Open Access Policy

Insights in Animal Science (ISSN 3007-6420) is a peer-reviewed, open access journal. All article types—including full research articles, review papers, and short communications—are published open access and made immediately and permanently available for anyone to read, download, copy, and distribute.

All articles are published under the Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license, allowing unrestricted reuse provided that proper credit is given to the original work.

Meaning of Open Access

In accordance with widely accepted definitions of open access in scholarly publishing, the journal defines open access under the following conditions:

• All content is freely available online with no subscription or access fees.
• All articles are released immediately upon publication (no embargo period).
• All content may be reused, shared, and redistributed without obtaining permission, provided the original work is properly cited.

Editorial Policy

Insights in Animal Science maintains a transparent, impartial, and structured editorial workflow to ensure fairness, scientific integrity, and high-quality publishing. The editorial process follows COPE’s best-practice recommendations and is aligned with the journal’s peer review, authorship, misconduct, and conflict of interest policies.

1. Editorial Screening

All submissions undergo an initial evaluation by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC) to assess:

• Relevance to the journal’s scope
• Originality and scientific quality
• Compliance with ethical standards
• Basic completeness of the manuscript

Manuscripts that pass this stage are assigned to a qualified Handling Editor.

2. Assignment to Handling Editor

The Handling Editor manages the peer review process, selecting expert reviewers according to the journal’s Peer Review Policy. The Handling Editor ensures an unbiased and rigorous review process.

3. Editorial Evaluation After Peer Review

Following external peer review, the Handling Editor evaluates the reviewer reports and prepares an editorial recommendation. Possible recommendations include:

• Accept
• Minor Revision
• Major Revision
• Resubmit for Review
• Reject

4. Final Editorial Decision

The EIC confirms and issues the final decision based on reviewer feedback, editorial assessment, and adherence to journal standards. The EIC has full responsibility for all editorial decisions.

5. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions are made independently of the publisher, sponsors, or external influence. The EIC and editors follow the journal’s Conflicts of Interest Policy and recuse themselves where relevant.

6. Handling Submissions from Editorial Board Members

To maintain the highest standards of editorial independence and to avoid any real or perceived conflicts of interest, Insights in Animal Science does not accept research articles, reviews, or other peer-reviewed content from the Editor-in-Chief, editors, associate editors, or members of the editorial board. These individuals may contribute editorials, commentaries, or other non-peer-reviewed content.

This policy ensures complete transparency, neutrality, and fairness in the journal’s publication process.

7. Ethical Oversight

The editorial team ensures compliance with ethical standards related to authorship, research ethics, data integrity, participant consent, and publication conduct. Allegations of misconduct are handled according to the journal’s Misconduct Policy.

Submission-to-publication timeline: On average, submission to first decision takes approximately eight weeks (about 60 days). Authors are normally given one month (around 30 days) to prepare and submit revisions. Accepted manuscripts are published online as Online First as soon as production is complete—typically within 2–4 weeks—depending on editorial and production workload. These are average times and may vary for complex manuscripts or unforeseen delays.

Ethical Research and Ethics Approval Policy

Insights in Animal Science requires that all research published in the journal is conducted in a fair, responsible, and ethically sound manner. Authors must ensure that their research complies with international ethical standards and all applicable institutional, national, and regional regulations.

Ethics Approval for Animal Studies

For studies involving animals, authors must obtain prior approval from an independent ethics committee or institutional review board (IRB), such as:

• Institutional Ethics Committee
• Institutional Review Board (IRB)
• Local, regional, or national ethics board

The manuscript must include:

• Name of the approving ethics committee or review board
• Approval number, ID, or decision reference
• A statement confirming informed consent from participants (if applicable)

Informed Consent Requirements

Manuscripts reporting research involving human participants must include a statement confirming that:

• Participants gave informed consent for participation
• Participants gave consent for publication of collected data

If verbal consent was obtained instead of written consent, the manuscript must clearly explain:

• Why written consent was not possible
• How verbal consent was documented and verified

When Ethics Approval Is Not Required

If a study does not require ethics approval under national or institutional regulations, authors must:

• Provide a clear justification in the manuscript
• Where possible, provide a link to an official national or government policy confirming that no ethics approval is required
• Explain circumstances if no such document is available

Even if local regulations do not require approval, authors must still comply with international ethical standards.

