About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Peer Review Process

The articles must favorably accredit the process of academic review, which works under the modality of double-blind peer review, where the identity of both authors and reviewers will remain anonymous:

1. The articles that accredit editorial review will be sent to academic experts in the same discipline and topic as the submitted text. The reviewers will be selected from the panel of referees —which comprises specialist of national and international institutions— they will produce comments about the relevance and academic quality of the submitted text and will decide on the feasibility of publishing the paper in question.

2. The reviewers will be in charge of revising and analyzing the academic, theoretical and methodologic relevance of each and every article assigned to them. They will be responsible for verifying the explicit presence of the theoretical-methodological section, congruency regarding the field of studies, consistency between academic output and the findings’ relevance, as well as the up-to-dateness and appropriateness of the bibliography resorted to.

3. All the texts will be sent to two experts —ascribed to institutions other than the authors’— who will comment on the text.

4. In case of discrepancy between the rulings, the assistance of a third reviewer will be sought in order to resolve the case. Finally, on the basis of the reviewers’ recommendations, the decision of the Editorial board of REVISTA MEXICANA DE CIENCIAS PECUARIASwill be:

• Recommend its publication without modifications.

• Recommend its publication with minor changes and which do not make a second peer review necessary.

• Condition its publication on the introduction of important changes, which makes a new peer review necessary. This process can be repeated up to three rounds, if upon reaching this point the document is not recommended for publication yet, the article will be rejected without option to resend it.

• Not recommend its publication.

1. For a text to be approved for publication it is indispensable that at least two of the three reviewers’ rulings are positive.

2. The editorial board will ensure, in all cases, that the rulings delivered to the authors contain sound arguments to support the editorial decision.

3. The results of the academic review process will be unappealable in all cases.

4. If observations are received, the author(s) will have a 30-calendar-day deadline to send the new version of the work to the editor. Failing to meet this deadline will mean the manuscript has to begin a review process anew.

5. The time for the document to be sent to review will be in function of the number of articles in waiting list. The referees, once receiving the article, will have six weeks to carry out the review and deliver their ruling.

6. The accepted documents will start the edition process (proofreading, metadata marking up, layout and typesetting) to later be included in the corresponding fascicle, according to the decision of the editorial board.

7. Once the editorial process concludes (proofreading, metadata marking up, layout and typesetting), the preliminary version of the text will be sent to the authors for their final revision and approval. The authors will have three calendar days to give their consent, if no comments are received within this period, the journal’s editorial coordination will assume the authors have tacitly approved.

Open Access Policy

Open access policy

The authors who publish in Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias accept the following conditions:

In accordance with copyright laws, Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias recognizes and respects the authors’ moral right and ownership of property rights which will be transferred to the journal for dissemination in open access.

All the texts published by Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias –with no exception– are distributed under a , which allows third parties to use the publication as long as the work’s authorship and its first publication in this journal are mentioned.

The author(s) can enter into independent and additional contractual agreements for the nonexclusive distribution of the version of the article published in Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias (for example, include it into an institutional repository or publish it in a book) as long as it is clearly and explicitly indicated that the work was published for the first time in Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias.

For all the above, the authors shall send the form of Letter-transfer of Property Rights for the first publication duly filled in and signed by the author(s). This form must be sent as a PDF file to: cienciaspecuarias@inifap.gob.mx

Filing

Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias uses LOCKSS system to create a storing system distributed among participant libraries and allows the creation of permanent files in the journal for preservation and restoration purposes.

Code of ethics

Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias adheres to the code of ethics for the actions and performance of personnel involved in this journal’s publication process (editors, editorial committee, authors and reviewers) established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and available at publicationethics.org

Plagiarism detection

In Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias specialized software for plagiarism detection is used. The texts submitted will undergo a screening test before being sent to editorial and academic review; they will be rejected if the percentage of similarity with other published text or available on the internet is over 50%.

If possible plagiarism is reported or detected in a published text, the procedure to follow is the one established by COPE.

Guidelines and best editorial practices

These guidelines refer to the policies of best editorial practices by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), available at: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines.

