About the Journal

Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources (JANR)

(J. Agric. Nat. Res.)

ISSN: 2661-6270 (Print) / eISSN: 2661-6289 (Online)

Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources (JANR) is dedicated to publishing high-quality original research and review articles on various disciplines of agriculture. The main objective of JANR is to provide a platform for national and international scholars,  academicians, and researchers to share their innovative research findings in agricultural fields. The JANR is an online open access international, peer reviewed and official journal published annually by Prithu Technical College, Lamahi  Municipality Ward -3, Bangaun, Deukhuri Dang, Nepal. 

Focus and Scope
The scopes of Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources include, but are not limited to, the following fields of Agricultural Ecology, Agricultural economics, Agricultural Engineering, Agricultural extension, Agronomy, Animal Science and Veterinary, Aquaculture and fisheries, Conservation agriculture, Entomology, Environment Science, Food Science, Forestry Science, Genetic engineering, Horticulture, Irrigation Science, Land use and waste management in agriculture, Microbiology, Plant Biotechnology, Plant Breeding and genetics, Plant Pathology, Production Ecology, Sociology of agriculture, Agricultural chemistry, Soil Science, Scientific publication, Scientific writing and communication in agriculture and natural resources. 

Note: Authors are solely responsible for any scientific misconduct including plagiarism and authorship errors in their articles; the publisher and editorial board are not responsible for any scientific misconduct that happened in any published article.

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other persons.

Why submit:

• promotion of each published article,
• constructive peer review by specialists,
• worldwide dissemination of research results.

Rejection Rate:

• 50%

Publication Frequency

The publication of this journal is annual.

Publication lag-time

Average number of weeks between article submission & publication is 8 weeks.

Publisher
Tribhuvan University, Institute of Agriculture and Animal Sciences, Prithu Technical College, Dang, Nepal

Owner
Tribhuvan University, Institute of Agriculture and Animal Sciences, Prithu Technical College, Dang, Nepal

Publication Charge

Article Processing Cost (APC): From 2024, the author/s need to pay publication fee  (NPR 4000 or USD 30 or  INR 2500) to cover the costs of peer review, copyediting, typesetting, archiving and journal management.

Payments should be made to:

Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources takes each complaint seriously and handles it. The complainant issue is checked and acted upon. All complaints will be acknowledged immediately if made by email or telephone. Final decisions are conveyed to the complainant. The Journal holds awareness of the complaints in terms of Authorship complaints, Plagiarism, Duplicate, multiple, concurrent publication, Misappropriation of Research results, Allegations of research errors and fraud, Violations of Research standards, Undisclosed conflicts of interest, Reviewer bias, or acts of harm out of the competition by reviewers.  For making complaints, kindly provide your query to editorial office.

Retraction Policy

Article Withdrawal: The authors  need to submit a written request and can withdraw their article in any stage of publication before fully published with DOI registration. In case of post publication stage if any readers or any third person complaint about the content, copyright issue, fraudulent data, multiple submission, plagiarism, the article will be withdrawn from the online system by the publisher with a note on retraction.  

Article Corrections: An erratum/corrigendum/addendum will be published and linked with original published article in case of significant correction

 Article Retractions: If any person make a complaints along with proof of plagiarism or copyright issues, the publisher will retract/remove the published article with a note on retraction mentioning the reasons and the case may be informed to the concerned author’s institution and/or funding organizations of the article. The retraction of a published article will be decided by the publisher after discussion with the concerned editor.

Plagiarism Policy
This journal upholds a strict policy against plagiarism to maintain the integrity of published research and support ethical standards in scholarly publishing. Manuscripts submitted to this Journal should be original and must not be plagiarized. Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images or data from another source, even from your own publications, without giving any credit to the original source. If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. In case of detecting plagiarism after the publication, the journal will be in charge of marking all the pages of the article with the word "Retracted". This journal uses Plagiarism Checker X for detection of plagiarism. The limit of plagiarism for this journal is less than 15% .

 Digital Preservation Policy 

All published articles are preserved in TU Central Library, Nepal.

Abstracting/Indexing Services: The journal has been indexed in many Abstracting/Indexing services that store much essential information about the articles. These services archive not only the metadata about the article, but the electronic versions of the articles, as well. Therefore, copies of the articles are available to the scientific community through their systems.

Self-archiving: Authors may archive the final published version of their articles in personal or institutional repositories immediately after publication.

