Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

The Journal of Agricultural and marine sciences is an international peer-reviewed journal that publishes original fundamental and applied research articles in a wide variety of disciplines of the agricultural and marine sciences. The journal is intended to serve specialists and practitioners and bring together quality papers dealing with agricultural economics, natural resource economics, animal and veterinary sciences, bio-resources, biotechnologies, soil sciences, water management, agricultural engineering, fisheries marine sciences, food science, human nutrition, plant production, plant protection, rural environment, coastal zone management, etc. 


Section Policies


Research papers should not exceed 6000 words or 14 pages and 50 references . The paper should be divided into the following 6 sections: Abstract, Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussions and References. Additional sections such as Acknowledgements, Conclusions or Recommendations can also be included.

Although merging results and discussion is possible, it is not a structure encouraged by the editorial board.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Editorials should not exceed 2000 words and include more than 25 References.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Short Note

Notes are short original research articles. They should not exceed 2000 words and 30 references or 4 printed pages. They should have the same overall structure as Research Articles: Abstract, Introduction, Material and methods, Results, Discussion and References.


Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Reviews should not exceed 6000 words and 14 pages and include more than 100 References. Authors who would like to submit a review are requested to send to the Editor in chief (AgrSciEd@squ.edu.om) a one page letter of intention outlining the focus and scope of the projected review before submitting their review online. Although there is an abstract for Reviews, the abstract should not follow the structured abstract suggested for Articles and Notes.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Snapshot are single page paper focusing on a high quality illustration. The paper itself should not exceed one page and list only a maximum of 3 references. Snapshot papers illustrate the common say “One picture is worth a thousand words”. The topic of the papers should be based on a high quality photographic evidence of rare organisms, new records, unusual observation, severe pathology, exceptional soils, etc.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed


Perspective papers are short papers (<3000 words or 6 pages)  that present an opinion or novel interpretation of existing ideas or data.  They may also present an historical perspective on one of the themes of the journal. These manuscripts should follow a structure and a logical sequence of section related to the content and purpose of the paper. An abstract is required but should not follow the suggested structure for Research Articles or Short Notes.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Book Review

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

JAMS Flyer

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

General Review Process

The Journal of Agricultural and Marine Sciences (JAMS) uses a blind review process in which the peer reviewers’ names are not disclosed to the authors. Although the reviewer can make himself known should he choose to do so. Before submitting the papers for review the editors will evaluate the manuscript suitability for the journal (language, readership, format), insure the completeness of the submission and make an initial “plagiarism” assessment of the manuscript.

If suitable for the journal, the editors will choose 2-3 reviewers among researchers working in a similar field and listed in the journal database. The selection of reviewers is based on several factors: expertise, reputation, specific recommendations of the author or of a reviewer, and our own previous experience of a reviewer's characteristics. The editors will request a minimum of two independent reviews but can if necessary request additional evaluations, particularly if 2 reviewers have severely contradictory opinions on the papers.

Following the reviews, the section editor will place the manuscript among 4 categories:

accepted with minor modifications (mostly editorial and typographic errors)

accepted conditionally to a revision of the papers following the recommendations and specific comments or concerns of the reviewers (the reviewers found incomplete or unclear statements that needs to be revised; some of the results may need to be reinterpreted or some figures redrawn; part of the discussion may need some additional work). The acceptance remains conditional until the editorial is satisfied with the revision. 

acceptable but after only after a second round of reviews (the paper cannot be accepted without a thorough revision of its structure or significant changes in its presentation.

not acceptable. There are major flaws in the experimental design, sampling protocol or analytical protocol that preclude a sound analysis. The Reviewers found significant overlap with published results.


The editor will then inform the corresponding author of his editorial decision and convey the comments and suggestions of the reviewers to which the author has to respond normally within 2-4 weeks. Authors may contact the editor through the journal email system if they require an extension.

After reception of a revised manuscript, it may be subjected to an additional round of review. The final decision of acceptance or rejection lies with the Editor in Chief in coordination with the whole editorial board and Sultan Qaboos University Academic Publication Board.

All communications between authors, editors and reviewers are made using the current SQU-OJS platform. 


Publication Frequency

The journal publishes one issue per year.


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.



This journal utilizes LOCKSS system to create a distributed archiving system among participating libraries and permits those libraries to create permanent archives of the journal for purposes of preservation and restoration.


Malpractice Statement

This Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement is prepared based on Elsevier recommendations and COPE's Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical guidelines for journal publication

The publication of an article in the peer-reviewed journals published by The Journal of Agricultural and Marine Sciences (JAMS) is process of permanent knowledge improvement. It is a direct reflection of the quality of the work of the authors and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behaviour for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society of society-owned or sponsored journals.

Sultan Qaboos University and JAMS takes their duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously and we recognise our ethical and other responsibilities.

We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

Duties of authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion' works should be clearly identified as such.

Data access and retention

Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and plagiarism

The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Plagiarism takes many forms, from 'passing off' another's paper as the author's own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Note: Before a paper is sent to review, the manuscript is screened through "Turnitin" software. If there an indication of plagiarism found, the manuscript will instantly be rejected.

Multiple, redundant or concurrent publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

Acknowledgement of sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

Authorship of the paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and human or animal subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) has approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest stage possible.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author's obligation to promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the editor of the correctness of the original paper.

Duties of editors

Publication decisions

The editor of a peer-reviewed journal is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working in conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editor may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

Fair play

An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.


The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers. Editors should require all contributors to disclose relevant competing interests and publish corrections if competing interest.


Article Processing Charges

All issues of the Journal of Agricultural and Marine Sciences are freely available online and do not carry any publication charges.