Peer-review process
Pre-review: Submissions are first evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief. If manuscripts do not meet the minimum requirements detailed in the Submission Preparation Checklist, he will be returned to the corresponding author for compliance. Likewise, the editor-in-chief may reject submissions that do not pertain to the discipline or subject area covered by the journal.
Once it has been verified that the submissions meet the minimum requirements, the editor in charge of the process will assign the manuscript to two external peer reviewers, experts in the subject matter of the manuscript, to evaluate the submission.
Peer review system: Mammalia aequatorialis has adopted a double-blind peer review system in which the identity of the peer reviewer and the author(s) is anonymized.
The peer review process applies only to scientific articles. All other sections (short notes, book reviews, thesis abstracts, state of the art, and opinion articles) are not peer-reviewed; however, the relevance of their publication corresponds to the Editorial Committee.
Choice of reviewers: Reviewers will be professionals with experience in the subject to be evaluated, whether they are domiciled in Ecuador or in any other country. Authors of a manuscript may suggest up to three reviewers, but the decision of who reviews the submission will be exclusive to the editors.
The reviewers will have at least a third level academic degree, but reviewers with master's or doctoral degrees will be preferred. Whenever possible, the review of a manuscript should be sent to persons with an academic level equal to or higher than that of the first author or corresponding author.
Peer review process: Each review ends with the recommendation given by the peer reviewer. The peer reviewer may recommend to the editor in charge to publish the manuscript without corrections. However, the peer reviewer may suggest rejecting the manuscript or publishing it after the author makes major or minor corrections.
Before making a decision, the editor-in-charge evaluates the peer reviewers' recommendations. The editor may decide to accept or reject it, or open a new round of revisions and send the manuscript to another peer reviewer.
The final decision to publish a manuscript rests with the editors and their verdict will be final and unappealable.
Evaluation options: A manuscript can be evaluated in five different ways:
- Accepted without changes
- Accepted with minor changes
- Accepted with major changes
- Not accepted, but has potential and can be resubmitted with suggested corrections.
- Not accepted
Processing time: The refereeing process can last between two and six months, although the journal's policy is to give a response in four months at the most, this is not always possible.
