• Authors should submit the original work. Any infringement may lead to a retraction of the article.
• Authors should not fabricate or manipulate the data. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
• Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data.
• Author should take care in regards to Plagiarism should not be happen in submitted manuscript. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
• Authors should take the proper permission from copyright owner(s) and to state evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers.
• Authors should guarantee that the article has not been published previously or is not being evaluated for publication elsewhere.
• Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.
• All authors should take care about Submitted works that should not contain any unlawful statements that may violate the law.
• If the research involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that, the appropriate institutional ethical committee has approved them.
• Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human or animal subjects. Those who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgments. The International Council of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) gives more detailed guidance on authorship.
• The corresponding author should serve as the editor's point of contact with the other authors, keeping them up to date and including them in significant publication decisions. We have the right to request confirmation that all authors have met the authorship requirements.

• The editor of the IJABR is responsible for final decision regarding the publication of article submitted.
• Editors should provide a fair judgment and consideration to all manuscripts based on its quality with no regard to racial background, gender, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political background of the authors, institutional affiliation of the author(s).
• If referee who feels unable to review within a time should notify to editor and editor should appoint the appropriate reviewer for the review process. Editors are responsible to consider all the submitted manuscripts in a reasonable time frame.
• The team of IJABR must not disclose any data of a submitted manuscript and not disclose any information about the manuscript under consideration to other parties.
• Editors should not provide any private information of authors is included in the manuscript sent to reviewers
• Editors are expected to act accordance with COPE practices when considering a manuscript for publication.

• Methodological Soundness: Verifying that the experimental design is robust and that the results support the conclusions drawn.
• Originality: Alerting the editors if they suspect any overlap between the submitted manuscript and previously published work (plagiarism or "salami slicing").
• Data Integrity: Checking for inconsistencies in data presentation, suspicious image manipulations, or statistical errors.

• Confidentiality: Reviewers must not share, discuss, or distribute the manuscript or its findings with any third party. The document remains the intellectual property of the authors until publication.
• Conflict of Interest: Reviewers must recuse themselves if they have a personal, professional, or financial connection to the authors or institutions that could bias their judgment.
• Constructive Critique: Feedback must be professional and objective. Personal attacks or derogatory comments toward the authors are strictly prohibited.

• Promptness: To support the rapid dissemination of biotechnological research, reviewers are expected to deliver their reports within the journal’s specified timeframe. If a delay is inevitable, they must notify the Editor immediately.
• Recommendation Clarity: Reviewers must provide a clear recommendation (Accept, Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Reject) with specific evidence to justify their decision, aiding the Editor in making the final call.

• Anonymity: Reviewers must maintain their anonymity (unless the journal operates an open-review model) and should not contact authors directly.
• Alerting to Post-Publication Issues: If a reviewer discovers a flaw in a paper they previously reviewed after it has been published, they have a responsibility to notify the Editorial Office to initiate the correction or retraction process.

• Correction Implementation (Errata): The publisher is solely responsible for correcting errors introduced during the typesetting or production process by issuing an Erratum.
• Archival Integrity: The publisher ensures that retracted articles are not deleted but remain accessible with a permanent watermark to preserve the historical record of science.
• Database Notification: Upon the publication of a correction, retraction, or expression of concern, the publisher is responsible for notifying indexing services to ensure the metadata is updated across all platforms.
• Version Control: The publisher maintains dated logs of any "Post-Publication Changes" to ensure transparency regarding when and why an article was modified.
• If Editor and Author(s) have any relationship, which may lead to an unfair evaluation, another editor will be appointed instead.
• Any appearance of conflict of interest at the time of receiving a new manuscript for evaluation, reviewer should promptly return the manuscript to the editor, informing the conflict of interest issue.

• Immediate rejection of the infringing manuscript.
• Immediate rejection of every other manuscript submitted to IJABR by any of the authors of the infringing manuscript.
• Prohibition against all of the authors for any new submissions to IJABR, either individually or in combination with other authors of the infringing manuscript, as well as in combination with any other authors. This prohibition will be imposed for a minimum of 36 months.
• Prohibition against all of the authors from serving on the Editorial Board of IJABR.
• In cases where the violations of the above policies are found to be particularly egregious, the publisher reserves the right to impose additional sanctions beyond those described above.

• Authors submit a Manuscript to IJABR
• An editor evaluates the article’s suitability for publication in the journal based on its scope and screens it for plagiarism using iThenticate.
• The editor then submits the article to two independent reviewers, chosen based on their field of expertise and relevance to the article's topic, to critically evaluate it. If they believe they lack sufficient knowledge on the article subject or refuse the review, another reviewer is invited to assist with the evaluation.
• Reviewer'r comment will be sent to the Associate editor, whether Manuscript Need modification, Rejection or Accepted. This message will forward to Authors also.
• If the manuscript is accepted by reviewers, the editor will send the acceptance to the author; if the galley proof is authorized by the author, the manuscript will be queued for publishing.
• If the reviewer requests a revision, the author(s) should react promptly and clarify any unclear points.
• Upon receiving the revised Manuscript, the reviewers will check the author/s modified Manuscript.
• If modified/revised Manuscript accepted by the reviewer, the acceptance will be sent to the author, after galley proof approved by Author then Manuscript will be in queue for publication.
• If Reviewer rejects the manuscript, then editor will inform the review decision to author.