Guidelines for Reviewers

Reviewers
Bio Palembanica gratefully acknowledges the contribution of scholars and experts who serve as reviewers for the journal.
The reviewers play an essential role in maintaining the scientific quality, integrity, and relevance of manuscripts published in Bio Palembanica. Through their constructive and independent evaluations, reviewers contribute significantly to improving the quality of research and supporting the advancement of biological sciences, biodiversity, ecology, conservation, and related fields.

Reviewer Recognition
Bio Palembanica highly appreciates the time, expertise, and scholarly contribution of its reviewers. The journal recognizes peer review as an important academic contribution to maintaining the quality and integrity of scientific publications.

Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers are expected to:
• Evaluate manuscripts objectively, fairly, and independently.
• Assess the scientific quality, originality, methodology, and significance of submitted manuscripts.
• Provide constructive and substantive comments to help authors improve their manuscripts.
• Maintain the confidentiality of all information related to the reviewed manuscript.
• Identify relevant published works that have not been appropriately cited.
• Notify the Editor-in-Chief or Handling Editor of any potential conflict of interest.
• Complete the review within the agreed timeframe whenever possible.

Areas of Expertise
Bio Palembanica welcomes reviewers with expertise in, but not limited to:
• Biodiversity and Systematics
• Taxonomy
• Ecology
• Conservation Biology
• Zoology
• Botany
• Microbiology
• Genetics and Molecular Biology
• Marine and Freshwater Biology
• Environmental Biology
• Wildlife Biology
• Evolutionary Biology
• Ethnobiology
• Environmental Science
• Biological Resources and Conservation

Review Process
When reviewing a manuscript submitted to Bio Palembanica, reviewers are kindly requested to evaluate the manuscript objectively and critically, while providing constructive comments that can help improve its scientific quality. Please consider the following aspects:
• Title: Does the title accurately and clearly reflect the main content, subject, and scope of the manuscript?
• Abstract: Does the abstract accurately summarize the purpose, methods, main findings, and conclusions of the study? Is it consistent with the content of the manuscript?
• Introduction: Does the introduction provide sufficient background and clearly explain the scientific context and rationale of the study? Is the research problem or objective clearly stated? Does it identify the knowledge gap addressed by the study? Is the research question or hypothesis clearly formulated and relevant to the field of biology? Does the introduction appropriately cite and discuss relevant previous studies?
• Theoretical/Conceptual Background: Where applicable, is the theoretical or conceptual basis of the study appropriate and adequately supported by relevant scientific literature? Does the manuscript demonstrate a clear understanding of previous research related to the topic?
• Materials and Methods: Are the methods described clearly and in sufficient detail to allow the study to be evaluated and, where appropriate, replicated? Are the study design, sampling procedures, materials, instruments, analytical methods, and statistical analyses appropriate for the research objectives? For studies involving biodiversity, taxonomy, ecology, or conservation, are species identification, sampling locations, specimen handling, permits, and relevant analytical procedures adequately described?
• Results: Are the results presented clearly and logically? Are the findings adequately supported by the data? Are appropriate statistical or analytical methods used where necessary? Are tables and figures consistent with the results described in the text?
• Discussion: Does the discussion provide a meaningful interpretation of the findings rather than simply repeating the results? Are the findings compared appropriately with relevant previous studies? Does the discussion explain the biological significance and implications of the results? Are unexpected findings, limitations, or contradictions with previous studies adequately addressed?
• Conclusion: Are the conclusions clearly supported by the results and discussion? Do they directly address the research objectives or questions? Are the conclusions appropriately stated without making claims that go beyond the evidence? Where relevant, does the manuscript identify implications for future research, biodiversity management, conservation, or other biological applications?
• References: Are the references relevant, accurate, and sufficient to support the statements made in the manuscript? Are important and recent scientific publications included? Are citations and references consistently formatted according to the journal's required style? Reviewers are also encouraged to identify relevant literature that should be considered by the authors.
• Tables and Figures: Are tables and figures necessary, clear, and appropriately presented? Do they effectively support or enhance the understanding of the manuscript? Are figure and table captions sufficiently informative? Are the data presented accurately and in a form that is easy for readers to interpret?
• Writing Style and Language: Is the manuscript clearly written and logically organized? Is the language appropriate for an international scientific audience? Is the English or Bahasa Indonesia grammatically correct, coherent, and easy to understand? Are scientific terms used consistently and appropriately?
• Scientific Quality and Originality: Does the manuscript provide original and scientifically meaningful information? Does it make a clear contribution to biological knowledge? Is the study sufficiently rigorous and relevant to the scope of Bio Palembanica?
• Ethical and Research Considerations: Where applicable, does the study comply with relevant ethical requirements, research permits, biodiversity regulations, animal welfare standards, and other applicable legal or institutional requirements?
• Mechanics and Formatting: Please check spelling, grammar, punctuation, scientific nomenclature, units, abbreviations, formatting, and consistency throughout the manuscript.

Final Review Considerations
• All information contained in the manuscript and all comments provided during the peer-review process must be treated as strictly confidential.
• Reviewers should not share, copy, distribute, or use unpublished information from the manuscript for personal or professional purposes.
• If you wish to discuss the manuscript with a colleague or another expert, please inform the Editor and obtain permission before doing so.
• Reviewers should not contact the authors directly regarding the manuscript or the review.
• Please disclose any potential conflict of interest that could affect your objectivity. If a conflict exists, inform the Editor as soon as possible.
• Reviewers should provide objective, respectful, and constructive comments. Personal criticism of the authors should be avoided.
• If you suspect plagiarism, duplicate publication, inappropriate text reuse, or other forms of publication misconduct, please provide the Editor with sufficient details or evidence.
• If you suspect fabrication, falsification, manipulation of data, or other forms of research misconduct, please inform the Editor confidentially and provide the reasons for your concern.
• Any concerns regarding ethical approval, research permits, specimen collection, animal welfare, authorship, conflicts of interest, or other ethical matters should be communicated directly to the Editor.
• The final editorial decision regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection of a manuscript rests with the Editor based on the reviewers' recommendations and the overall assessment of the manuscript.

Our Reviewers
Bio Palembanica maintains a diverse reviewer network consisting of researchers and academics from Indonesia and other countries with relevant expertise in biological sciences and related disciplines.