About the Journal

Jurnal Biodjati (e-ISSN: 2541-4208, p-ISSN: 2548-1606) is a reputable scientific journal managed by the Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung. Since its establishment in 2016, this journal has served as a platform for publishing original research in various biological fields, including both fundamental and applied aspects of biology, encompassing molecular biology, genetics, microbiology, biotechnology, ecology, environmental sciences, and ethnobiology.

With a rigorous and standardized peer-review process, Jurnal Biodjati ensures that every published article meets high scientific standards and contributes to the advancement of knowledge. The journal is published twice a year, in May and November, providing researchers with the opportunity to disseminate their findings to a broader scientific community. Jurnal Biodjati is accredited as SINTA 2 and indexed in various reputable databases, including DOAJ, WorldCat, Google Scholar, Portal Garuda, Moraref, Crossref, Dimension, BASE, One Search ID, and ISJD, ensuring broad visibility and accessibility for published articles.

Focus and Scope

The journal aims to advance the frontiers of biological sciences by publishing high-quality research and reviews in biosciences and their applications. Our focus encompasses fundamental and applied aspects of biology, including but not limited to molecular biology, genetics, microbiology, biotechnology, ecology, environmental sciences, and ethnobiology. We welcome interdisciplinary studies that integrate biological principles with technological innovations for sustainable solutions in health, agriculture, and biodiversity conservation.

Peer Review Process

Jurnal Biodjati uses an online submission and review system. The submission and peer review of every article must be managed using this system and based on following.

Peer Review Policy.

• Editorial Board is responsible for the selection of papers and the selection of reviewers.
• Articles must typically be reviewed by at least two independent reviewers.
• Reviewers are unaware of the identity of the authors, and authors are also unaware of the identity of reviewers (double blind review)
• Reviewing process will consider novelty, objectivity, method, scientific impact, conclusion, and references.
• The final decision of manuscript acceptance shall be made by the Editorial Board according to Reviewers critical comments.
• Section Editor will send the final decision regarding the submission to the corresponding author based on the reviewer recommendation.
• Editorial Board shall protect the confidentiality of all material submitted to the journal and all communications with reviewers.

Overall Guideline for Reviewer, including checklist, can be found in this page:  https://journal.uinsgd.ac.id/index.php/biodjati/pages/view/Guideline

Publication Frequency

Journal published on May and November each years (biannually)

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.

Publication Ethics

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

Jurnal Biodjati is a journal aims to advance the frontiers of biological sciences by publishing high-quality research in biosciences and their applications. Our focus encompasses fundamental and applied aspects of biology, including but not limited to molecular biology, genetics, microbiology, biotechnology, ecology, environmental sciences, and ethnobiology. We welcome interdisciplinary studies that integrate biological principles with technological innovations for sustainable solutions in health, agriculture, and biodiversity conservation, as well as related topics that has neither been published elsewhere in any language, nor is it under review for publication anywhere. This following statement clarifies ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the editor, the reviewer, and the publisher (Department of Biology, Faculty of Science and Technology, UIN Sunan Gunung Djati Bandung). This statement is based one COPE Best Practice Guidelines.

Allegation of Research Misconduct

Research misconduct means fabrication, falsification, citation manipulation, or plagiarism in producing, performing, or reviewing research and writing an article by authors, or in reporting research results. When authors are found to have been involved with research misconduct or other serious irregularities involving articles that have been published in scientific journals, Editors have a responsibility to ensure the accuracy and integrity of the scientific record.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the Editors and Editorial Board will use the best practices of COPE to assist them to resolve the complaint and address the misconduct fairly. This will include an investigation of the allegation by the Editors. A submitted manuscript that is found to contain such misconduct will be rejected. In cases where a published paper is found to contain such misconduct, a retraction can be published and will be linked to the original article.

The first step involves determining the validity of the allegation and an assessment of whether the allegation is consistent with the definition of research misconduct. This initial step also involves determining whether the individuals alleging misconduct have relevant conflicts of interest.

If scientific misconduct or the presence of other substantial research irregularities is a possibility, the allegations are shared with the corresponding author, who, on behalf of all of the coauthors, is requested to provide a detailed response. After the response is received and evaluated, additional review and involvement of experts (such as statistical reviewers) may be obtained. For cases in which it is unlikely that misconduct has occurred, clarifications, additional analyses, or both, published as letters to the editor, and often including a correction notice and correction to the published article are sufficient.

Institutions are expected to conduct an appropriate and thorough investigation of allegations of scientific misconduct. Ultimately, authors, journals, and institutions have an important obligation to ensure the accuracy of the scientific record. By responding appropriately to concerns about scientific misconduct, and taking necessary actions based on evaluation of these concerns, such as corrections, retractions with replacement, and retractions, Jurnal Biodjati will continue to fulfill the responsibilities of ensuring the validity and integrity of the scientific record.

Complaints and Appeals

Jurnal Biodjati will have a clear procedure for handling complaints against the journal, Editorial Staff, Editorial Board or Publisher. The complaints will be clarified to the respected person with respect to the case of complaint. The scope of complaints include anything related to the journal business process, i.e. editorial process, found citation manipulation, unfair editor/reviewer, peer-review manipulation, etc. The complaint cases will be processed according to COPE guideline.