International Ethical Standards

All research involving humans or animals must adhere to internationally recognized ethical guidelines, such as:

• Declaration of Helsinki (for human research)
• ARRIVE Guidelines for reporting animal research
• NC3Rs principles (Replacement, Refinement, and Reduction in animal studies)

Ethics Statement Requirement in All Articles

All full-text versions of published research articles (HTML and PDF) must include a dedicated ethics statement. Authors should use the following formats:

Ethics Approval: This study was approved by [Name of Ethics Committee], approval number [XXXX].

Ethics Approval: Ethics approval was not required for this study according to [National/Institutional Policy], available at [link], because [explanation]. The research adhered to international ethical standards.

Authorship Policy

Insights in Animal Science follows international standards for responsible authorship and contributorship. The journal adheres to COPE guidelines and requires transparency in authorship, contributions, and responsibilities.

Authorship Criteria

To qualify as an author, each individual must meet all of the following criteria:

• Substantial contribution to the conception, design, data collection, analysis, or interpretation of the research
• Drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content
• Approval of the final version to be published
• Accountability for all aspects of the work, ensuring questions related to accuracy or integrity are appropriately addressed

Individuals who do not meet all four criteria must be listed as contributors and not as authors.

Responsibilities of Authors

• Ensure accuracy, integrity, and originality of the submitted manuscript
• Disclose all sources of funding, conflicts of interest, and ethical approvals
• Ensure that all authors meet the authorship criteria and have agreed to be listed
• Provide accurate and complete contributor statements

Responsibilities of the Corresponding Author

The corresponding author is responsible for:

• Serving as the primary point of contact with the journal
• Ensuring all authors have reviewed and approved the submission
• Coordinating responses to peer review comments
• Ensuring compliance with journal policies and ethical requirements
• Managing authorship changes and securing written agreement from all authors
• Ensuring that all contributors are correctly acknowledged

Contributorship and Acknowledgements

The journal requires transparent reporting of individual contributions using a clearly defined model (e.g., CRediT taxonomy). Each author’s specific role must be stated in the manuscript.

Individuals who contributed to the work but do not meet the criteria for authorship must be listed in the Acknowledgements section. Examples include:

• Technical staff
• Editorial or writing assistance
• Advisors who provided general guidance
• Administrative support
• Individuals providing materials or equipment

All individuals acknowledged must give consent to be listed.

Changes to Authorship

The journal follows strict procedures for adding, removing, or rearranging authorship. Any request for authorship change must be accompanied by:

• A written, signed statement from the corresponding author explaining the reason for the change
• Written consent from all authors (including those added or removed)

Before Publication

Authorship changes during submission or peer review require full documentation and editorial approval.

After Publication

Authorship changes requested after publication require the same documentation. If approved, the journal will issue a formal correction notice, which will be permanently linked to the original article.

Misconduct Related to Authorship

Guest authorship, ghost authorship, and gift authorship are not permitted. Suspected misconduct will be handled according to COPE’s guidelines for authorship disputes.

Author Guidelines

Detailed instructions for authors are provided in the journal’s Author Guidelines:

Author Guidelines

Conflicts of Interest Policy

Insights in Animal Science is committed to ensuring transparency, objectivity, and integrity in its editorial and publication processes. All stakeholders—including authors, editors, reviewers, journal staff, and the publisher—must disclose any conflicts of interest that could influence the research, evaluation, or publication of a manuscript.

Definition of a Conflict of Interest

A conflict of interest (COI) exists when an individual’s personal, financial, professional, or institutional relationships could inappropriately influence—or appear to influence—their responsibilities in the publication process.

Conflicts of interest include, but are not limited to:

• Financial conflicts: grants, fees, honoraria, employment, stock ownership, patents.
• Personal or professional relationships: recent collaboration, mentorship, family relationships, or academic competition.
• Institutional conflicts: direct involvement of affiliated organisations with the research or publication.
• Editorial or reviewer conflicts: handling or reviewing work by colleagues, students, or affiliated institutions.

