About the Journal

Agriprima is an applied agricultural scientific journal which covers a wide range of topics in the fields of agricultural sciences. This journal publishes original research articles in the field of plant breeding and genetics, plant biotechnology, seed technology, plant protection, soil science, plant nutrition, harvest, and post-harvest technology, as well as relevant and prospective innovations for agriculture progress and crop production. This journal is published six monthly in March and September. All submitted papers are fully peer-reviewed by a qualified reviewer with expertise in the appropriate field for the article.

The papers that meet the requirements will be published and freely available (open access) under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license (CC BY-SA 4.0).

 

Peer Review Process

The submitted manuscripts will be reviewed by 2 (two) reviewers for each related topic. The decision of the first reviewer will be the top priority for the editor to make a decision.

The manuscript review process may vary depending on the time the reviewer has to review and return the revised manuscript. It generally takes three weeks to complete one round of reviews.

Prospective manuscript reviewers are selected based on the suitability of their area of expertise The editor will send an e-mail willingness to become a reviewer. If approved, the Editor will send the manuscript through the OJS-based website.

All review processes are carried out in private and are managed by the Agriprima Editor.

 

Open Access Policy

This journal provides open access that can be read and downloaded for free to the public and will support the exchange of knowledge in applied agricultural science. All content is published under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license (CC BY-SA 4.0).

 

PUBLICATION ETHICS

ETHICS FOR EDITORS

1. Publication Decision
The editor has the authority to select and decide the articles to be published. Decisions are made based on the level of article contributions and recommendations from reviewers. Editors carry out their duties in accordance with the policies of the journal Manager and comply with applicable legal provisions such as defamation, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.

2. Objective Assessment
The editor evaluates a text based on its intellectual content without any discrimination, ethnicity, ethnicity, gender, nationality, and others.

3. Confidentiality
Editors and editorial staff may not disclose any information about the manuscript that has been received to anyone, other than authors, reviewers, prospective reviewers, and the editorial board.

4. Conflict of Interest
Article material sent to AGRIPRIMA and not yet published may not be used for the editor's personal research without the written permission of the author. Information or ideas obtained through blind review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. Editors must refuse to review the manuscript if the editor has a conflict of interest, due to a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution associated with the text.

5. Cooperation in Investigation
Editors must take responsive steps if there are complaints related to ethics in the manuscripts that have been received or in articles that have been published. The editor can contact the scriptwriter and provide consideration for the complaint. Editors can also communicate further to related research institutions or institutions. Once the complaint has been resolved, matters such as publication of corrections, withdrawals, statements of concern, or other notes, need to be considered.

ETHICS FOR REVIEWERS

1. Contribution to Editor's Decision
Blind peer reviews by reviewers help editors in making decisions and can help authors improve their writing through editorial communication between reviewers and authors. Peer review is an important component of informal scientific communication (formal scholarly communication) and scientific approaches.

2. Timeliness
If the assigned reviewer feels that he does not have the qualifications to review a manuscript or knows that it is impossible to do a review in a timely manner, the assigned reviewer must immediately inform the editor.

3. Confidentiality
Any manuscripts that have been received for review must be treated as confidential documents. The manuscript may not be shown to or discussed with others unless it has been authorized by the editor.

4. Objective
Reviews must be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers must convey their views clearly along with supporting arguments.

5. Completeness and Authenticity of Reference
Reviewers must identify published works that have not been cited by the authors. A statement about previously published observations or arguments must be accompanied by relevant citations. The reviewer must notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under review and other published papers, to the knowledge of the reviewer.

6. Conflicts of Interest
Unpublished article material may not be used in reviewers' personal research without the written permission of the author. Information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain. A reviewer should refuse to review a manuscript if the reviewer has a conflict of interest, due to a competitive, collaborative, or other relationship with the author, company, or institution associated with the work.

ETHICS FOR AUTHORS

1. Writing Standards
The author must present an accurate paper/article on the research conducted and present an objective discussion of the significance of the research. Research data must be presented accurately in the article. An article must be detailed enough with sufficient references to allow others to replicate the work. Fraud or inaccurate presentation of papers is unethical and unacceptable behavior.

2. Access to Research Data
Authors may be asked to provide raw data for the writings to be reviewed and must be able to provide public access to such data where possible, and must be able to retain such data for a reasonable period of time after publication.

3. Originality and Plagiarism
Plagiarism in all forms is unethical behavior in the publication of scientific papers and  it is unacceptable

 

Plagiarism Check

  1. Naskah yang diserahkan oleh penulis, telah lolos screening plagiasi dengan app-software seperti:
    unplag.com Viper Plagiarism Cheker X
  2. Sebelum dipublikasikan, Pemeriksaan plagiasi (final) dilakukan oleh editorial menggunakan app-software
    Grammarly Turnitin