mandatory that authors should write
his/her feedback here)
Compulsory REVISION comments

1. Is the manuscript important for scientific community?


(Please write few sentences on this manuscript)

2. Is the title of the article suitable?


(If not please suggest an alternative title)

3. Is the abstract of the article comprehensive?

4. Are subsections and structure of the manuscript


appropriate?

5. Do you think the manuscript is scientifically correct?

6. Are the references sufficient and recent? If you have


suggestion of additional references, please mention in the
review form.

(Apart from above mentioned 6 points, reviewers are free to


provide additional suggestions/comments)

Minor REVISION comments

1. Is language/English quality of the article suitable for


scholarly communications?

Optional/General comments

Created by: DR Checked by: PM Approved by: MBM Version: 1.7 (15-12-2022)
Review Form 1.7

PART 2:

Reviewer’s comment Author’s comment (if agreed with reviewer, correct the
manuscript and highlight that part in the manuscript. It is
mandatory that authors should write his/her feedback here)

(If yes, Kindly please write down the ethical issues here in details)
Are there ethical issues in this manuscript?

Are there competing interest issues in this manuscript?

If plagiarism is suspected, please provide related proofs or web


links.

PART 3: Declaration of Competing Interest of the reviewer:

Here reviewer should declare his/her competing interest. If nothing to declare he/she can write “I declare that I have no competing interest as a reviewer”

PART 4: Objective Evaluation:

Guideline MARKS of this manuscript


Give OVERALL MARKS you want to give to this manuscript
( Highest: 10 Lowest: 0 )

Guideline:
Accept As It Is: (>9-10)
Minor Revision: (>8-9)
Major Revision: (>7-8)
Serious Major revision: (>5-7)
Rejected (with repairable deficiencies and may be reconsidered): (>3-5)
Strongly rejected (with irreparable deficiencies.): (>0-3)

PART 5: Reviewer Details:


This information is mandatory to prepare the Reviewer Certificate properly.
Certificate preparation will not be possible if incomplete information is received.

Name of the Reviewer


Department of Reviewer
University or Institution of Reviewer
Country of Reviewer
Position: (Professor/lecturer, etc.) of Reviewer
Email ID of Reviewer
WhatsApp Number of Reviewer
5-8 Keywords regarding expertise of Reviewer

Created by: DR Checked by: PM Approved by: MBM Version: 1.7 (15-12-2022)

You might also like