Ethical Oversight

If the research work involves chemicals, human, animals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript in order to obey ethical conduct of research using animals and human subjects. If required, Authors must provide legal ethical clearance from the association or legal organization.

If the research involves confidential data and of business/marketing practices, authors should clearly justify this matter whether the data or information will be hidden securely or not.

Duties of Authors

1. Reporting Standards: Authors should present an accurate account of the original research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Researchers should present their results honestly and without fabrication, falsification or inappropriate data manipulation. A manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Manuscripts should follow the submission guidelines of the journal.
2. Data Access, Retention and Reproducibility: Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication. Authors are responsible for data reproducibility.
3. Originality and Plagiarism: Authors must ensure that they have written entirely original work. The manuscript should not be submitted concurrently to more than one publication unless the editors have agreed to co-publication. Relevant previous work and publications, both by other researchers and the authors own, should be properly acknowledged and referenced. The primary literature should be cited where possible. Original wording taken directly from publications by other researchers should appear in quotation marks with the appropriate citations.
4. Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publications: Author should not in general 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 same research in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable. Multiple publications arising from a single research project should be clearly identified as such and the primary publication should be referenced
5. Acknowledgement of Sources: Authors should acknowledge all sources of data used in the research and cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given.
6. Authorship and Contributorship of the Paper: The authorship of research publications should accurately reflect individuals contributions to the work and its reporting. 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. In cases where major contributors are listed as authors while those who made less substantial, or purely technical, contributions to the research or to the publication are listed in an acknowledgement section. 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.
7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: All authors should clearly disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works: If the author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in the submitted manuscript, then the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.
9. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects: The author should clearly identify in the manuscript if the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use.

Duties of Editor

1. Publication Decisions: Based on the review report of the editorial board, the editor can accept, reject, or request modifications to the manuscript. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision. Editors have to take responsibility for everything they publish and should have procedures and policies in place to ensure the quality of the material they publish and maintain the integrity of the published record.
2. Review of Manuscripts: Editor must ensure that each manuscript is initially evaluated by the editor for originality. The editor should organize and use peer review fairly and wisely. Editors should explain their peer review processes in the information for authors and also indicate which parts of the journal are peer reviewed. Editor should use appropriate peer reviewers for papers that are considered for publication by selecting people with sufficient expertise and avoiding those with conflicts of interest. 
3. Fair Play: The editor must ensure that each manuscript received by the journal is reviewed for its intellectual content without regard to sex, gender, race, religion, citizenship, etc. of the authors. An important part of the responsibility to make fair and unbiased decisions is the upholding of the principle of editorial independence and integrity. Editors are in a powerful position by making decisions on publications, which makes it very important that this process is as fair and unbiased as possible.
4. Confidentiality: The editor must ensure that information regarding manuscripts submitted by the authors is kept confidential. Editors should critically assess any potential breaches of data protection and patient confidentiality. This includes requiring properly informed consent for the actual research presented, consent for publication where applicable.
5. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest: The editor of the Journal will not use unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript for his own research without written consent of the author. Editors should not be involved in decisions about papers in which they have a conflict of interest

Duties of Reviewers

1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions: Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.
2. Confidentiality: Information regarding manuscripts submitted by authors should be kept confidential and be treated as privileged information. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.
3. Acknowledgement of Sources: Reviewers must ensure that authors have acknowledged all sources of data used in the research. Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. The reviewers should notify the journal immediately if they come across any irregularities, have concerns about ethical aspects of the work, are aware of substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article, or suspect that misconduct may have occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript; reviewers should, however, keep their concerns confidential and not personally investigate further unless the journal asks for further information or advice.
4. Standards of Objectivity: Review of submitted manuscripts must be done objectively and the reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments. The reviewers should follow journal instructions on the specific feedback that is required of them and, unless there are good reasons not to. The reviewers should be constructive in their reviews and provide feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. The reviewer should make clear which suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work
5. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest: Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers. In the case of double-blind review, if they suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential conflict of interest.
6. Promptness: The reviewers should respond in a reasonable time-frame. The reviewers only agree to review a manuscript if they are fairly confident they can return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame, informing the journal promptly if they require an extension. 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.

Intellectual Property (Copyright Policy)

Journal policy about intelectual property or copyright is declared here.

Peer-Review Process Policy

Peer-Review process/policy is declared here

Post-Publication Discussions and Corrections

Jurnal Biodjati accepts discussion and corrections on published articles by reader. In case the reader giving discussions and corrections toward a published article, the reader can contact by email to Editor in Chief by explaining the discussions and corrections. If accepted (by Editor in Chief), the discussions and correction will be published in next issue as Letter to Editor. Respected Authors can reply/answer the discussions and corrections from the reader by sending the reply to Editor in Chief. Therefore, Editors may publish the answer as Reply to Letter to Editor.