Application of COI Policy to All Roles

• Authors: Must disclose all financial and non-financial COIs related to the work.
• Editors and Guest Editors: Must recuse themselves from handling submissions where a COI exists.
• Reviewers: Must decline invitations if any COI could bias their evaluation.
• Publisher and Journal Staff: Must avoid involvement in editorial decisions where conflicts exist.
• Editorial Board Members: Are subject to the same COI rules as editors and reviewers.

Disclosure Requirements

Authors must include a clearly written conflict of interest statement at the time of submission and within the published article. Disclosures must specify:

• All financial support related to the research
• Any personal, professional, or institutional relationships that may influence the work
• A declaration if no conflicts exist (“The authors declare no conflicts of interest.”)

Editors, reviewers, and staff must declare any potential COIs to the Editor-in-Chief immediately upon recognition.

Handling of Disclosed Conflicts

When a conflict of interest is disclosed:

• The Editor-in-Chief assigns the manuscript to an editor with no conflicts.
• Reviewers with conflicts are not invited to evaluate the manuscript.
• Disclosed author COIs are published within the article’s conflict of interest statement.

Undisclosed Conflicts of Interest Identified After Submission or Publication

If a COI is identified after submission or publication, the editorial team will:

• Investigate according to COPE guidelines
• Contact the authors and relevant parties for clarification
• Issue a correction, expression of concern, or retraction if necessary

Conflict of Interest Statement in Published Articles

All full-text versions of published articles (HTML and PDF) must include a conflict of interest statement using one of the following formats:

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare the following conflicts of interest: [Provide details].

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

Author Fees Policy

Insights in Animal Science is committed to full transparency regarding all fees associated with manuscript submission, processing, or publication. All applicable fees are clearly stated on the journal’s APC page.

Article Processing Charges (APCs)

The journal applies the following Article Processing Charges, payable only after acceptance:

• USD 100 for full-length research articles
• USD 70 for short communications

No Additional Charges

The journal does not impose any colour charges, page charges, submission fees, or any other hidden costs.

When and How Fees Are Charged

• Fees are charged only after acceptance; no payment is requested during peer review.
• Payments are made through bank transfer.
• Invoices are issued to the corresponding author or the designated payer.

Fee Waivers and Discounts

The journal offers fee waivers to support authors facing financial constraints. Waivers may apply to:

• Authors from low- and lower-middle-income countries
• Students or early-career researchers
• Unfunded research projects
• Cases of demonstrated financial hardship

Authors requesting a waiver must contact the editorial office at the time of submission with a justification and any supporting documents. Waiver decisions do not influence editorial or peer review outcomes.

Reviewer Discounts

Discount vouchers may be provided to reviewers in recognition of their contribution. These vouchers can be applied toward APC payments. Full details of APCs and discount policies are available on the journal’s APC page.

Transparency and Ethics

The journal does not charge any hidden, undeclared, or unexpected fees. All publication costs are fully disclosed in this policy and communicated transparently to authors.

Post-Publication Corrections, Expressions of Concern, and Retraction Policy

Insights in Animal Science is committed to maintaining the accuracy and integrity of the scholarly record. The journal follows internationally accepted standards for handling post-publication issues. All correction notices, expressions of concern, and retractions are published openly and linked to the original article.

1. Corrections

Corrections are issued when a published article contains an error that affects the accuracy or clarity of the work but does not invalidate its overall findings. Corrections may address:

• Minor errors in data, text, or figures
• Author name or affiliation updates
• Missing or incorrect funding or ethics statements

Corrections are published as a distinct notice, linked to the original article, and include a clear description of the changes made. The original article is not removed but may be updated with a note indicating that a correction has been issued.

2. Expressions of Concern

An expression of concern may be issued when:

• There is inconclusive evidence of research misconduct
• An ongoing investigation is underway but will take significant time
• Serious doubts arise regarding the reliability or integrity of the work

The expression of concern remains linked to the original article until the investigation is complete, at which time it may be followed by a correction or retraction.