If the journal stops publishing: The publisher intends and expects to continue to publish the journal for a very long time. If due to some rare, unfortunate circumstances, the publisher is forced to stop publishing the journal, the manuscripts published in the journal will be kept online and accessible to the readers for at least 10 more years. 

Self-archiving Policy

This policy sets out the ways in which this journal authors can self-achieved versions of their work on their own webpages, on institutional webpages and in other repositories. For non-commercial and non-promotional research and private study purposes individual users may view, print, download and copy self-archived articles, as well as text and data mine the content under the following condition. Where content in the article is identified as belonging to a third party, it is the obligation of the user to ensure that any reuse complies with the copyright policies of the owner of that content. The proof correction may not be deposited by authors in institutional repositories. Self-archived content may not be re-published verbatim in whole or in part, whether or not for commercial purposes, in print or online. Self-archived articles posted to repositories or websites are without warranty from JANR of any kind, either express or implied, including, but not limited to, warranties of merchantability, fitness for a particular purpose, or non-infringement. To the fullest extent permitted by law JANR disclaims all liability for any loss or damage arising out of, or in connection, with the use of or inability to use the content.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge. Publishing your research articles as an open access article with Publisher will mean that it:

• is immediately free to access online upon publication (no embargo period).
• can be shared and used by readers as defined by your user license. The published material can be re-used without obtaining permission as long as a correct citation to the original publication is given.
• free access for all users worldwide.
•  increased visibility and readership.

Animal Rights Statement

When reporting experiments on animals, authors should indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed. The materials and methods (experimental procedures) section must clearly indicate that appropriate measures were taken to minimize pain or discomfort, and details of animal care should be provided. We recommend authors to obey all national and international guidelines set out for the care and use of animal in research. ARRIVE (Animal Research: Reporting of In Vivo Experiments) . We also recommend our authors to follow Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on the Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora.

Human Rights Statement

Before reporting research work involving human subjects, authors should ensure that the work has been conducted in full accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible institutional or national committees on human subjects as well as with the Helsinki Declaration. In cases, where such committees do not exist, stick compliance with the Helsinki Declaration is suggested. In any other cases, authors are required to explain the full rationale for their approach approaches, and should demonstrate all doubtful matters of the study in the submitted manuscripts.

Disclosure of conflicts of interest

All authors must disclose all potential conflicts of interest, i.e., when the financing / personal status/affiliation of the authors (or the authors' organization/employer) may affect the authors' decision, work, or manuscript.  Authors should  fill out form regarding the Statement of Competing Interests. If there are none, please declare no conflicts of interest.

Authors retain the copyright of the published articles. 
Authors grant publisher a license to publish the articles
The Author warrants that the Work:
• Has not been published before (except if included in an institutional pre-print server). • Is not presently being considered for publication elsewhere.
• Does not violate any intellectual property right of any person or entity.
• Does not contain any subject matter that contravenes any laws (including defamatory material and misleading and deceptive material) and
• Meets ethical standards applicable to the research discipline.

Indexing/Abstracting

DOAJ

OPENALEX

Metadata / Catalog Services

CROSSREF

ZDB

SUDOC

EZB

Peer Review Process

This journal employs a double-anonymized peer review system. Upon submission, the manuscript undergoes an initial editorial screening to assess its relevance, quality, and suitability for publication. If it meets the journal’s criteria, the manuscript is forwarded to at least two independent expert reviewers for a thorough scientific evaluation.

Following the reviewers’ assessments, the final decision—acceptance, revision, or rejection—is made by the editorial team.

Editorial Independence and Ethics

Editor-in-Chief, editors and reviewer board members of JANR  can publish their own articles but their papers must be evaluated by at least two external reviewers and editors who are not member of editorial and reviewer board of this Journal.  

To maintain transparency and uphold the highest ethical standards, our editors are not involved in decisions regarding manuscripts under the following circumstances:

• Manuscripts they have authored or co-authored
• Manuscripts submitted by their family members or close colleagues
• Manuscripts that involve products, services, or research areas in which they have a direct interest

Such submissions undergo the same rigorous review process as all others. Peer review and editorial decisions in these cases are overseen independently, without the involvement of the conflicted editor or their research group.

Peer Review Workflow

1. Manuscript Submission
   Authors submit their manuscript through the journal’s online submission system. All required files and declarations must be provided at this stage.

2. Initial Editorial Screening
   The Editor-in-Chief (EiC) conducts an initial assessment to evaluate the manuscript’s relevance to the journal’s scope, overall quality, and adherence to formatting requirements. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable may be desk-rejected without external review.