Article Withdrawal Policy

Biodjati Journal is committed to maintaining scientific integrity, upholding publication ethics, and ensuring the efficient use of resources. Therefore, the withdrawal of submitted articles is only permitted under certain circumstances with justifiable reasons.
1. Pre-Publication Withdrawal
Authors may request to withdraw their manuscript within a maximum of 14 days after submission. The request must be submitted formally via email to the editorial team, including a clear and valid reason. The editorial team reserves the right to reject the withdrawal request if the reason provided is deemed insufficient.
2. Post-Publication Withdrawal
Articles that have already been published may only be withdrawn if proven to involve:
• Copyright infringement.
• Serious ethical violations.
• Legal issues or
• Violations of Biodjati Journal policies.
Such withdrawals will be processed and announced publicly in the relevant journal issue.
3. Authors’ Responsibility
Before submitting a manuscript, authors are responsible for ensuring the following:
• The manuscript is original and has not been previously published.
• All listed authors have approved the content and submission of the manuscript.
• The order and number of authors have been mutually agreed upon.
• The manuscript is not under review or consideration by another journal.
Unilateral withdrawal of a manuscript without valid justification may damage the author’s academic reputation and may result in internal sanctions, including the rejection of future submissions

Plagiarism Policy

Refrences Management

Manuscripts are written by using standard citation application (Mendeley/Endnote/Zotero).

APA (American Psychological Association) reference style is required. More or less 80% references for literature reviews should be the recent (up to date) journals published in the last 10 years, but the rest of 20 % references can be cited from research reports and or articles.

Retraction and Correction

Retraction & Correction (R & C) Policy

We understand that the authors have worked carefully preparing manuscripts, and we have carried out peer-review processes. However, sometimes there is the potential for published articles to be withdrawn or deleted for scientific reasons. It should not be done lightly and can only occur under extraordinary circumstances. Therefore, corrections, clarifications, retractions, and apologies when needed will be carried out with strict standards to maintain confidence in the authority of its electronic archives. Our commitment and policy are to maintain the integrity and completeness of important scientific records for researchers and librarians' archives.

Article Retraction

Jurnal Biodjati is committed to playing its part in maintaining the integrity of the scholarly record; therefore, on occasion, it is necessary to retract articles. Articles may be retracted if:

• There is a major scientific error that would invalidate the article's conclusions, for example, where there is clear evidence that findings are unreliable, either as a result of misconduct (e.g., data fabrication) or honest error (e.g., miscalculation or experimental error).
• The findings have previously been published elsewhere without proper cross-referencing, permission, or justification (i.e., cases of redundant publication).
• There are ethical issues such as plagiarism (appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit, including those obtained through confidential review of others' manuscripts) or inappropriate authorship.

To ensure that retractions are handled according to publication best practice and following COPE retraction guidelines, Jurnal Biodjati adopts the following retraction process:

• An article requiring potential retraction is brought to the journal editor's attention.
• The journal editor should follow the step-by-step guidelines according to the COPE flowcharts (including evaluating a response from the author of the article in question).
• Before any action is taken, the editor's findings should be sent to the Ethics Advisory Board. The purpose of this step is to ensure a consistent approach in accordance with industry best practices.
• The final decision as to whether to retract is then communicated to the author and, if necessary, any other relevant bodies, such as the author's institution on occasion.
• The retraction statement is then posted online and published in the next available issue of the journal (see below for more details of this step).

Note that if authors retain the copyright for an article, this does not mean they automatically have the right to retract it after publication. The integrity of the published scientific record is of paramount importance, and COPE Retraction Guidelines still apply in such cases.

Article Correction

Register Journal should consider issuing a correction if:

• A small part of an otherwise reliable publication reports flawed data or proves to be misleading, especially if this is the result of honest error.
• The Author or Contributor list is incorrect (e.g., a deserving author has been omitted or someone who does not meet authorship criteria has been included).

Corrections to peer-reviewed content fall into one of three categories:

• Publisher correction (erratum): to notify readers of a critical error made by publishing/journal staff (usually a production error) that has a negative impact on the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article, or on the reputation of the Authors or the journal.
• Author correction (corrigendum): to notify readers of an important error made by the Authors, which negatively impacts the publication record or the scientific integrity of the article or the reputation of the Authors or the journal.
• Addendum: an addition to the article by its Authors to explain inconsistencies, to expand the existing work, or otherwise explain or update the information in the main work.

The decision of whether a correction should be issued is made by the Editor(s) of a journal, sometimes with advice from Reviewers or Editorial Board members. Handling Editors will contact the Authors of the paper concerned with a request for clarification, but the final decision about whether a correction is required and which type rests with the Editors.

Article Removal

In an extremely limited number of cases, it may be necessary to remove a published article from our online platform. This will only happen if an article is clearly defamatory, or infringes others legal rights, or where the article is, or we have good reason to expect that it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article if acted upon, may pose a serious health risk. In such circumstances, while the article's metadata (i.e., title and author information) will be retained, the text will be replaced with a screen indicating that the article has been removed for legal reasons.

Article Replacement

In cases where an article, if acted upon, may pose a serious health risk, the Authors of the original paper may wish to retract the flawed original and replace it with a corrected version. Under such circumstances, the above procedures for retraction will be followed with the difference that the article retraction notice will contain a link to the corrected re-published article together with a history of the document.