Integrative Bioscience Nexus

Manuscript submission overview

Integrative Bioscience Nexus (IBN) is an international, peer-reviewed, open-access journal committed to publishing high-quality research across the broad spectrum of biosciences, including molecular biology, biotechnology, cell biology, genetics, microbiology, biochemistry, bioinformatics, immunology, physiology, ecology, zoology, botany, agricultural sciences, fisheries, environmental sciences, biomedical sciences, and interdisciplinary life science research. The journal emphasizes scientific rigor, transparency, reproducibility, and ethical publishing standards.

The manuscript submission process is designed to ensure efficiency, fairness, and scientific integrity while supporting authors from diverse disciplinary and geographic backgrounds. This section provides a comprehensive overview of the submission framework, including types of publications accepted, submission procedures, file requirements, formatting flexibility, cover letter expectations, author identification, affiliation policies, and guidelines for independent researchers.

Authors are strongly encouraged to carefully read all submission guidelines prior to preparing and submitting their manuscripts, as adherence to these requirements significantly facilitates peer review, reduces processing delays, and ensures consistency with international publishing standards.

Types of publications

Integrative Bioscience Nexus accepts a wide range of manuscript types that reflect the diversity of modern bioscience research. Each manuscript type serves a distinct scientific purpose and must be prepared according to its specific structural and methodological expectations.

1. Original research articles

Original research articles represent the core publication type of the journal. These manuscripts report novel experimental, computational, or theoretical findings that significantly advance knowledge within the field of biosciences.

Such manuscripts must include complete methodological details, enabling reproducibility of results. Authors are expected to present robust experimental design, appropriate statistical analyses, and well-supported interpretations.

Typical structures include:

• Abstract
• Keywords
• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Back matter (CRediT, conflicts of interest statement, Acknowledgement, funding, ethics, data availability, etc.)

Research articles must provide:

• Clear research questions or hypotheses
• Strong justification grounded in existing literature
• Detailed methodology sufficient for replication
• Statistically validated results
• Critical interpretation of findings

The journal encourages submission of interdisciplinary research that integrates biological sciences with computational modeling, engineering approaches, environmental systems, or medical applications.

2. Review articles

Review articles provide comprehensive, critical, and balanced synthesis of existing literature on a specific topic in biosciences. These manuscripts do not present new experimental data but instead evaluate and integrate published research findings.

Reviews should:

• Identify current knowledge gaps
• Compare and contrast different scientific approaches
• Highlight controversies and unresolved questions
• Provide future research directions

Review articles must be analytical rather than descriptive. Authors are expected to critically evaluate methodologies, experimental designs, and theoretical frameworks used in previous studies.

Structure generally includes:

• Abstract
• Keywords
• Introduction
• Thematic sections with subheadings
• Critical discussion
• Conclusions and future perspectives

High-quality reviews often serve as foundational references for emerging research fields.

 

3. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses are evidence-based studies that follow structured methodologies to collect, evaluate, and synthesize existing research data.

These manuscripts must adhere strictly to internationally recognized reporting guidelines such as PRISMA.

Authors must:

• Define clear inclusion and exclusion criteria
• Describe search strategies in detail
• Provide flow diagrams of study selection
• Perform statistical synthesis where applicable
• Ensure transparency and reproducibility

Meta-analyses should include detailed statistical methodologies, effect size calculations, heterogeneity assessments, and sensitivity analyses.

 

 

 

4. Short communications

Short communications are concise reports of preliminary findings, novel observations, or methodological innovations that warrant rapid dissemination.

These manuscripts should be:

• Brief yet scientifically rigorous
• Focused on a single key finding
• Supported by sufficient experimental or analytical evidence

Despite their brevity, short communications must maintain the same ethical and scientific standards as full-length research articles.

 

5. Technical notes and method articles

Technical notes describe new experimental procedures, laboratory techniques, computational tools, or analytical workflows.

These manuscripts are essential for:

• Improving experimental reproducibility
• Introducing methodological innovations
• Sharing optimized protocols

Method articles must include step-by-step descriptions, validation data, and performance benchmarks where applicable.

 

6. Editorials and perspectives

Editorials and perspective articles provide expert opinions, policy discussions, or conceptual frameworks on emerging topics in biosciences.

These articles are typically invited but may also be submitted voluntarily.

 

Submission Process

The submission process for Integrative Bioscience Nexus is designed to ensure transparency, efficiency, and fairness at all stages of manuscript handling.

 

Online submission system

All manuscripts must be submitted through the journal’s online submission portal. Hard copy or email submissions are not accepted.

The corresponding author is responsible for:

• Uploading all required files
• Ensuring co-author approval
• Providing accurate metadata
• Responding to editorial communications

Step-by-step submission procedure

Registration

Authors must first register an account on the journal submission platform. Registration requires:

• Full name
• Institutional affiliation
• Valid email address
• ORCID iD (recommended)

Manuscript upload

Authors must upload:

• Main manuscript file
• Figures and tables (if separate)
• Supplementary materials (if applicable)
• Cover letter
• Ethical approval documents (if required)

Metadata entry

Authors must provide structured metadata including:

• Title
• Abstract
• Keywords
• Author information
• Funding details
• Conflict of interest statements

Reviewer suggestions

Authors may suggest potential reviewers with appropriate expertise. Suggested reviewers must meet ethical requirements and must not have conflicts of interest with the authors.

Final confirmation

Before submission, authors must confirm:

• All co-authors have approved the manuscript
• Ethical requirements have been met
• Data availability requirements are satisfied
• The manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere

 

Accepted file formats

To ensure compatibility and efficient processing, Integrative Bioscience Nexus accepts manuscripts in multiple standardized formats.