3. Assignment to a Handling Editor
   Suitable manuscripts are assigned to a Handling Editor, who is responsible for managing the peer-review process.

4. Reviewer Selection and Invitation
   The Handling Editor invites a minimum of two qualified expert reviewers to provide an independent and confidential evaluation of the manuscript.

5. Reviewer Response and Evaluation
   Invited reviewers may accept or decline the invitation. Those who accept conduct a thorough and confidential review, assessing the manuscript’s originality, methodological rigor, significance, and clarity.

6. Editorial Assessment of Reviews
   The Handling Editor examines all reviewer reports. If the reports are inconclusive or additional expertise is required, further reviewers may be consulted.

7. Decision and Author Notification
   Based on the reviewers’ comments and the editor’s assessment, the Handling Editor issues an initial decision, accompanied by anonymized reviewer comments, and communicates this to the authors.

8. Revision Submission
   Authors submit a revised manuscript along with a detailed response to reviewers, addressing all comments point-by-point.

9. Evaluation of Revisions
   The Handling Editor reviews the revised submission. If necessary, the manuscript may be returned to reviewers for a second evaluation.

10. Final Editorial Decision
    After considering all revisions and reviewer feedback, the editors make the final decision on the manuscript. The decision is communicated to the Handling Editor and then to the authors.

11. Production Processing
    Accepted manuscripts are forwarded by the Handling Editor to the EiC, after which they enter the production workflow, including copyediting, typesetting, and proofing prior to publication.

Peer Review Guidelines
Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources is a peer-review journal, we perform the quality control for submitted manuscripts by the refereeing process. The reviewers should  evaluate the manuscript based on the criteria for publication.

Criteria for Publication

The Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources is a peer-reviewed journal committed to maintaining high academic and ethical standards. All submitted manuscripts undergo rigorous quality control through an independent refereeing process. Reviewers are asked to evaluate submissions based on the following criteria:

Originality and Novelty

Manuscripts must present original research that has not been previously published in any form and is not under consideration by any other journal or publishing medium. Submitted work should offer novel insights, methodologies, findings, or interpretations that contribute meaningfully to the advancement of knowledge in agriculture and natural resources.

Scientific Quality and Rigor

Research articles must demonstrate sound scientific methodology, robust experimental design, appropriate statistical analysis, and clear interpretation of results. The conclusions should be supported by the data presented.

Relevance and Contribution to the Field

The study should address topics of relevance to the journal’s scope and make a significant contribution to existing literature. Manuscripts should clearly highlight the importance of the research problem and its implications for the broader scientific community or applied practice.

Review articles should provide a comprehensive, authoritative, and up-to-date synthesis of the most significant developments in the chosen topic. They must:

• Be scientifically accurate and balanced.
• Describe the most recent and relevant research contributions.
• Demonstrate a high level of critical analysis and conceptual insight.
• Include appropriate and comprehensive citations without overlooking important work by other researchers.

Clarity, Organization, and Presentation

Manuscripts should be written in clear, concise, and grammatically correct English. The organization of the article—including figures, tables, and references—should follow the journal’s formatting guidelines and be suitable for academic publication.

Ethical Standards

All research must comply with established ethical guidelines, including those related to human or animal subjects, environmental protection, data integrity, and responsible authorship. Any potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed.

Impact and Readability

Reviewers will also consider whether the manuscript is likely to be of interest to the journal’s readership and whether it communicates its findings effectively to both specialists and broader audiences.

For this journal that uses  peer review, the identities of both reviewers and authors are concealed from each other throughout the review. To facilitate this, authors must ensure that their manuscripts are prepared in such a way that they do not reveal their identities to reviewers, either directly or indirectly.

Conducting the Review
The JANR is peer review journal. Peer review is the collaborative process that allows manuscripts submitted to a journal to be evaluated and commented upon by independent experts within the same field of research. Upon receipt, manuscripts are assessed for their suitability for publication by the editorial staff. Only the manuscripts meeting the journal’s general criteria for consideration are sent out for review. Reviewing needs to be conducted confidentially, the articles should not be disclosed to a third party.

Peer-review publication policies.
Editors, authors and reviewers are required to keep confidential all details of the editorial and peer review process on submitted manuscripts. Unless otherwise declared as a part of open peer review, the peer review process is confidential and conducted anonymously; identities of reviewers are not released. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality of manuscripts. If a reviewer wishes to seek advice from colleagues while assessing a manuscript, the reviewer must consult with the editor and should ensure that confidentiality is maintained and that the names of any such colleagues are provided to the journal with the final report. Regardless of whether a submitted manuscript is eventually published, correspondence with the journal, referees’ reports and other confidential material must not be published, disclosed or otherwise publicized without prior written consent. Reviewers should be aware that it is our policy to keep their names confidential and that we do our utmost to ensure this confidentiality. We cannot, however, guarantee to maintain this confidentiality in the face of a successful legal action to disclose identity.