3. Retractions

A retraction is issued when the published findings are no longer considered reliable due to:

• Research misconduct (e.g., fabrication, falsification, plagiarism)
• Major errors that invalidate the study’s conclusions
• Unethical research practices or lack of required ethics approval
• Significant authorship or conflict-of-interest violations

Retraction notices include:

• The reason for retraction
• Who is retracting the article (authors, editor, or publisher)
• A link to the original article

Retracted articles remain accessible but are clearly marked as “Retracted” on all versions (HTML, PDF) and in metadata records.

4. Post-Publication Discussion and Debate

The journal permits responsible post-publication critique and scholarly discussion. Readers, researchers, and authors may raise concerns or request clarifications by contacting the editorial office at ias@iapublishing.org.

Valid, evidence-based comments may be published as:

• Letters to the editor
• Commentaries
• Formal replies by the authors
• Editorial notes

The editorial team evaluates all post-publication comments and determines whether further action is needed (correction, expression of concern, or retraction).

5. Transparency and Indexing

All post-publication notices are:

• Freely accessible and openly available
• Linked to the original article
• Indexed in relevant databases to ensure the accuracy of the scholarly record

Complaints Policy

Insights in Animal Science is committed to maintaining high editorial standards and providing a fair, transparent, and ethical publishing process. The journal follows COPE guidelines for handling complaints, concerns, and allegations of misconduct.

Scope of Complaints

Complaints may relate to:

• Journal policies, editorial decisions, or peer review procedures
• Concerns about published content
• Delays in the editorial or review process
• Misconduct by authors, reviewers, or editors
• Breach of ethical, authorship, or publication standards
• Failure to follow journal procedures or COPE guidelines

How to Submit a Complaint

All complaints must be submitted in writing to the editorial office at:

Email: ias@iapublishing.org

Complaints should include:

• A clear description of the concern
• Links or references to any relevant article or correspondence
• Any supporting documents or evidence

Complaint Handling Procedure

The journal handles complaints through a structured and confidential process:

1. Acknowledgment: The complaint will be acknowledged within 5 working days.
2. Initial Assessment: The Editor-in-Chief or designated editor reviews the complaint and determines the appropriate course of action.
3. Investigation: If needed, the journal may consult editors, reviewers, or external experts. All investigations follow COPE guidance and ensure impartiality.
4. Response: A detailed response will be provided to the complainant, normally within 30 days, explaining the findings and any actions taken.
5. Corrective Actions: When warranted, the journal may issue a correction, expression of concern, retraction, or editorial note.

Escalation and Appeals

If a complainant is dissatisfied with the response, they may request an appeal. Appeals are reviewed by a senior editor not involved in the original decision. In complex or unresolved cases, the journal may consult publicly available COPE guidelines to ensure that the process follows recognized best practices.

Confidentiality and Record Keeping

All complaints are handled confidentially. The journal maintains secure records of all complaints, investigations, and resolutions for internal quality assurance and compliance with COPE standards.

Good Faith Expectations

The journal expects all complaints to be made in good faith and supported by evidence. Frivolous, defamatory, or unsubstantiated complaints may not be pursued.

Appeals Policy

Insights in Animal Science provides authors with the opportunity to appeal editorial decisions in a fair, transparent, and evidence-based manner. The journal follows COPE guidelines when handling appeals of rejected or revised manuscripts.

Grounds for Appeal

Authors may submit an appeal if they believe that:

• A significant misunderstanding occurred during peer review
• A reviewer made a factual, methodological, or interpretation error
• The editorial decision did not adequately consider the evidence presented
• There is a strong scientific justification for reconsidering the manuscript

Appeals that simply dispute the decision without new evidence or clear justification will not be considered.

How to Submit an Appeal

Authors must submit their appeal in writing to:

Email: ias@iapublishing.org

The appeal letter must include:

• The manuscript title and submission number
• A detailed explanation of the reason for the appeal
• Clear evidence or justification supporting the request
• A point-by-point response to reviewer or editor comments (if applicable)

Appeal Handling Procedure

1. Acknowledgment: The editorial office acknowledges receipt of the appeal within 5 working days.
2. Initial assessment: The Editor-in-Chief evaluates whether the appeal has valid grounds.
3. Independent review: The manuscript may be reassessed by:
   • A senior editor not involved in the original decision, or
   • An independent external reviewer
   to ensure an unbiased evaluation.
4. Final decision: A written response is provided to the author, normally within 30 days. This decision is final and cannot be appealed further.