Microsoft Word files

Manuscripts prepared in Microsoft Word (doc or .docx) are preferred for initial submission.

Requirements include:

• Single document submission preferred
• Figures embedded near first citation
• Editable text (no locked content)
• Standard fonts (Times New Roman, Arial, Calibri)

LaTeX submissions

LaTeX submissions are accepted for computational, mathematical, and physics-based bioscience studies.

Requirements include:

• Single ZIP file containing all source files
• Compiled PDF version
• Proper figure linking
• Bibliography file included (.bib recommended)

Figures and supplementary files

Accepted formats include:

• PNG
• JPEG
• TIFF
• PDF (for vector graphics)

Supplementary materials may include:

• Datasets
• Code files
• Videos
• High-resolution images
• Extended tables

Files should be clearly labeled (e.g., Figure 1, Table S1).

Free format submission

IBN supports a flexible submission format policy to reduce formatting barriers for authors during initial submission.

Principles of Free Format Submission

Authors are not required to strictly format manuscripts according to journal layout requirements at submission stage. However, manuscripts must include all essential scientific components:

• Title
• Abstract
• Keywords
• Main text sections
• Figures and tables
• References
• Ethical statements

Although formatting is flexible, manuscripts must maintain scientific clarity and logical organization.

Required sections include:

• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusions

Back matter must include:

• Funding information
• Author contributions
• Data availability statement
• Conflicts of interest

Reference style

All manuscripts submitted to the journal must use the IEEE reference style. References should be formatted consistently according to the journal’s author guidelines before submission. Manuscripts with incorrectly formatted references may be returned to the authors for revision prior to editorial assessment or peer review.

Cover letter

A cover letter is mandatory for all submissions and serves as an important communication tool between authors and editors. The cover letter should:

• Introduce the manuscript
• Explain the significance of the research
• Highlight novelty and scientific contribution
• Confirm suitability for the journal scope
• Declare ethical compliance

The cover letter must include:

• Manuscript title
• Type of article
• Brief summary of findings
• Statement of originality
• Declaration of non-submission elsewhere

Authors should also disclose:

• Prior submission history (if applicable)
• Preprint availability
• Related manuscripts under consideration

The cover letter must confirm:

• The manuscript is not under review elsewhere
• All authors approve submission
• Ethical guidelines have been followed

Author identification

Accurate author identification is essential for transparency, accountability, and academic attribution. Each author must provide:

• Full name (first and last name)
• Institutional affiliation
• Department or research unit
• Valid institutional email address
• ORCID iD (recommended)

The corresponding author is responsible for:

• Communication with the editorial office
• Submission management
• Revision coordination
• Final manuscript approval
• Ensuring authorship accuracy

Where applicable, equal contributions should be clearly indicated using standardized notation.

Example statement:

“These authors contributed equally to this work.”

 

Author affiliation

Author affiliations must accurately reflect institutional relationships at the time the research was conducted.

Affiliations should include:

• Department or faculty
• Institution name
• City
• Postal code (if applicable)
• Country

Primary affiliation

Authors should list the institution where the majority of research was conducted as the primary affiliation.

Multiple affiliations

Authors with multiple institutional associations should list all relevant affiliations.

Affiliation accuracy

Incorrect or misleading affiliation information may lead to:

• Attribution errors
• Funding misrepresentation
• Institutional disputes
• Publication corrections or retractions

Authors are responsible for ensuring accuracy prior to submission.

 

Independent researcher

Authors who are not affiliated with a formal academic or research institution must declare themselves as Independent Researchers. An independent researcher is an author who:

• Is not currently employed by a university, institute, or company
• Conducted research independently
• Does not hold institutional affiliation during manuscript preparation

 

Independent researchers should list:

• Independent Researcher, City, Country
• Ethical and Administrative Considerations

Independent researchers must still comply with:

• Ethical approval requirements
• Data integrity standards
• Authorship criteria
• Funding disclosure rules

Independent status does not exempt authors from any publication ethics obligations.

 

Manuscript preparation

General considerations

IBN accepts manuscripts that demonstrate methodological rigor, scientific originality, and clear contribution to the advancement of biosciences across interdisciplinary domains. All submitted manuscripts must be written in clear scientific English and should present reproducible, verifiable, and well-structured research outputs. Authors are strongly encouraged to carefully review the journal scope prior to submission to ensure alignment with biomedical, life sciences, environmental, molecular biology, biotechnology, cell biology, genetics, microbiology, biochemistry, bioinformatics, immunology, physiology, ecology, zoology, botany, agricultural sciences, fisheries, environmental sciences, biomedical sciences, and interdisciplinary life science research).

Manuscripts should be prepared in a logical and standardized structure to ensure consistency across publications and facilitate peer review, indexing, and post-publication dissemination.

 

 

Research manuscripts should comprise

Front matter

• Title
• Author list
• Institutional affiliations
• Abstract (Should 200-250 words)
• Keywords (4–6 terms)

Main manuscript sections

• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusions (optional but recommended for integrative synthesis)

Back matter

• Supplementary Materials
• Author Contributions
• Funding Statement
• Data Availability Statement
• Acknowledgments
• Conflicts of Interest
• References

Review manuscripts should comprise

Front matter

• Title
• Author list
• Affiliations
• Abstract
• Keywords

 

Main text

Review manuscripts should present a structured, critical, and comprehensive synthesis of existing literature. Authors may organize content into thematic sections and subsections depending on the complexity of the topic.

Back matter

• Author Contributions
• Acknowledgments
• Conflicts of Interest
• References

Review articles should not include original experimental data but must critically evaluate existing studies, identify gaps in knowledge, and provide future research directions in the field of integrative biosciences.

