About the Journal

Focus and Scope

Agrarian journal publishes original articles and scientific communications that contribute to the development of Agrarian Sciences.

The journal was published quarterly until 2021, but since 2022 it has been published continuously. It covers the following topics:

  • Agronomy

  • Agricultural Engineering

  • Animal Production

  • Agribusiness

  • Food Science and Technology

The journal's target audience is professors and undergraduate and graduate students, researchers and managers of higher education and research institutions, scientific and professional associations, managers and technicians of Agrarian Sciences and other entities involved in the training of personnel and scientific production in the area.

Peer Review Process

The manuscripts submitted to Agrarian are evaluated by the Editors (desk review) in relation to adherence to the scope of the journal and compliance with the rules established in the Guidelines for Authors. In this phase, the manuscripts will also undergo an electronic analysis using an anti-plagiarism software for possible identification of plagiarism.

After approved by the desk review, the manuscript is submitted to a blind peer review, sent to a minimum of two ad hoc reviewers who will evaluate the scientific quality of the research. The reviewers will make the recommendation "Accept", "Necessary revisions", "Resend for review" or "Reject" the manuscript.

If the reviewers do not provide consistent answers, the Editors will make a decision based on the opinions expressed or send the article to a third reviewer.

After reviewing the opinions, the Editors will decide whether the manuscript should be accepted, revised, submitted to a new round of evaluations or rejected.

The Editors' decision is final.

Accepted manuscripts will be published respecting the chronological order of acceptance of the section to which they were submitted.

Publication Frequency

Continuous flow

 

Open Access Policy

Agrarian journal provides immediate open access to its content under the Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Brazil (CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 BR) License based on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge

 

Processing and Publication Fees

This journal does not charge APCs or submission charges.

Submission, processing and publication are free.

 

Classification Journal - Qualis-CAPES

Qualis-CAPES is a system used in Brazil to classify the scientific production of graduate programs in relation to articles published in journals. This classification is made by area and varies between A1, A2, B1 to B5 and C.

Agrarian's performance in the last assessment (Quadrennium 2013-2016) is shown below.

Assessment area Classification
Interdisciplinary B2
Agrarian Sciences I B3
Environmental Sciences B4
Engineering III B4
Zootechnics / Fishery Resources B4
Public and Business Administration, Accounting and Tourism B5
Biotechnology B5
Engineering I B5
Engineering IV B5
History B5
Veterinary Medicine B5
Biodiversity C
Biological Sciences I C
Pharmacy C

Publication Ethics Guidelines

Agrarian Code of Ethics aims at contributing to the journal scientific quality, assuring its credibility to editors, authors and readers. This code is based on the core practices of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), on the guidelines provided by the Council of Science Editors (CSE) to promote scientific journals integrity, and on the usual scientific practices for publications in the agricultural filed of study.

Agrarian adopts the definition of research misconduct provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF). The term is defined as “fabrication, falsification, or plagiarism in proposing or performing research”. NSF also specifies fabrication as “making up data or results and recording or reporting them”; falsification as “manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, or changing or omitting data or results” in such a way the “research is not accurately represented”; and plagiarism as the “appropriation of another person’s ideas, processes, results or words without giving appropriate credit” (NSF, 2012, p. 237).

Therefore, plagiarism, falsification and fabrication are considered research misconduct by Agrarian, and shall not be permitted. Authors must guarantee that all data presented on the submitted manuscripts are real and authentic.

Authorship and Contribution

  • Authors must ensure that the submitted manuscripts and their content are original and that they were not submitted to another journal.
  • Authors of a submitted manuscript must have contributed to the research development. The insertion of new authors after the manuscript acceptance shall not be permitted.
  • The content and opinions expressed in the publication are those of the authors alone. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to ensure that all authors are in agreement and to keep them informed about the whole process of submission.
  • Authors must cite and organize the references that formed the theoretical and practical basis of their researches according to the Authors Guidelines.
  • Moreover, they shall provide information, if applicable, about the research funding sources writing an acknowledgment at the end of the paper or at a footnote in its beginning.

Complaints and Appeals

  • When submitting a manuscript, authors agree on publishing it on the journal.
  • Authors will be informed about the acceptance of the paper before the beginning of Agrarian editing/designing process, and shall express their desire of withdrawing the paper in case they need. After being editing, the withdrawal of papers will only be accepted at justifiable request, which shall be sent to the journal by e-mail and analyzed by the Editorial Board.
  • In case of suspected plagiarism, the journal’s editor shall contact the author for explanations. The deadline set by the editor must be respected. The author’s response shall be analyzed by the Editorial Board, who shall decide whether the manuscript must move forward, be altered by its authors or be rejected.

