Editorial Policies
Standards for wildlife research publication.
Publication Ethics
Wildlife maintains rigorous ethical standards aligned with COPE guidelines ensuring integrity of published wildlife research and fair treatment of all stakeholders.
Peer Review
All submissions undergo rigorous peer review by experts in relevant wildlife research areas. Single-blind review is standard, with author identities known to reviewers. Double-blind review available upon author request. Editors make final decisions based on reviewer recommendations, considering scientific merit, methodology, and contribution to the field.
Review Criteria
- Scientific validity and rigor
- Methodological appropriateness
- Contribution to wildlife science
- Clarity of presentation
Timeline
- Initial screening: 1-2 days
- Peer review: 2-3 weeks
- Editorial decision: 3-5 days
- Publication: 4-6 weeks
Research Ethics
All wildlife research must comply with institutional ethical guidelines and applicable regulations. Studies involving animals require ethics committee approval with protocol numbers documented. Field research should minimize disturbance and document permits. Authors must disclose funding sources and conflicts of interest.
Misconduct Policy
Suspected misconduct including plagiarism, data fabrication, or duplicate publication is investigated following COPE guidelines. Confirmed misconduct results in rejection, retraction, and notification to author institutions. Authors may appeal decisions through formal process with additional evidence.
Appeals: Authors may appeal editorial decisions by submitting detailed response addressing reviewer concerns. Appeals are reviewed by Editor-in-Chief with additional reviewer input when appropriate.
Questions About Policies?
Contact our editorial office.