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must follow internationally recognized reporting guidelines such as PRISMA or equivalent updated frameworks. Authors should ensure transparency in search strategy, inclusion/exclusion criteria, data extraction, and analytical methods. A completed PRISMA checklist and flow diagram should be included during submission.

These manuscripts should follow the same general structure as research articles, including Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion, and Conclusions, with additional methodological rigor applied to ensure reproducibility and statistical validity.

Graphical abstract

A Graphical Abstract (GA) is not strictly mandatory visual summary for most article types in Integrative Bioscience Nexus. It is displayed alongside the abstract in the online version of the article and serves as a visual entry point to the study.

The graphical abstract must be an original, standalone visual representation of the manuscript’s key message. It should not replicate figures used in the main manuscript or simply combine text and images from the abstract.

Requirements for graphical abstracts

Authors must ensure the following criteria are met:

• The graphical abstract must be original and unpublished.
• It must not include copyrighted material, trademarks, or restricted visual elements.
• Acceptable file formats include PNG, JPEG, or TIFF.
• Minimum resolution: 560 × 1100 pixels (height × width).
• Text should be minimal, legible, and scientifically appropriate.
• Recommended fonts include Times New Roman, Arial, Helvetica, Calibri, or Ubuntu.
• Decimal formatting must use points, not commas.
• Avoid overcrowding, excessive text, or unnecessary decorative elements.
• The phrase “Graphical Abstract” must not appear within the image.

Graphical abstracts should visually summarize hypotheses, methodology, key results, or conceptual frameworks in a manner accessible to both specialist and non-specialist readers.

 

Acronyms, abbreviations, and initialisms

All acronyms and abbreviations must be defined at first mention in the abstract, main text, and first occurrence in figures or tables. Once defined, they may be used consistently throughout the manuscript.

Authors must ensure clarity and avoid excessive use of abbreviations that may reduce readability. Standard scientific abbreviations and internationally recognized terms may be used without definition, provided they are widely established in the field.

 

 

Units of measurement

All manuscripts submitted to Integrative Bioscience Nexus must use the International System of Units (SI units). Where non-SI units are used, authors must provide SI equivalents.

Consistency in unit usage is required throughout the manuscript, including tables, figures, and supplementary materials. Conversion errors or inconsistencies may delay the review process.

 

Equations

Mathematical equations must be prepared using editable formats such as Microsoft Equation Editor or MathType. Equations embedded as images are not acceptable unless absolutely necessary for graphical representation.

All symbols must be clearly defined at their first appearance. Numbered equations should be used when referenced in the text. Complex mathematical expressions should be formatted clearly to ensure reproducibility and editorial compatibility.

 

Research data and supplementary materials

IBN strongly encourages authors to adopt open science principles by sharing datasets, protocols, code, and analytical workflows. Transparency in data reporting is considered essential for scientific validation and reproducibility.

Supplementary materials

Authors may include supplementary files such as:

• Additional figures and tables
• Extended methodological descriptions
• Raw datasets
• Video or audio files
• Software code or scripts

All supplementary materials must be clearly referenced in the main manuscript and labeled appropriately (e.g., Table S1, Figure S1).

 

Data availability

Authors must include a Data Availability Statement indicating whether and where the data supporting the findings can be accessed. Where data cannot be shared due to ethical, legal, or privacy constraints, a clear justification must be provided.

Open data policy

Where possible, datasets should be deposited in recognized public repositories that support long-term accessibility and assign persistent identifiers (DOIs). Authors are encouraged to follow FAIR data principles (Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, Reusable).

 

Preregistration

Where applicable, authors are encouraged to preregister study protocols, experimental designs, or analysis plans prior to data collection. Preregistration enhances transparency, reduces bias, and strengthens methodological integrity.

Links to preregistered protocols should be included in the Materials and Methods section.

 

Reporting standards and guidelines

IBN supports adherence to established reporting frameworks depending on study design, including but not limited to:

• PRISMA for systematic reviews
• CONSORT for randomized controlled trials
• STROBE for observational studies
• ARRIVE for animal research
• CARE guidelines for case reports

Authors must ensure compliance with relevant standards and may be required to submit completed checklists during peer review.

 

 

Software and code

When computational tools, scripts, or software are developed as part of the study, authors must provide sufficient detail for reproducibility. This includes:

• Software name and version
• Computational environment
• Parameter settings
• Source code availability (where applicable)

Authors are strongly encouraged to deposit code in public repositories such as GitHub, GitLab, or institutional archives with appropriate documentation.

 

Deposition of biological sequences and data

Where studies involve genetic, genomic, proteomic, or transcriptomic data, authors must deposit relevant sequences in appropriate public databases prior to submission. Accession numbers must be included in the manuscript.

Common repositories include:

• GenBank for nucleotide sequences
• EMBL or DDBJ for genetic data
• GEO or SRA for high-throughput sequencing datasets
• UniProt or PRIDE for protein-related datasets

Failure to provide accession numbers may delay publication.

 

Figures, tables, and schemes

All visual elements must be clearly labeled, properly numbered, and cited in the main text in sequential order. General requirements:

• Figures should be of high resolution (minimum 300–600 dpi preferred).
• Acceptable formats include PNG, JPEG, and TIFF.
• Tables must be editable and created using word processing table tools.
• Each figure and table must include a descriptive caption.

 

Placement and formatting

Figures and tables should be placed close to their first citation in the text. Large datasets should be provided as supplementary material rather than embedded in the main manuscript.

Scientific integrity in visuals

Images must not be manipulated in a way that misrepresents data. Adjustments to brightness, contrast, or color balance are permitted only if applied uniformly and transparently.

Language and style requirements

All manuscripts must be written in clear, professional scientific English. Authors are responsible for ensuring grammatical accuracy and clarity prior to submission.