Conditions of Appeal

• The journal will not reconsider manuscripts that have already received a final decision after appeal.
• Appeals must be based on scientific arguments, not on disagreement alone.
• The outcome of an appeal may be:
  • Upholding the original decision
  • Inviting a revised submission
  • Re-evaluating the manuscript with new reviewers

Editorial Independence

All appeals are handled independently of the original decision-making editor to ensure fairness, neutrality, and adherence to ethical publishing standards.

Allegations of Misconduct Policy

Insights in Animal Science is committed to maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record. The journal follows COPE guidelines when handling allegations of misconduct, including but not limited to data fabrication, data falsification, plagiarism, image manipulation, authorship misconduct, ethical violations, duplicate publication, and peer review manipulation.

Types of Research and Publication Misconduct

Misconduct may include any of the following:

• Data fabrication: Inventing data or results that have not been collected or observed.
• Data falsification: Manipulating, modifying, or omitting data to distort findings.
• Image manipulation: Enhancing, altering, or duplicating images in a misleading way.
• Plagiarism: Use of another’s work, text, or ideas without proper attribution.
• Duplicate or redundant publication: Reuse of substantial parts of one’s own published work without acknowledgment or justification.
• Unethical research: Conducting studies without required ethics approval or informed consent.
• Peer review manipulation: Artificially influencing the peer review process.
• Authorship misconduct: Ghost, gift, or guest authorship; disputes over authorship contributions.

Reporting Allegations of Misconduct

Concerns or allegations of misconduct may be raised by authors, reviewers, readers, or editorial board members. All allegations must be submitted in writing to the editorial office:

Email: ias@iapublishing.org

Reports must include detailed information and any supporting evidence.

Initial Assessment

Upon receiving an allegation, the Editor-in-Chief conducts a preliminary assessment to determine whether:

• The allegation is credible
• There is sufficient information to proceed
• The matter requires a formal investigation

The journal may request additional information from the complainant before proceeding.

Investigation Procedure

If the allegation appears valid, the journal follows a structured investigation process:

1. Author Notification: The corresponding author and relevant co-authors are contacted and asked to respond.
2. Evidence Review: The editorial team examines data, images, ethics approvals, and previous correspondence.
3. Consultation: External experts or the authors’ institution may be consulted, as recommended by COPE.
4. Decision: Based on evidence, the journal determines the appropriate corrective action.

Possible Outcomes

After investigation, the journal may take one or more of the following actions:

• No action (allegation not supported)
• Correction (for honest errors that do not invalidate the findings)
• Expression of Concern (when investigation is incomplete or inconclusive)
• Retraction (for confirmed serious misconduct or unreliable findings)
• Removal of article in exceptional legal or ethical cases
• Reporting to the authors’ institution or funding body

Image and Data Integrity

Authors may be asked to provide original data or image files during an investigation. Failure to provide such materials may result in rejection, correction, or retraction.

Confidentiality

All allegations and investigations are handled confidentially. Information is shared only with individuals involved in the resolution of the case.

Good Faith Protection

The journal protects individuals who report concerns in good faith. Allegations made maliciously or without supporting evidence may not be pursued.

Corresponding Author Contact Information Policy

Insights in Animal Science requires that the full contact details of the corresponding author are clearly displayed on all full-text versions of each published article, including both the HTML and PDF formats.

Required Contact Information

The corresponding author’s details must include:

• Full name of the corresponding author
• Affiliation (department, institution, city, country)
• Email address

This information ensures transparency, academic accountability, and allows readers, reviewers, and researchers to contact the corresponding author regarding the research.

Placement of Contact Details

The corresponding author’s contact information must appear:

• On the article’s HTML page (typically below the list of authors)
• On the article’s PDF version (on the title page or immediately below author names)
• In the article metadata exported by OJS (for indexing and citation databases)

Example Format

Corresponding Author: Dr. [Full Name]
[Department], [Institution], [City], [Country]
Email: [email@example.com]

Participant Consent and Identifiable Data Policy

Insights in Animal Science is committed to protecting the privacy, dignity, and rights of all individuals whose information, images, or data may be included in published research. The journal follows COPE guidelines for the ethical use of identifiable personal data in scholarly publications.

