Current Topics in Agronomic Science follows an editorial process based on the following stages:
- Manuscript submission
Manuscripts must be submitted exclusively through the journal's electronic editorial management platform. The corresponding author must register in the system and correctly complete all the information requested during the submission process.
The submission must include, at a minimum, the following files:
- Cover letter.
- Frontal page with author names, affiliations, ORCID of each author, and contact information.
- Anonymized manuscript for evaluation.
- Figures, tables, and supplementary material, if necessary.
Once the submission is complete, the platform will automatically generate an acknowledgment of receipt and assign an identification number to the manuscript, which must be used in all subsequent communication.
- Initial administrative and technical review
The editorial team will conduct a preliminary review to verify that the manuscript meets the formal requirements established in the instructions for authors. During this stage, the following aspects will be reviewed, among others:
- Thematic alignment with the journal's objectives and scope.
- Compliance with the required structure.
- Manuscript length.
- Formatting of tables, figures, and references.
- Proper use of the citation system.
- Inclusion of all required files.
- Correct anonymization of the manuscript.
- Overall quality of writing and presentation.
Manuscripts that do not meet the minimum requirements may be returned to the authors for correction before the editorial evaluation process begins. The journal may administratively reject submissions that present serious formatting deficiencies, ethical violations, or a clear lack of thematic relevance.
- Review of originality and editorial ethics
All manuscripts will be reviewed using text similarity detection software. The Editorial Committee will evaluate the results of the analysis, considering matches derived from correctly referenced citations, authors' previous publications, possible duplication of publications, partial or total plagiarism, and text manipulation or excessive self-plagiarism.
In the results of the similarity analysis, CTASci will accept an overall similarity percentage of 25%, but no specific source should exceed 3% similarity. When similarity values exceed these limits, the journal may request clarification from the authors, require corrections, temporarily suspend the editorial process, reject the manuscript, or notify the relevant institutions in serious cases.
- Use of artificial intelligence
All manuscripts will be reviewed for the use of artificial intelligence (AI). CTASci accepts that AI may be used for grammatical correction, writing improvement, or even translation. In any case, the use of AI must be declared by the authors, specifying the tool used and its purpose.
CTASci does not accept the use of AI for the fully automated generation of the manuscript, data fabrication, the creation of nonexistent references, automatic scientific interpretation without human validation, manipulation of scientific images, the creation of fictitious results, or unverified literature reviews.
- Initial editorial evaluation
The Editor-in-Chief will conduct a preliminary academic evaluation of the manuscript. This stage will analyze aspects such as originality, scientific relevance, contribution to knowledge, methodological coherence, technical and scientific quality, suitability for the journal's focus and objectives, and potential interest to the academic community.
Based on this review, the manuscript may be sent for external peer review, returned for revisions, or rejected without peer review if it does not meet the journal's scientific or thematic criteria.
- Assignment of reviewers and scientific peer review
Manuscripts approved in the initial editorial evaluation will undergo double-blind peer review, maintaining the anonymity of both authors and reviewers.
The Editor will assign at least two reviewers specializing in the manuscript's subject area. The reviewers will evaluate aspects such as originality, scientific importance, methodological rigor, the quality of the analysis and interpretation of the results, the currency and relevance of the references, the clarity of the writing, and the validity of the conclusions.
The reviewers will issue an editorial recommendation, which may be:
- Accept without changes.
- Accept with minor changes.
- Reconsider after major changes.
When there are conflicting opinions, the Editor may request the opinion of a third reviewer, conduct a supplementary editorial evaluation, or issue a reasoned decision based on all available evidence.
- Communication of opinions and review by authors
The corresponding author will receive the comments and recommendations from the reviewers and the editorial team within eight weeks of the submission date. When modifications are requested, the authors must submit two documents:
- A revised version of the manuscript.
- A detailed response document to the reviewers, indicating the changes made and the action taken or attention given to each observation.
Corrections must be submitted within 21 days, although authors may request a 14-day extension to submit a second version. If these deadlines are not met, the manuscript may be considered withdrawn from the editorial process.
Depending on the extent of the modifications, the manuscript may be re-evaluated by the reviewers, reviewed solely by the Editor, or proceed directly to final editorial decision.
- Final editorial decision
Based on the peer review reports and the editorial evaluation, the Editor-in-Chief will issue the final decision on the manuscript, considering the following options:
- Final acceptance.
- Acceptance subject to minor adjustments.
- Request for further revision.
The editorial decision is final, except in duly justified and documented cases.
- Style editing, proofreading, and translation
Accepted manuscripts will proceed to the technical editing and editorial preparation process. During this stage, spelling and grammar corrections, standardization of editorial style, typographical and formatting adjustments, review of figures, tables, and references, and translation or linguistic review of bilingual versions may be performed. During this process, the journal may request assistance from the authors to clarify technical or terminological aspects of the manuscript as part of editing.
- Galley proofs
Before publication, the corresponding author will receive the galley proof of the article for final review. At this stage, only minor corrections related to typographical errors, author information, institutional affiliations, or minor editorial errors can be made. The author must return the proofs, with any comments they deem appropriate, within 72 hours. Failure to respond may be interpreted as tacit approval of the submitted version.
Substantial modifications to the scientific content of the manuscript will not be permitted at this stage. The addition of authors or changes to their order will not be permitted.
- Article publication
Once the editorial process is complete, the article will be published electronically in open access format. Accepted articles may be published continuously or in advance of their final inclusion in a volume and issue of the journal.
Each published article will include a DOI (Digital Object Identifier), complete editorial metadata, dates of receipt and acceptance, and the corresponding access license. The final publication will be the official and permanent version of the scientific article.
- Publication time
Current Topics in Agronomic Science establishes an editorial processing time of no more than six months between receipt of a manuscript and its eventual publication.