Peer Reviewer Process

Peer Review Process

SAGARA: Journal Advancing Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences employs a strict Double-Blind Peer Review process to ensure the quality, scientific validity, and relevance of published articles. Throughout this process, both the reviewers' and authors' identities are concealed from each other to maintain objectivity, fairness, and academic integrity.

1. Initial Editorial Assessment

All submitted manuscripts are initially evaluated by the Editor-in-Chief and the Editorial Board. Manuscripts that do not meet the journal's focus and scope, formatting guidelines, or minimum quality standards (including a high plagiarism similarity index) will be rejected at this stage without being sent for review.

2. Peer Review Phase

Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are sent to at least two (2) independent expert reviewers in the relevant field of fisheries, aquaculture, or aquatic sciences. The reviewers will evaluate the manuscript's originality, methodological rigor, data analysis, academic contribution, and clarity of presentation.

3. Editorial Decision

Based on the reviewers' recommendations and feedback, the editor will make one of the following decisions: Accept Submission, Revisions Required (Minor or Major), Resubmit for Review, or Decline Submission.

4. Revision and Final Acceptance

If revisions are required, authors must revise their manuscript strictly according to the reviewers' comments within the given timeframe. The final decision of acceptance rests solely with the Editor-in-Chief after ensuring all scientific and formatting revisions have been properly addressed.