The publisher reserves the right to contact funders, regulatory bodies, journals and the authors’ institutions in cases of suspected research or publishing misconduct.

Reviewers should check the following parameters;

• Articles are of outstanding scientific importance
• Adherence to the instruction to authors
• Complete organization of articles
• Appropriateness of title and abstract
• Appropriateness and adequacy of methodology
• Appropriateness of figures and tables
• Relevance of discussion
• Soundness of conclusions and interpretation
• Appropriateness of referencing. References list should be in APA style. In text citation, for any source with more than two authors, type out the first author's last name followed by "et al." Follow this format for the first and subsequent citations of the source. Example for a source (Research plays a vital role in development planning) with three authors, Rasmussen, Hopkins, and Fitzpatrick (2004). Cite this text as Research plays a vital role in development planning (Rasmussen et al., 2004).

Structure
Is the article clearly laid out? Are all the key elements (where relevant) present: abstract, introduction, methodology, results, conclusions? Consider each element in turn:

• Title: Does it clearly describe the article?
• Abstract: Does it reflect the content of the article?
• Introduction: Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated? Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context, and explain what other authors’ findings, if any, are being challenged or extended. It should describe the experiment, the hypothesis(es) and the general experimental design or method.
• Method: Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected? Is the design suitable for answering the question posed? Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research? Does the article identify the procedures followed? Are these ordered in a meaningful way? If the methods are new, are they explained in detail? Was the sampling appropriate? Have the equipment and materials been adequately described? Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?
• Results: This is where the author/s should explain in words what he/she discovered in the research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted. Are the statistics correct? If you are not comfortable with statistics, please advise the editor when you submit your report. Interpretation of results should not be included in this section.

  Results and Discussion Format: Authors may present the Results and Discussion either as separate sections or as a combined, integrated section. The chosen structure should enhance clarity and effectively communicate the study’s findings.

• Conclusion/Discussion: Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable? Have the authors indicated how the results relate to expectations and to earlier research? Does the article support or contradict previous theories? Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?
• Language: If an article is poorly written due to grammatical errors, while it may make it more difficult to understand the science, you do not need to correct the English. You should bring this to the attention of the editor, however.

Finally, on balance, when considering the whole article, do the figures and tables inform the reader, are they an important part of the story? Do the figures describe the data accurately? Are they consistent, e.g. bars in charts are the same width, the scales on the axis are logical.

Previous Research
If the article builds upon previous research does it reference that work appropriately? Are there any important works that have been omitted? Are the references accurate?

Ethical Issues

• Plagiarism: If you suspect that an article is a substantial copy of another work, please let the editor know, citing the previous work in as much detail as possible
• Fraud: It is very difficult to detect the determined fraudster, but if you suspect the results in an article to be untrue, discuss it with the editor. Whether it contains ideas and language without properly crediting the sources?
• Other ethical concerns: Do you have any financial conflict with the authors of the manuscript? Are the author accept the conditions to keep the used data at least for 3 years safe after the publication of the data?

The reviewers should reject the manuscripts if they observed below faults;

Mismatch with the journal

• The manuscript does not make a contribution to new knowledge in the discipline or the application of knowledge
• Manuscripts that lie outside the stated aims and scope of the journal
• Topics that are not of interest to the journal’s readership
• Manuscripts that do not follow the format specified by the journal

Flaws in study design

• Poorly formulated research question
• Choice of a weak or unreliable method
• Choice of an incorrect method or model
• Inappropriate statistical analysis
• Unreliable or incomplete data
• Inappropriate or sub optimal instrumentation
• Small or inappropriately chosen sample

Poor writing and organization

• Introduction that does not establish the background of the problem studied
• Inadequate description of methods
• Discussion that only repeats the results but does not interpret them
•  Insufficient explanation of the rationale for the study
•  Insufficient literature review
• Conclusions that do not appear to be supported by the study data

Inadequate preparation of the manuscript

•  Failure to follow the journal’s Instructions for Authors
• Sentences that are not clear and concise
• Title, abstract are not persuasive
• Wordiness and excessive use of jargon
• Poor grammar or spelling mistakes
• Poorly designed tables or figures

After reviewing the manuscripts carefully the reviewers should make their recommendations as below;

1. Rejected due to poor quality, or out of scope
2. Accept without revision
3. Accept but needs revision (either major, moderate or minor)

In the latter case, clearly identify what revision is required, and indicate to the editor whether or not you would be happy to review the revised articles.