Conflicts of interest/Competing Interests

  • The journal’s editor must not have conflicts of interest regarding the manuscripts he/she accepts or rejects. In case of conflict of interest, the editor shall request the analysis and decision of an Editorial Board’s member who must not be involved in the conflict.
  • Reviewers shall report personal, professional, intellectual, financial, political or religious conflicts of interest to Agrarian editorial team.
  • Considering the peer review process, reviewers must inform the editor in case the author’s identity is known by them.
Data sharing and Reproducibility
  • Agrarian is an Open Access journal. All of its content is available at no cost to users or institutions.
  • Users can read, download, copy, distribute, print, search or link the full texts of the articles  published by this journal without asking for prior permission from the editor or authors.
  • Authors must declare their authorship of the submitted manuscripts and the legitimate use of any third-party materials, citing them appropriately.
  • All content presented in the articles published by the journal is the sole responsibility of the authors, and the reproduction of such content is allowed, provided the source is cited.

Ethical Oversight

  • Authors must ensure that the research, when appropriate, has been approved by the relevant entity (for example, the Research Ethics Committee).

  • The Agrarian Editorial Board is responsible for monitoring the compliance with these publication ethics guidelines. In addition, the board should always consider the changes in scientific publication standards in the field of Agrarian Sciences when making its decisions.

Intellectual Property

  • The authors authorize the publication of their articles in the journal.
  • The authors ensure that the contribution is original, unpublished and is not being evaluated by any other journal.
  • The journal is not responsible for the opinions, ideas and concepts expressed in the texts, since they are the sole responsibility of the authors.
  • The authors own the copyright of their articles and grant the journal the right of first publication, being the paper simultaneously licensed under a CC BY-NC-SA 3.0 BR License, which allows others to share the article with the acknowledgement of its authorship and initial publication in this journal.
  • The authors are able to make separate and, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the article published by the journal (e.g., post it on an institutional repository or publish it in a book), since an acknowledgement of its previous publication is provided.
  • The authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., on institutional repositories or on their website) only after its publication.

Peer Review Processes

  • Reviewers must refuse to review papers whose themes they do not feel qualified to assess.
  • Reviewers shall only agree to assess a manuscript if they have knowledge of the topic to carry out an adequate review and are available to meet the deadlines.
  • Reviewers must not use or divert the knowledge acquired during the review process.
  • The manuscripts must be treated confidentially. The reviewers must respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and must not disclose any details of the manuscript or its review, during or after the evaluation process.
  • Remarks made by reviewers should be objective and constructive, avoiding hostility and personally defamatory or disparaging comments.
  • The reviewers must indicate the flaws that can be corrected and, what must be done for this purpose. They can also suggest relevant references for studies that were not cited, when scientifically relevant to the article and/or its reformulation.
  • Reviewers must indicate the possible changes in the first revision of the manuscript, avoiding new recommendations when the reworked file is returned.
  • Authors might be invited to be reviewers for Agrarian. If the authors are able to perform this role, they must do so with dedication, promptness and scientific seriousness, contributing to the improvement of the manuscript.
  • Agrarian reviewers must adopt COPE ethics guidelines for peer reviewers.

Editorial Practices

Agrarian editorial practices are those described by the Committee on Publications Ethics (COPE), in its Guidance for Editors: research, audits and service evaluations.

Post-publication Discussions and Corrections

Agrarian recognizes the importance of post-publication commentaries on published researches as necessary to the scientific discourse improvement.

Complaints or disagreements about interpretation and other issues should be sent to the journal's editor-in-chief by e-mail (revistaagrarian@ufgd.edu.br). Readers and/or authors who have identified inconsistencies shall clearly  inform the publication reference, including title, author and section of the article, and briefly make their remarks.

Agrarian adopts the following policy for making corrections to the print and online versions of their peer-reviewed content.

  • Editor Correction. Notification of an important error made by Agrarian that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the paper, or the reputation of the authors or of the journal.
  • Author Correction. Notification of an important error made by the author(s) that affects the publication record or the scientific integrity of the paper, or of the reputation of the authors or the journal.
  • Retraction. Notification of invalid results that affect the reliability of a previously published article. The original article is marked as retracted but remains available to readers, and the retraction statement notifying readers of the invalidity of the published paper is bi-directionally linked to the original published paper.
  • Editor's Note. An editor's note is a statement from editors notifying readers of issues related to the published paper. It is an online update made only on the registration page of the published article.

The decisions about types of correction are dicussed with the Editorial Board, but the editor-in-chief makes the final decision about the category in which the amendment is published.