While professional language editing services are not mandatory, poorly written manuscripts may be returned prior to peer review.

Ethical compliance statement

All manuscripts must comply with international standards of publication ethics, including COPE guidelines. Any form of plagiarism, data fabrication, falsification, or inappropriate image manipulation is strictly prohibited.

Authors must ensure:

• Originality of submitted work
• Proper citation of all sources
• Transparency in methods and data reporting
• Disclosure of conflicts of interest
• Ethical approval where required

 

Front matter

These sections must be included in all manuscript types submitted to IBN to ensure consistency, clarity, and indexing compatibility across biomedical, life science, and interdisciplinary research outputs.

 

Title

The manuscript title must be concise, informative, and directly reflective of the study content. It should clearly indicate the nature of the study, particularly when reporting specific study designs such as experimental research, clinical or preclinical trials, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, or replication studies.

When applicable, the title should specify the biological system, organism, dataset, or methodological framework used in the study. Gene and protein names, when included, must follow standardized scientific nomenclature and should be presented in abbreviated form where appropriate.

Authors must avoid the use of unnecessary abbreviations, acronyms, or informal expressions in the title. Running titles, headers, or decorative elements are not permitted and will be removed during editorial processing.

The title should be understandable to a broad scientific audience while maintaining precision for indexing in bibliographic databases and search engines.

Author list and affiliations

All contributing authors must be listed with their full first and last names. Middle initials may be included where relevant for identification purposes. The author list must accurately reflect all individuals who meet the criteria for authorship according to international publication ethics standards.

Affiliations must follow a standardized institutional format, preferably aligned with PubMed/MEDLINE conventions, and should include:

• Department or research unit
• Institution or university name
• Full postal address (including city, postal code, state/province where applicable)
• Country

At least one author must be designated as the corresponding author, who will be responsible for all communication with the journal during submission, peer review, and post-publication stages.

Email addresses of all authors may be published as part of the article metadata. It is the responsibility of the corresponding author to confirm that all co-authors consent to the disclosure of their contact information.

If any co-author does not wish to have their email address displayed, this must be clearly communicated during the proofing stage prior to publication.

Any changes to author names, order, or affiliations after acceptance are generally not permitted unless formally justified and approved by the editorial office.

Equal contributions

Where two or more authors have contributed equally to the work, this must be indicated using a superscript symbol (†) placed after their names. A corresponding statement should be included below the affiliation list:

“These authors contributed equally to this work.”

Equal contribution designations must also be clearly reflected in the Author Contributions section in the back matter to ensure transparency in intellectual and practical input.

Artificial Intelligence use in authorship

Generative artificial intelligence tools, including large language models, must not be listed as authors under any circumstances. These tools do not meet the criteria for authorship as defined by international publication ethics guidelines, including accountability, intellectual contribution, and responsibility for the integrity of the work.

 

Abstract

The abstract must provide a clear, concise, and structured summary of the manuscript and should not exceed 250 words. It must be presented as a single paragraph without subheadings and references.

The abstract should follow a non-structured narrative that includes the following elements:

1) Briefly introduce the scientific context and the primary research question or problem being addressed.

2) Summarize the key methodologies, experimental design, datasets, or analytical approaches used. For studies involving animals or clinical participants, relevant ethical approvals, preregistration details, or model systems should be briefly mentioned.
3) Present the most important findings of the study in a clear and objective manner without interpretation beyond the data.

4) State the main interpretation or implication of the findings and their relevance to the broader field.

The abstract must accurately reflect the content of the manuscript. It should not contain information, claims, or conclusions that are not supported in the main text. Overstatement or speculative language should be avoided to maintain scientific objectivity.

 

Keywords

Authors must provide 4 to 6 keywords immediately following the abstract. These keywords should reflect the central themes, methodologies, organisms, or analytical frameworks used in the study.

Keywords should be:

• Scientifically relevant and discipline-specific
• Suitable for indexing and discoverability
• Avoid redundant repetition of title terms where possible
• Consistent with standardized biomedical and life science terminology

Keywords play a critical role in enhancing the visibility, indexing, and retrieval of published work within Integrative Bioscience Nexus.

 

Research manuscript sections

Research articles submitted to IBN must be structured in a clear, logical, and reproducible format that ensures scientific rigor and facilitates peer review. Standardized sectioning is required unless otherwise justified by the nature of the study.

Introduction

The introduction should provide a focused overview of the scientific background and contextual framework of the study. It must clearly articulate the rationale for the research and establish its relevance within the broader field of integrative biosciences.

Authors should:

• Situate the study within existing scientific literature
• Identify key knowledge gaps or unresolved questions
• Highlight relevant controversies or competing hypotheses where applicable
• Clearly define the objectives, aims, or hypotheses of the study

The introduction should be written in a manner accessible to a broad scientific readership, including researchers outside the immediate specialty. Overly technical or narrowly focused descriptions should be avoided unless necessary for understanding the study design.

The section should conclude with a clear statement of the study’s objectives and anticipated contributions to the field.

 

Materials and methods

The Materials and Methods section must provide sufficient detail to ensure full reproducibility of the study. Authors are expected to describe all experimental procedures, computational workflows, and analytical methods in a transparent and structured manner.

For novel methodologies, complete procedural descriptions must be provided. For established techniques, appropriate citations should be included, along with a brief description sufficient for understanding the application within the current study.

This section should include, where applicable:

• Study design and experimental framework
• Sample collection, preparation, and processing methods
• Instrumentation, reagents, and materials used
• Software, algorithms, and computational tools (including version numbers)
• Statistical methods and data analysis procedures
• Ethical approvals, preregistration identifiers, or protocol registrations

Where computational or software-based methods are used, authors must specify:

• Software name and version
• Parameter settings and configurations
• Availability of custom scripts or source code

If generative artificial intelligence tools were used beyond basic language editing (e.g., for data analysis, interpretation, or visualization), this must be explicitly disclosed within this section.

