Peer-review process

Regulation on the review

of scientific and theoretical, scientific and practical journal “Agrology”


  1. General regulations.

 1.1. Institute of review is created, which includes members of the editorial board and other leading experts of the university, other institutions in scientific research areas, editors, editorial and publishing department for expert review of papers manuscripts and other materials received for publication in the journal “Agrology”.

1.2. The purpose of the review is improving the quality of scientific papers and other materials by objective and impartial evaluation of highly qualified experts on the topics covered in the works.


  1. The procedure for articles review.

 2.1. All articlesthatare sentto the journal “Agrology” arereviewed in order of precedence established by thisRegulation. The materials are permitted to review preparedin accordance with therules laid downfor the authorsby international standards andnational standards of Ukrainein forceregulations.

 2.2. Editor of editorial and publishing department reports the authors about received articles and submitting it for review within 7 days.

 2.3. Reviewer is selected by editor of editorial and publishing department or editorial board membership from the number leading scientists on the specialization of the proposed work but always in the direction of studies.

 2.4. The journal “Agrology” uses Double-blind peer review submitted on the specialization of the article: neither the authors nor the reviewers do not know each other.

All reviewers must be well-known specialists, have publications on the subject of reviewed material. Editorial Board reserves the right to conduct an additional review.

 2.5. Terms of review in each case are determined by the editor taking into account the most rapid publication of the material.

 2.6. The following issues are highlighted in the review:

  • compliance of article content stated in its title theme and the journal profile;
  • relevance of work: compliance with priority areas and modern scientific achievements in the agricultural sector of the national economy and in the adjacent areas of the country;
  • scientific innovation: results of the completed phase of the research, originality of the task;
  • feasibility of article publishing taking into account the coverage of this issue in the existing literature;
  • consistency, coherence and consistency of the material, availability tables, figures, formulas correctness;
  • correctness and completeness of scientific proofs listed in work;
  • estimation accuracy and uniqueness of the conclusions, their adequacy of the main provisions of the article, theoretical and practical importance of the material;
  • informativeness, consistency, structuring, abstracts, keywords, references;
  • advantages and disadvantages of the article and recommended corrections and additions.

 2.7. Reviewer gives an opinion on the possibility of article publishing “recommended”, “recommended after correcting the deficiencies specified by the reviewer” or “not recommended”.

 2.8. As a result of reviewing the Editorial Board together with Editorial and Publishing department decide to publish (reject) articles, informing authors not later than 20 days from the date of notification about getting their copyright material.

 2.9. Article, requiring revision based on the comments of the reviewer, is sent to the author. The term of corrections is not more than one month. Corrected article is reviewed again. In case of material rejection Editorial Board directs reasoned refusal to the author.

 2.10. Article that is not recommended by the reviewer for publication is not accepted for review again. The text of negative review is sent to the author by e-mail, fax or regular mail.

 2.11. Positive reviews, provided by the authors, are not a sufficient reason for its publication. The final decision on whether the publication is made by Editorial Board.

 2.12. The originals of reviews are kept in Editorial and Publishing department for ten years.