For Reviewers
Plant Biotechnology Persa is committed to ensuring that the peer-review process is as robust and ethical as possible. Please read the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) guidelines for peer reviewers before completing your review.

Peer Review Process
The peer review process is recognized as a crucial tool in enhancing the quality of scientific papers. Below are guidelines designed to improve and facilitate this process, making it an essential part of the manuscript publication journey.
Steps in the Review Process
Invitation to Review: Upon receiving an invitation, reviewers are provided with information such as the title, abstract, and a suggested timeframe for the review. Once the invitation is accepted, the reviewer can access the full manuscript through their registered account and submit their feedback.
Evaluation of Innovation and Scientific Accuracy: Reviewers should assess the level of innovation and technical rigor of the manuscript, paying attention to the extent of progress compared to previous research. They are also expected to provide comments on the strengths and weaknesses of the study, the use of statistical methods, and the clarity of the data.
Assessment of References and Target Audience: It is the reviewers' responsibility to ensure a comprehensive review of the literature and to determine whether the article is suitable for its intended audience.
Ethical Guidelines for Reviewers
Ethical Standards: Reviewers are expected to adhere to the guidelines set by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) before starting the review process. These guidelines cover issues such as:
- Identifying and addressing duplicate submissions or fabricated data
- Investigating potential cases of plagiarism
- Maintaining confidentiality until the article is published
Key Recommendations for Reviewers
Impartiality and Independence: Reviewers must evaluate manuscripts objectively and without bias. If a manuscript falls within their own financial or research interests, they should refrain from reviewing it and notify the editor.
Confidentiality: All information in the manuscript must remain confidential until publication. Reviewers must not use unpublished data from the manuscript for their own research purposes.
Feedback to Editors: If there are comments that are not appropriate to share with the authors, reviewers can communicate them directly to the editors. The feedback provided to the editor should be consistent with the comments shared with the authors.

Access to Other Reviewers' Feedback: Once a reviewer submits their review, they will have access to the feedback from other reviewers. This helps to enhance the quality and comprehensiveness of the review.
Online Review Process and Registration
The submission, review, and revision processes are conducted entirely online. Upon accepting the invitation, reviewers need to register on the website, where they can download the manuscript and provide their comments.
Review of Revised Manuscripts: If requested by the editorial board, reviewers may be invited to review revised versions of the manuscript. This practice aims to reduce the workload on reviewers while maintaining the quality of the review process.
Confidentiality of Reviewers: The identity of reviewers will not be disclosed to the authors, ensuring that the review process remains completely anonymous and unbiased.