The level of detail provided should allow independent researchers to replicate the study without ambiguity.

 

Results

The Results section must present findings in a clear, logical, and objective manner without extensive interpretation. Data should be reported in a structured format that corresponds directly to the methods described.

Authors should ensure that:

• Results are presented in a logical sequence consistent with the study design
• Statistical outcomes are clearly reported with appropriate measures of significance
• Figures and tables are referenced in the text in sequential order
• Redundant repetition of numerical data across text, tables, and figures is avoided

Interpretation of results should be limited to essential explanatory statements where necessary for clarity. Detailed comparison with existing literature should be reserved for the Discussion section.

 

Discussion

The Discussion section should interpret the findings in relation to existing scientific literature and theoretical frameworks. Authors should critically evaluate how the results contribute to, confirm, or challenge current knowledge in the field.

This section should:

• Contextualize findings within prior research
• Address supporting and conflicting evidence
• Explain potential biological, methodological, or computational implications
• Acknowledge limitations of the study design, data, or analytical approach
• Suggest future research directions and potential applications

Authors are encouraged to provide a balanced interpretation that reflects both strengths and limitations of the study.

 

Conclusion

The Conclusion section is optional but recommended, particularly for complex or multidisciplinary studies. It should provide a concise synthesis of the main findings and their broader significance.

This section should not introduce new data or arguments but should instead emphasize the key scientific contributions and potential translational or theoretical impact of the study.

Where appropriate, conclusions may highlight future directions for research or potential applications in biosciences, healthcare, environmental science, or related disciplines.

 

Patents

If the research presented in the manuscript has led to or is associated with any patent applications or granted patents, a dedicated Patents section may be included.

This section should briefly state:

• Patent title and reference number (if available)
• Status of the patent (filed, under review, granted)
• Relationship between the patent and the published work

If no patents are associated with the study, this section may be omitted.

 

 

Back matter

Supplementary materials

Supplementary materials published alongside the manuscript may include additional figures, tables, datasets, and other supporting files that provide extended evidence for the findings but are not essential for the main text. These materials are intended to enhance transparency and reproducibility of the study. Each supplementary item should be clearly labeled and cited in the text. Examples include: Figure S1: Study workflow diagram, Figure S2: Extended experimental results, Table S1: Full dataset summary, Table S2: Additional statistical outputs, Video S1: Experimental procedure demonstration, and Dataset S1: Raw data files used for analysis. All supplementary materials should be submitted in standard, non-proprietary formats such as PDF, PNG, JPEG, TIFF, CSV, or XLSX to ensure long-term accessibility and compatibility. Supplementary materials are peer-reviewed alongside the main manuscript and must be properly described in the corresponding section of the article.

 

Author contributions

All authors must have made substantial intellectual contributions to the research work, including study conception and design, data acquisition, data analysis, interpretation of results, drafting or critical revision of the manuscript, and final approval of the submitted version. Authorship must reflect accountability for the integrity of the entire work. Contributions should be reported using the CRediT taxonomy to ensure transparency. A typical format is as follows: Conceptualization, A.A. and B.B.; Methodology, A.A.; Software, A.A. and C.C.; Validation, B.B. and C.C.; Formal Analysis, A.A.; Investigation, A.A. and B.B.; Data Curation, C.C.; Writing – Original Draft Preparation, A.A.; Writing – Review & Editing, B.B. and C.C.; Visualization, A.A.; Supervision, B.B.; Project Administration, B.B.; Funding Acquisition, C.C. Each author must agree to be accountable for their contributions and ensure that any issues related to data integrity or accuracy are appropriately addressed.

 

Funding

All sources of financial support for the research must be clearly declared, including grants, institutional support, and funding agencies. If no external funding was received, the statement should read: “This research received no external funding.” If funding was provided, the statement should specify the funding agency, and grant number, for example: “This research was funded by the National Research Council, grant number ABC-12345.” It can also include the name of the fund receiver. If publication costs were covered, this should also be indicated explicitly. Funding transparency is essential for maintaining research integrity and compliance with indexing and funding agency requirements.

 

Institutional review board statement

For studies involving human participants, human data, or animal subjects, ethical approval must be stated clearly. A standard statement is: “The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and approved by the Institutional Review Board of [Institute Name] (protocol code XXX, date of approval).” For animal studies: “The animal study protocol was approved by the Institutional Animal Care and Use Committee of [Institute Name] (protocol code XXX, date of approval).” If ethical approval was not required, the manuscript must provide a justification, such as: “Ethical review and approval were waived for this study due to the use of publicly available anonymized datasets.” If no human or animal subjects were involved, the statement should read: “Not applicable.” All ethical declarations must ensure compliance with international research ethics standards.

 

Informed consent statement

When human participants are involved, informed consent must be obtained prior to participation. A standard statement is: “Informed consent was obtained from all subjects involved in the study.” If applicable, consent for publication must also be stated: “Written informed consent has been obtained from the patient(s) to publish this paper.” In cases where consent was waived, the justification must be clearly provided: “Patient consent was waived due to anonymized retrospective data use approved by the institutional ethics committee.” If no human participants were involved, the statement should read: “Not applicable.” Ethical transparency in participant consent is a fundamental requirement for publication.

 

Data availability statement

Authors must specify where the data supporting the findings of the study can be accessed. If data are publicly available, the repository name and DOI or URL should be provided, for example: “The datasets generated during the current study are available in FigShare at https://doi.org/xxxxx.” If data are restricted due to privacy or ethical concerns, the statement should specify: “The data are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.” If no new data were generated, authors should state: “No new data were created or analyzed in this study.” Data availability statements ensure reproducibility, transparency, and compliance with open science principles.