Anonymisation and Confidentiality

Authors must ensure that all personal data are anonymised to the greatest extent possible. Any potentially identifiable information—including images, clinical data, demographics, geographic location, or unique personal characteristics—must be removed or coded unless explicit consent for publication has been obtained.

Manuscripts must describe how anonymity and confidentiality of participants were protected during data collection, analysis, and reporting.

Informed Consent for Study Participation

For research involving human participants, authors must confirm that informed consent for participation was obtained prior to data collection. Consent procedures must comply with institutional, national, and international ethical standards, including the Declaration of Helsinki.

Consent for Publication of Identifiable Material

When manuscripts include identifiable personal data—such as photographs, audio recordings, video materials, or any information that could reveal a participant’s identity—authors must obtain explicit written consent for publication from the participant(s).

The consent must cover:

• Use of personal data, images, audio, or video materials
• Permission for these materials to be published in a scholarly journal
• Understanding that the published material may be accessible online
• Agreement to the terms of the journal’s open access license (e.g., CC BY 4.0)

Journal Requirements Published on the Website

The journal publicly states that informed consent for publication is required wherever there is a risk of identifying an individual. Manuscripts lacking appropriate consent will not be considered for publication.

Consent Statement Required in Articles

All articles that contain identifiable personal information must include a dedicated consent statement in the full-text version (HTML and PDF), using the following format:

Consent for Publication: Written informed consent for publication of the identifiable data and/or images included in this article was obtained from the participant(s).

If no identifiable material is present, authors must include the following statement:

Consent for Publication: Not applicable. No identifiable personal data, images, or materials are included in this article.

Non-Compliance

The journal reserves the right to reject, retract, or remove any article containing identifiable data for which appropriate consent has not been documented or provided.

Journal Identifiers Policy

ISSN Identification

Insights in Animal Science publishes its International Standard Serial Numbers (ISSN) prominently to ensure accurate identification, indexing, and cataloguing of the journal.

• ISSN (Online): 3007-6420

The ISSN identifiers are displayed on the journal homepage, in the “About the Journal” section, and on all official journal documents.

Unique Article Identifiers (DOI)

All published articles are assigned a unique and persistent Digital Object Identifier (DOI). DOIs ensure permanent accessibility, reliable citation, and long-term discoverability of the journal’s content.

Each article displays its DOI in:

• The article’s HTML page
• The PDF version of the article
• All exported citation formats (e.g., APA, BibTeX, RIS)

Example DOI format:
https://doi.org//10.69917/ias.02.02-05

The assignment and maintenance of DOIs are managed through Crossref

Funding Policy

Insights in Animal Science requires authors to disclose all sources of financial support associated with the research, writing, and publication of their manuscripts. This ensures transparency, accountability, and compliance with ethical publishing standards.

Funding Disclosure Requirements

Authors must clearly state the following information in their manuscript:

• Full names of all funding organisations or agencies that supported the research
• Grant numbers, project codes, or contract numbers associated with the funding
• The specific role of each funder (e.g., design of the study, data collection, analysis, writing, publication support)
• A declaration if the research received no external funding (“This research received no external funding.”)

Funding and Open Access Compliance

The journal complies with funder open access mandates. Authors whose funders require open access publication (e.g., under Plan S, national research councils, or institutional policies) may publish under the journal’s Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY 4.0) license.

If funders mandate open access or require publication under a specific licence, it is the responsibility of the authors to ensure compliance. Authors must verify that the journal’s policies satisfy their funder’s requirements.

Funding Statement in Articles

A funding statement must be included in all full-text versions of each published article (HTML and PDF). The statement appears in a dedicated section using the following format:

Funding: This research was funded by [Funder Name], grant number [XXXX]. The funder had [describe the role, e.g., no role / full involvement] in the study.

Where there is no financial support, the following statement must be included:

Funding: This research received no external funding.