During the manuscripts evaluation process, the reviewers should follow and fulfill the “Review Form” and it should be sent to editorial office along with  revised manuscripts.

IF YOU CANNOT JUDGE ALL PARTS, PLEASE, INDICATE WHICH CHAPTERS SHOULD BE REFEREED BY ANOTHER REVIEWER

Competing Interests Statement for reviewer

The reviewers declare that they have no competing financial or non-financial interests that could influence their evaluation of the manuscript. They have no professional collaborations or personal affiliations with the authors and confirm that they remain fully independent in their assessment.

Recognition for Reviewers
Reviewers are key to the success of journal and its wider community. This is why the publisher seeks to recognize the efforts of reviewers. The ways reviewers currently receive recognition can include:

• Being included in a journal’s reviewers list in each issue of the journal. This is the most common form of recognition.
• Getting a letter or certificate of contribution from the journal editors and publisher

The publisher has created a certificate of recognition to serve as a formal acknowledgment of a reviewer’s role in the peer-review process of a journal. Reviewers can request the certificate from publisher contact. A reviewer confirmation letter is also available upon request.

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Guidelines

Introduction

The Publisher is committed to promoting integrity in research and publication by adhering to internationally recognized ethical standards. Concerns regarding publication ethics—including those related to authorship, data accuracy, duplicate submission, peer-review integrity, or undisclosed conflicts of interest—are taken seriously and investigated promptly. When misconduct is verified, the Publisher may reject the submission, issue a correction or retraction, or notify the relevant institutional authorities as appropriate.

All submitted manuscripts undergo initial screening for plagiarism, image manipulation, data falsification or fabrication, and related forms of unethical behavior. Submissions that violate ethical norms will not be considered for publication.

These guidelines are informed by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) principles and reflect widely accepted standards in scholarly publishing.

Malpractice Statement

In accordance with Springer Nature’s commitment to ethical publishing, the Publisher maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy toward publication malpractice. Misconduct includes, but is not limited to:

• plagiarism or self-plagiarism
• data fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate image manipulation
• unethical research practices
• undisclosed conflicts of interest
• breach of confidentiality
• manipulation of the peer-review process
• improper authorship practices

If malpractice is identified at any stage—submission, review, or after publication—the Publisher may:

• reject or withdraw the manuscript
• retract or correct a published article
• issue expressions of concern
• notify the authors’ institutions or funders
• implement sanctions where appropriate

Authors requesting withdrawal or retraction must provide a written explanation. Authors may also appeal editorial decisions by submitting a justified written request accompanied by supporting evidence. Editorial judgments are based solely on the scholarly value, methodological quality, and ethical soundness of the work, without political, commercial, or personal influence.

Ethical Guidelines

The following responsibilities reflect the expectations for authors, editors, reviewers, and the Publisher, in line with Springer Nature’s ethical policies.

Authors’ Responsibilities

Authorship and Contribution

Authorship must reflect individuals who have made substantial contributions to the study’s conception, design, analysis, or interpretation, and who can take responsibility for the integrity of the work. Gift, honorary, or guest authorship is strictly prohibited. Authorship changes require written approval from all listed contributors.

Funding and Acknowledgements

Authors must disclose all financial, material, or institutional support that facilitated the research. Acknowledgements must accurately reflect contributions that do not meet authorship criteria.

Conflict of Interest Declarations

Authors must disclose any real or perceived conflicts of interest—financial, personal, political, or academic—that may influence the work. Transparent disclosure supports trust and accountability.

Data Accuracy, Availability, and Ownership

Authors must ensure that data are accurate, reliably recorded, and available upon reasonable request. Data manipulation or selective reporting is considered misconduct. Authors are responsible for understanding and validating all datasets included in the work.

Changes to authorship

Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted. 
Only in exceptional circumstances the Editor will consider the addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors after the manuscript has been accepted.  If the manuscript has already been published in an online issue, any requests approved by the Editor will result in a corrigendum.

Reporting and Research Standards

Research findings must be reported honestly, clearly, and without fabrication or inappropriate manipulation. Authors should follow recognized reporting guidelines (e.g., CONSORT, PRISMA, ARRIVE) where applicable and avoid redundant or concurrent submissions.