 

Acknowledgments

This section is used to recognize individuals, institutions, or organizations that contributed to the research but do not meet authorship criteria. This may include technical assistance, administrative support, or material contributions. Example: “The authors would like to thank the laboratory staff and institutional support team for their assistance in data collection and analysis.” If generative AI tools were used, disclosure must be included, for example: “During the preparation of this manuscript, the authors used [tool name] to assist in language editing and formatting. The authors have reviewed and take full responsibility for the final content.” Acknowledgments should remain concise and professional.

 

Conflicts of interest

All authors must disclose any financial or personal relationships that could influence the research outcomes or interpretation. If no conflicts exist, the statement should read: “The authors declare no conflicts of interest.” If conflicts exist, they must be explicitly described, including funding relationships, consultancy roles, stock ownership, or institutional affiliations. Example: “Author A has received research funding from Company X. Author B serves as a consultant for Company Y.” Transparency in conflicts of interest ensures objectivity and maintains trust in scientific communication.

References (IEEE Style)

References must be listed in the order they appear in the manuscript and formatted according to IEEE style. Citations in the text should be indicated using numbered brackets, for example [1], [2], [3]. The reference list should include complete bibliographic details such as author names, article title, journal name, volume, issue, pages, and year.

When citing multiple references at the same location in the text, the reference numbers should be grouped within a single pair of square brackets and separated by commas, for example, [1,2,3]. For a series of consecutive references, a hyphen should be used to indicate the range, for example, [4–7]. A combination of consecutive and non-consecutive references should be formatted as [1,3–5,8].

Examples:
[1] A. B. Author and C. D. Author, “Title of the article,” Journal Name, vol. 10, no. 2, pp. 123–130, 2024.

[2] E. F. Author, Book Title, 3rd ed. City: Publisher, 2023.

[3] G. H. Author, “Chapter title,” in Book Title, 2nd ed., I. Editor and J. Editor, Eds. City: Publisher, 2022, pp. 45–60.

[4] Organization Name, “Title of webpage,” Available: URL. [Accessed: 10 Jun. 2026].

All references must be verified for accuracy and consistency, and must follow IEEE formatting strictly to ensure indexing compatibility and academic integrity.

 

Preparing figures, schemes and tables

Figures, schemes, and tables are essential components of scientific manuscripts, providing a visual representation of data that enhances clarity, interpretability, and reproducibility of research findings. All visual elements should be prepared with high scientific and technical standards to ensure they accurately reflect the results described in the text. Authors are responsible for ensuring that all graphical materials are clear, properly labeled, and consistent with journal formatting requirements.

Resolution, color, and format

All figures and schemes must be submitted in a single compressed ZIP file during manuscript submission. Each file should be prepared at high resolution, preferably not less than 600 dpi, to ensure clarity in both print and digital formats. Acceptable file formats include PNG, JPEG, and TIFF. Authors are encouraged to use RGB color mode with 8-bit per channel for all color figures, as color publication is fully supported without additional charges.

To avoid formatting inconsistencies during production, images should be combined into complete figures rather than submitted as separate components with editable layers. All figures must be flattened, ensuring that no editable text or objects remain within the image file. Tables should be created using Microsoft Word’s built-in table function to maintain structural consistency and editing compatibility. Each table column must include a clear and descriptive heading to ensure readability.

Order and placement

All figures, schemes, and tables must be numbered sequentially according to their first citation in the manuscript text (e.g., Figure 1, Figure 2, Scheme 1, Scheme 2, Table 1, etc.). Each visual element should be placed as close as possible to its first mention in the main text to enhance readability and logical flow. Proper sequencing ensures that readers can easily follow the relationship between the narrative description and the corresponding visual data.

Content and presentation standards

Figures and schemes should contain only English text and standardized scientific notation. Mathematical symbols must be used correctly, and typographical consistency should be maintained throughout all visuals. Dashes, decimal points, and numerical formatting must follow international scientific conventions (e.g., decimal points instead of commas in decimal values).

All figures must be fully self-explanatory, containing all necessary labels, legends, and annotations. Unnecessary artifacts such as spelling correction underlines, editing marks, or extraneous formatting symbols must be removed prior to submission. Numbers equal to or greater than five digits should include comma separation for readability (e.g., 10,000 instead of 10000).

Each figure, scheme, and table must include a concise but descriptive title and an explanatory caption. Any symbols such as *, **, or # used within figures must be clearly defined in the caption. Captions should provide sufficient context so that the visual element can be understood independently of the main text.

 

Copyright and permissions

Authors must ensure that all figures, schemes, and tables are either original or properly adapted with appropriate permissions from copyright holders. When reproducing or modifying previously published materials, clear acknowledgment of the original source must be included in the caption, along with any required copyright statements. It is the responsibility of the authors to determine whether permission is required and to obtain such permission before submission.

Where applicable, copyright statements must be explicitly included in figure or table captions to comply with intellectual property regulations. Failure to secure appropriate permissions may result in delays or rejection during the editorial process.

Additional considerations

Authors are encouraged to ensure that all visual materials meet publication-quality standards prior to submission. Poor-quality images, inconsistent formatting, or unclear labeling may require revision during peer review or production stages. Professional figure preparation services may be considered to improve clarity and scientific communication when necessary.

 

Supplementary materials, data deposit and software source code

Biologica Aid Limited research data policies

Modern scientific publishing requires that research outputs are transparent, reproducible, and accessible. In line with this principle, authors are strongly encouraged to share all relevant research materials, including datasets, protocols, analytical procedures, computational workflows, and software codes. These resources should follow the FAIR principles—Findable, Accessible, Interoperable, and Reusable—so that other researchers can effectively validate and build upon published findings.

