Profiles
Peer Review Process
Fungal Biotec accepts manuscripts written in English and formatted according to the template given under the submission tab. Manuscripts that are not formatted according to the journal template will be rejected immediately. All the articles submitted will undergo a pre-screening process prior to being subjected to a single-blind peer review by at least two independent external reviewers. The steps in the process are as follows:
Once a manuscript is received by the managing editor, the managing editor conducts a preliminary screening to ensure that the manuscript is correctly formatted according to the journal's guidelines and contains no more than 20% plagiarism. If these criteria are not met, then the managing editor directly rejects the manuscript. Articles that pass the preliminary screening are then reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief to assess whether they align with Fungal Biotec's aims and scope, and to confirm their originality, novelty, and scientific significance. If the manuscript does not meet these criteria, the article is declined by the Editor-in-chief without further review. If the manuscript meets the criteria, the manuscript is assigned to a handling editor who will nominate at least two independent reviewers. The handling editor sends the article to the nominated reviewers and receives their recommendations. The peer-review process usually takes 4 months. The handling editor then submits the reviewers' recommendations to the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision based on these recommendations. The decisions are as follows:
Decision Types
- Accept the submission — When the manuscript is accepted without further changes or revisions.
- Minor revision required — When the manuscript is accepted but with minor changes. The authors are given two weeks to re-submit the article. After the author re-submits the revised manuscript, the handling editor determines whether the revisions or responses to the comments are satisfactory, upon which the manuscript is recommended to be accepted, and the editor-in-chief will be informed of the recommendation. Thereafter, the Editor-in-chief will accept the manuscript.
- Major revision required — When the manuscript requires major changes that need to be peer-reviewed again once the authors re-submit the revised version. The authors are given 4–6 weeks to re-submit the article. After the author re-submits the revised manuscript, the handling editor will send the revised manuscript back to the reviewers to assess whether the authors addressed the reviewer's comments and suggestions to a satisfactory level. This process will be repeated till the reviewers accept the revised version. Then, the handling editor will inform the Editor-in-chief of the final revisions and the recommendation to be accepted. Thereafter, the Editor-in-chief will accept the manuscript.
- Reject the submission — When the manuscript is declined either during the preliminary screening or the secondary screening or upon reviewer suggestions.
The final decision from the Editor-in-chief is communicated to the corresponding author. The accepted submissions are forwarded to the managing editor, who handles the copyright, artwork, and preparation of the proofs. The proof is sent to the authors, who will be given one week to review and return it. Once the authors confirm the proof, the Editor-in-chief reviews and approves it for publication. The article is then published on the journal's website, and the authors are notified.
Recent Papers
Volume 5 - 2025 issue 1
3. Hematological and biochemical responses of broilers to iron-enriched Pleurotusostreatus-fortified feed
Fadugba et al. (2025)
2. Unveiling a new host record of Amphisphaeria micheliae from Micromelum integerrimum
Pathirana et al. (2025)
1. Scleroderma: A review of the known species in Thailand
Gonkhom et al. (2025)
Volume 4 - 2024 issue 1
8. Paradictyoarthrinium diffractum, a new host record on Delonix regia in northern Thailand
Balagamage et al. (2024)
7. Proximal, mineral, functional and bioactive attributes of the ectomycorrhizal edible mushroom Clavaria versatilis
Vedashree et al. (2024)
6. A Comparative Approach on the Effects of Organic Wastes for the Cultivation of Wild Edible Mushrooms along with Various Substrate Compositions
Saha et al. (2024)
5. Preliminary investigation of wood-rotting fungi from two forest stands of Mizoram, North East India
Vanlalhluna et al. (2024)
4. Diverse use of mushroom mycelium-based as biomaterial products: A mini review
Khyaju S, Luangharn T. (2024)