Functions and responsibilities of the editorial committee

• Promote among the national and international academic community the submission of articles to be published in the Journal.
• Support in the selection of reviewers for the works received, as well as deliberate on the best options for possible reviewers where required.
• Suggest academic guidelines for the journal’s editorial policy.
• Promote the dissemination of the journal in national and international academic media.
• Participate as reviewers of the works submitted for publication or to recommend other experts as reviewers.
• Decide on the relevance of publishing the submitted materials on the basis of the experts’ reviews.
• Collaborate with the corresponding instances to maintain the periodicity established for the journal.

Functions and responsibilities of the Editor-in-chief

• Coordinate actions toward the fulfillment of the journal’s goals.
• Ensure high academic level in the published content.
• Inform the authors about the stage of the editorial process in which the submitted text is.
• Revise and assess each number published.
• Collaborate to maintain the journal’s publication periodicity and to begin the distribution of each journal’s number the first month of the corresponding period.

Functions and responsibilities of the Associate Editor

• Plan and coordinate the journal’s editorial production process.
• Monitor the technical processing of the materials approved by the editorial committee, once the established academic requirements are accredited.
• Receive the works submitted for possible publication and ask for the reviewers.
• Monitor compliance with the reviewers’ recommendations.
• Monitor proofreading and the journal’s technical quality.
• Approve the content proposed for each number of the journal.
• Inform the editorial committee on the review process of all the materials received, ensuring confidentiality.
• Propose the content of each number to the Editorial Committee from the texts corrected and approved at the time.

Responsibilities of the authors

• Follow the journal’s publication requirements regarding originality, not being published, relevance.
• Present their results with honesty and without lying, falsifying or manipulating data.
• Take collective responsibility, if this is the case, for the work submitted and published.
• Funding sources and relevant conflicts of interest must be stated in the article.
• Cite the work of others accurately and only refer publications used in the text.
• The authors must inform the editors if the results have been previously published or if any report or multiple analyses of the same dataset are under consideration for publication somewhere else. The authors must provide copies of the publications or related works submitted to other journals.

Responsibilities of the reviewers

• Accept the review of texts that fall into their specialty area so that an adequate assessment is carried out.
• Declare from the start of the process if there is any conflict of interest.^[1] If the identity of any author is suspected, the journal shall be notified if this piece of information poses any conflict of interest.
• Decline any review immediately if it is not possible for them to deliver it within the established deadline.
• Produce their assessment on the basis of originality, contribution of the article to the topic, methodology resorted to, relevance and up-to-dateness of the reported bibliography, style, coherence and quality in the structure and drafting.
• Immediately inform the journal if over the review process, they discover they do not have the necessary experience to assess all the text’s aspects.
• Their criticisms will be objective, specific and constructive.
• Clearly define the approval, rejection or conditioning of the text.
• Deliver their assessment within the established deadline.
• Respect confidentiality during and after the review process.
• Must not use content of an under-review or reviewed text.
• Will not involve third parties in the assigned review.
• Inform the journal if similarity with other text they have reviewed is noticed or if they identify any sort of plagiarism.
• Transferring the responsibility of undertaking a review to any other person, assistant or collaborator is not allowed whatsoever.

^[1] Conflicts of interest appear when authors, reviewers or editors have nonmanifest interests, which may influence their judgment on the material submitted for publication. These can be personal, academic, economic, political or religious. If such interests are relevant, they have to be communicated to the editors.

Journal History

Revista Mexicana de Ciencias Pecuarias is a scientific and technical difussion instrument of the livestock sector, it has been published in México since 1963 as Técnica Pecuaria, in 2010 it changes its name to the current one.

We publish original articles in Spanish or English. This journal is included in various index and platforms for scientific difussion, national and international, such as the Índice de Revistas Mexicanas de Investigación Científica y Tecnológica del Consejo Nacional de Ciencia y Tecnología (CONACYT); SciELO, Latindex, Biblat, Dialnet, Redib, Publindex; also in rankings such as the Journal Citation Report Science Edition of Web of Science and in Scimago Journal & Country Rank of Scopus Elsevier.