Biologica Aid Limited promotes open scientific exchange and supports data sharing as a fundamental part of the research lifecycle. Authors are encouraged to deposit their research data in trusted public repositories to ensure long-term accessibility and preservation. Where direct sharing is not possible due to ethical, legal, or privacy constraints, authors must clearly justify these restrictions in the “Data Availability Statement” and indicate how the data may be accessed upon reasonable request.

 

Data sharing principles and ethical considerations

Research data must only be shared when it complies with ethical approvals and participant consent agreements. Data involving human participants must be fully anonymized, and all sharing practices must comply with applicable data protection regulations. Any datasets that include sensitive or confidential information must be handled with caution, and restrictions must be explicitly stated at the time of submission.

In cases where access to data is restricted, authors may be required to provide metadata or summary datasets that allow partial validation of results. Journals may also request underlying datasets during peer review to ensure scientific rigor and transparency.

 

Data availability statements

All manuscripts must include a Data Availability Statement that clearly specifies the location and accessibility of research data. Examples include:

• If data are publicly available: “The datasets generated during the current study are available in [Repository Name] under DOI: [XXXX].”
• If data are available upon request: “The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.”
• If data are restricted: “The datasets are not publicly available due to privacy and ethical restrictions.”
• If no new data were generated: “No new data were created or analyzed in this study.”

These statements ensure clarity regarding data accessibility and support reproducibility in scientific research.

 

Data preservation and long-term accessibility

Authors are encouraged to preserve research data for a minimum period of at least five years following publication. Data should ideally be stored in institutional repositories or internationally recognized platforms that provide permanent identifiers such as DOIs. If a repository becomes unavailable, authors may be required to relocate the data and update the publication record accordingly.

Long-term preservation ensures that datasets remain accessible for future validation, replication, and secondary analysis. Institutions and funding agencies are encouraged to support sustainable data archiving strategies.

 

Selection of data repositories

Appropriate data repositories should be selected based on disciplinary relevance, long-term stability, and accessibility. Recommended repositories include those indexed in recognized directories such as re3data.org or FAIRsharing.org. Institutional repositories may also be used if they support standard metadata practices and assign persistent identifiers.

Preferred repositories should ensure:

• Long-term preservation of datasets
• Assignment of permanent identifiers (DOIs or equivalent)
• Open or controlled access without unnecessary barriers
• Support for standardized open licensing (e.g., CC-BY or CC0)
• Secure peer-review access when required

 

Data citation practices

All datasets referenced in the manuscript must be formally cited in the reference list, similar to traditional publications. This includes both primary datasets generated in the study and secondary datasets obtained from external sources. Proper citation ensures credit to data creators and enhances research transparency.

 

Software and source code availability

Where computational methods, algorithms, or software tools are developed as part of the study, authors are encouraged to make the source code publicly available. This may be done through repositories such as GitHub, GitLab, or institutional archives. The software description should include version information, system requirements, and any dependencies required for execution.

All computational workflows must be described in sufficient detail to allow replication. This includes input parameters, configuration settings, and analysis pipelines. If proprietary software is used, authors must clearly state the name, version, and provider.

 

Supplementary material submission

Additional materials that support but are not essential to the main manuscript may be submitted as supplementary files. These may include extended datasets, additional figures, tables, videos, or methodological details. Supplementary materials are reviewed alongside the main manuscript and must be clearly labeled and referenced within the main text.

Acceptable formats include commonly used non-proprietary file types such as PDF, CSV, XLSX, PNG, JPEG, or TIFF. All supplementary files should be prepared in a manner that ensures long-term accessibility and usability.

 

Handling of unpublished and restricted data

Data that are not yet published but are essential for interpretation of the study must be properly cited within the manuscript as “unpublished data” or “personal communication,” with appropriate justification. However, reliance on unpublished data should be minimized, and authors are encouraged to include such information in supplementary materials whenever possible.

 

Large datasets and specialized repositories

For large datasets exceeding 250 MB or complex datasets such as genomic, proteomic, or transcriptomic data, deposition in specialized repositories is mandatory. Examples include GenBank for nucleotide sequences, GEO for gene expression data, and ProteomeXchange for proteomics datasets. Accession numbers and repository links must be included in the manuscript prior to acceptance.

 

Deposition of sequence and omics data

All sequence-based data, including DNA, RNA, and protein sequences, must be submitted to appropriate international repositories before manuscript submission. Examples include GenBank, EMBL, DDBJ, GEO, ArrayExpress, and UniProt. Authors must provide accession numbers in the Materials and Methods section of the manuscript. Manuscripts without valid accession numbers may not proceed to publication.

 

Proteomics data submission

Proteomics datasets generated using mass spectrometry or related techniques must be deposited in recognized repositories such as PRIDE, jPOST, or ProteomeXchange. Authors should provide detailed methodological descriptions, including sample preparation, instrumentation settings, and analysis pipelines. Repository identifiers, dataset links, and access credentials (if required for peer review) must be clearly stated during submission.

 

Research ethics and publication ethics

Research ethics: core principles

All manuscripts submitted to IBN must comply with internationally accepted standards of research ethics, ensuring that scientific work is conducted responsibly, transparently, and with full respect for human dignity, animal welfare, environmental sustainability, and data integrity. Ethical research practice is considered an essential foundation of credible scientific publication rather than an administrative requirement. Authors are expected to follow globally recognized frameworks such as the Declaration of Helsinki (2013 revision), CIOMS guidelines, ICMJE recommendations, ARRIVE guidelines for animal research, and COPE standards for publication ethics. These frameworks collectively ensure that research is designed and conducted in a manner that minimizes harm, maximizes scientific value, and maintains public trust in scholarly communication. Any study that fails to meet these fundamental ethical expectations may be rejected regardless of its scientific novelty or methodological strength.

