Focus and Scope

Journal of Ayurvedic and Herbal Science (JAHS) is open access journal, devoted to publish articles from field of Ayurvedic and herbal research.

Scope include study relaated to Ayurveda, Pharmacognosy, Phytochemistry, Herbal medicine, Natural chemistry, Agriculture Science.

Section Policies

Original Articles

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Letter to the Editor

A letter can have a maximum of 800 words (including a maximum of 4 references) with one simple figure or table. The manuscript should not have sub-sections.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Review Articles

These should contain title page, summary (need not be structured) and key words. The text proper should be written under appropriate sub-headings. The authors are encouraged to use flowcharts, boxes, cartoons, simple tables and figures for better presentation. The total number of text words should not exceed 5000 and the total number of figures and tables should not be more than 10.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Short Communications

The manuscript should not be divided into sub-sections. It may have up to 1200 words (including a maximum of 5 references) and one figure or one table.

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Case Reports

A case report should have at least one of the following characteristics to be published in the Journal:

Special interest to the clinical research community
A rare case that is particularly useful to demonstrate a mechanism or a difficulty in diagnosis
new diagnostic method
new or modified treatment
a text that demonstrates relevant findings and is well documented and without ambiguity

The manuscript should contain: abstract of no more than 250 words, no more than 6 key words, the text may be divided into sections with appropriate titles and subtitles, no more than 20 references (without exceptions), no more than three illustrations (figures and/or tables)

Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Peer Review Process

All contributions submitted to journals that are selected for peer-review are sent to at least one, but usually two or more, independent reviewers, selected by the editors. As a condition of agreeing to assess the manuscript, all reviewers undertake to keep submitted manuscripts and associated data confidential, and not to redistribute them without permission from the journal. If a reviewer seeks advice from colleagues while assessing a manuscript, he or she ensures that confidentiality is maintained and that the names of any such colleagues are provided to the journal with the final report. By this and by other means, journals endeavour to keep the content of all submissions confidential until the publication date other than in the specific case of its embargoed press release available to registered journalists. Although we go to every effort to ensure reviewers honour their promise to ensure confidentiality, we are not responsible for the conduct of reviewers.

Publication Frequency

Journal Publishes Issue in last week of every month.

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.

Archiving

This journal utilizes the 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. More...

Plagiarism Policy

Plagiarism is the copying of ideas, text, data and other creative work (e.g. tables, figures and graphs) and presenting it as original research without proper citation. Plagiarism is a serious violation. We define plagiarism as a case in which a paper reproduces another work with at least 20% similarity and without citation. If evidence of plagiarism is found before or after acceptance or after publication of the paper, the author will be offered a chance to defense his\her paper. If the arguments are not found to be satisfactory, the manuscript will be retracted and Authors found to have been guilty of plagiarism will no longer have papers accepted for publication in Journal.

Publication ethics and malpractice

Journal dedicated to following best practices on ethical matters, errors and retractions. The prevention of publication malpractice is one of the important responsibilities of the editorial board. Any kind of unethical behavior is not acceptable, and journal do not tolerate plagiarism in any form. Authors submitting articles to Journal affirm that manuscript contents are original.

The following duties outlined for editors, authors, and reviewers are based on the COPE Code of Conduct for Journal Editors. Editors, authors, and reviewers will also adhere to the journal submission guideline policies.

Duties of Editor

  1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial review board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript.
  2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality, making use of appropriate software to do so. Following desk review, the manuscript is forwarded blind peer review to the editorial review board who will make a recommendation to accept, reject, or modify the manuscript.
  3. Fair Review: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by Journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors.
  4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential.
  5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his/her own research without written consent of the author.

Duties of Authors

  1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of their original research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Manuscripts will follow the submission guidelines of the journal. (See submission guideline policies)
  2. Originality: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work.
  3. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Authors should not submit the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently. It is also expected that the author will not publish redundant manuscripts or manuscripts describing the same research in more than one journal.
  4. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in the research work.
  5. Authorship of the Paper: Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to conception, design, execution or interpretation of the reported study. Others who have made significant contribution must be listed as co-authors. Authors also ensure that all the authors have seen and agreed to the submitted version of the manuscript and their inclusion of names as co-authors.
  6. Data Access and Retention: Authors should provide raw data related to their manuscript for editorial review and must retain such data.
  7. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If at any point of time, the author(s) discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in submitted manuscript, then the error or inaccuracy must be reported to the editor.

Duties of Reviewers

  1. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information.
  2. Acknowledgement of Sources: Manuscript reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Any kind of similarity or overlap between the manuscripts under consideration or with any other published paper of which reviewer has personal knowledge must be immediately brought to the editor's notice.
  3. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  4. Promptness: In the event that a reviewer feels it is not possible for him/her to complete review of manuscript within stipulated time then this information must be communicated to the editor, so that the manuscript could be sent to another reviewer.

Ethical Matter

Investigation using experimental animals must contain a statement confirming the adherence of the research to the Principles of Laboratory Animal Care (NIH publication #85-23, revised in 1985). Investigation involving human subjects should be in accordance with the Helsinki Declaration of 1975 (revised in 2008) and be approved by the institutional ethics committee or equivalent; and this should be stated in the "Materials and Methods" section. In addition, authors should send a notary verified letter of approval from the Ethics Committee or the Institutional Review Board.

In case of any doubt about the adherence of the research to the Helsinki Declaration, it should be demonstrated that the doubtful aspects have been explicitly approved by the relevant institutional ethics committee, and the rational for the approach should be explained.