Ethical Approval and Compliance

Research involving human participants or animals must include:

• documented approval from an appropriate ethics committee
• adherence to institutional and international standards, including the Declaration of Helsinki
• clear descriptions of efforts to ensure safety, confidentiality, and humane treatment

Permissions and Copyright

Authors must secure written permission to reuse previously published material (figures, tables, images, or substantial text). Proof of permissions may be requested at any stage.

Originality and Plagiarism

Submitted manuscripts must be original works not previously published or under consideration elsewhere. Plagiarism in all its forms—including inappropriate paraphrasing, duplication of one’s own work, or uncredited use of others’ ideas—is unacceptable.

Appeals

Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting detailed justification, additional evidence, or clarifications. Appeals are reviewed objectively, following best practices for editorial fairness.

Editors’ and Editorial Board Responsibilities

Editorial Independence and Integrity

Editors are chosen based on their expertise and scholarship. They must remain impartial and make decisions solely based on academic merit, regardless of authors’ identity, institutional affiliation, nationality, gender, or background.

Confidentiality

Editors must treat all manuscripts and correspondence as confidential. Unpublished materials must not be used for personal research or shared without permission.

Fair and Transparent Evaluation

Editors must ensure that all manuscripts undergo a fair and rigorous peer-review process. Decisions should be transparent, well-justified, and consistent with the journal’s editorial policies.

Responsiveness and Corrective Action

Editors must consider legitimate requests for corrections, retractions, or clarifications and act promptly when errors or misconduct are identified.

Conflict of Interest Management

Editors must recuse themselves from decisions involving manuscripts where conflicts exist. Reassignment to an independent editor is required.

Accountability for Ethical Oversight

Editors are responsible for ensuring that allegations of misconduct are investigated following COPE and Springer Nature–aligned procedures.

Reviewers’ Responsibilities

Role in Maintaining Scholarly Quality

Reviewers play a critical role in ensuring the accuracy, integrity, and scientific value of published research.

Appropriate Expertise and Timeliness

Reviewers should accept review invitations only when the manuscript aligns with their expertise and they can provide a timely, thorough assessment.

Conflicts of Interest

Reviewers must decline assignments if any conflict of interest—personal, financial, academic, or competitive—could influence their objectivity.

Confidentiality

Manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. Reviewers must not share or use unpublished material for personal advantage.

Objective and Constructive Feedback

Reviews must be fair, evidence-based, and respectful. Critique should aim to improve the manuscript and identify methodological weaknesses, ethical concerns, or gaps in reporting.

Ethical Oversight

Reviewers must flag suspected plagiarism, overlapping publications, data manipulation, or ethical violations through confidential communication with the editor

Publisher and Copy Editor Responsibilities

Support for Rigorous Peer Review

The Publisher ensures that the peer-review system remains unbiased, independent, and transparent. Commercial considerations do not influence editorial decisions.

• Corrections, Retractions, and Editorial Updates
• Consistent with publisher policies:
• Corrections are issued for minor errors that do not affect the overall conclusions.
• Retractions are issued for significant errors or confirmed misconduct.
• Expressions of Concern may be issued when investigations are ongoing.
• Retraction notices are linked to the original article to preserve the integrity of the scholarly record.

Confidentiality and Archiving

The Publisher safeguards manuscript confidentiality prior to publication and ensures long-term digital preservation through reliable archiving systems.

Complaint and Misconduct Handling

Ethical concerns, data misuse, suspected misconduct, or complaints regarding editorial practices should be reported to EiC: Email: jibshrestha@gmail.com

Journal History

Journal of Agriculture and Natural Resources has been started its publication since 2018. This journal has published two issues in  2020 and 2021. The journal frequency has been changed from bi-annual to annual since 2022. 

Reviewer Acknowledgements

The editorial board of Journal would like to acknowledge those reviewers who have dedicated their time and expertise for reviewing the manuscripts. Editor-in-Chief, editors and reviewer board members of this journal  can publish their own articles but their papers must be evaluated by at least two external reviewers and editors who are not the member of editorial or reviewer board of this Journal. The editorial board of JANR highly acknowledge to these external reviewers and editors (outside board members) for their contributions and reviewing/editing certificates and Publons acknowledgements are provided to them.

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 1(1), 2018

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 2 (1), 2019 and Volume 3(1), 2020

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 3 (2), 2020

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 4 (1), 2021

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 4(2), 2021

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 5(1), 2022

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 6(1), 2023

⇓ Reviewers for Volume 7(1), 2024