 

Research involving human subjects

Research involving human participants, human biological materials, identifiable data, or health-related personal information must receive prior approval from a recognized Institutional Review Board (IRB) or equivalent ethics committee before the study begins. Ethical approval is required not only for clinical trials but also for observational, behavioral, epidemiological, and survey-based research whenever human data is involved. Authors must clearly state in the manuscript that the study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki and must include essential details such as the name of the approving ethics committee, the protocol or project identification code, and the date of approval. A properly structured Institutional Review Board statement is mandatory for transparency and accountability.

In situations where ethical approval is not required, authors must provide a formal exemption issued by the relevant authority or cite applicable national legislation that explicitly waives the requirement for ethical review. Even in such cases, the ethical justification for exemption must be clearly described within the manuscript to ensure editorial transparency. The guiding principle is that absence of formal approval does not eliminate ethical responsibility.

 

Informed consent requirements

Informed consent represents a fundamental ethical obligation in all human-related research. Participants must be fully informed about the purpose of the study, procedures involved, potential risks and benefits, data usage, confidentiality protections, and their right to withdraw without penalty. Consent must be obtained freely without coercion or undue influence.

Written informed consent is required in studies involving clinical interventions, identifiable personal data, biological samples, or images and recordings of individuals. In such cases, authors must clearly declare that consent was obtained from all participants prior to inclusion in the study. In certain contexts such as ethnographic fieldwork or culturally sensitive environments where written consent is impractical, verbal consent may be accepted, provided that it is approved by the ethics committee and properly documented within the manuscript.

When identifiable information is included in a publication, additional consent for publication must be obtained. Participants must be made aware that published material may be permanently accessible in open-access formats and may be viewed globally. All identifying information should be anonymized unless it is scientifically necessary and explicitly consented to.

 

 

Clinical trials and registration requirements

Clinical trials are defined as prospective studies in which human participants are assigned to interventions with the aim of evaluating health-related outcomes. This includes pharmaceutical trials, surgical procedures, behavioral interventions, medical devices, and preventive strategies. All clinical trials must be registered in a publicly accessible registry such as ClinicalTrials.gov or other recognized international registries before the first participant is enrolled. Registration must include the registry name, registration number, and date of registration, which should be reported within the manuscript.

Observational studies such as cohort, case-control, or cross-sectional designs do not generally require registration unless mandated by funding agencies or institutional policies. However, transparency in study design and reporting remains essential in all cases. Randomized controlled trials must additionally comply with CONSORT guidelines, ensuring structured and complete reporting of trial design, participant flow, randomization procedures, and outcome assessment. Non-compliance with trial registration or reporting standards may result in rejection prior to peer review.

 

Ethical use of animals in research

Research involving animals must follow strict ethical principles that prioritize welfare and minimize suffering. All animal studies must comply with national legislation and institutional animal ethics committee approvals. Ethical justification is required to demonstrate that the scientific benefits outweigh potential harm to animals.

The guiding ethical framework is the principle of the Three Rs, which requires replacement of animals with alternative methods wherever possible, reduction in the number of animals used without compromising statistical validity, and refinement of experimental procedures to minimize pain, distress, and discomfort. Authors must describe housing conditions, feeding practices, veterinary supervision, and pain management strategies in sufficient detail to ensure reproducibility and ethical transparency.

For studies involving client-owned animals, informed consent from owners is mandatory, and veterinary care standards must be maintained throughout the research process. The ARRIVE guidelines must be followed to ensure transparent reporting of experimental design, randomization, blinding, and outcome reporting.

 

Cell line, plant, and biological materials ethics

Research involving cell lines must clearly indicate the origin, authentication status, and ethical approval where applicable. For human-derived cell lines, informed consent and institutional approval must be documented. Misidentified or contaminated cell lines are considered a serious violation of scientific integrity.

Similarly, research involving plant materials must comply with biodiversity conservation regulations and international agreements such as the Convention on Biological Diversity. Authors must provide details of sample collection, geographic origin, and voucher specimen deposition in recognized repositories or herbaria. Studies involving rare or endangered species require additional justification and may be subject to enhanced editorial scrutiny.

 

Dual-use research and biosecurity

Certain scientific research may have dual-use potential, meaning that it could be misapplied to cause harm to public health, agriculture, or national security. Such research must be clearly identified and carefully evaluated. Authors are required to disclose any potential risks and describe mitigation strategies. Manuscripts involving biosecurity-sensitive materials, pathogenic organisms, or high-risk technologies may require additional editorial assessment before peer review.

 

Sex and gender considerations in research

IBN encourages authors to incorporate sex and gender analysis wherever scientifically relevant. Biological sex and sociocultural gender must be clearly distinguished in study design and reporting. Authors should provide sex-disaggregated data when applicable and justify the exclusion of such analysis when it is not included. This ensures that research outcomes are inclusive, representative, and scientifically robust.

 

Publication ethics and scientific integrity

IBN maintains a strict zero-tolerance policy toward scientific misconduct. Plagiarism in any form, including text, data, figures, or ideas, is not permitted. Data fabrication, falsification, inappropriate image manipulation, duplicate publication, and unethical authorship practices are considered serious violations. All manuscripts undergo ethical screening, and suspected misconduct may result in rejection, retraction, or institutional notification. Authors are expected to ensure that their work is original, accurately reported, and properly cited.

 

Authorship and contribution ethics

Authorship must reflect substantial intellectual contribution to the research. This includes involvement in study design, data acquisition, analysis, interpretation, manuscript drafting, or critical revision. All authors must approve the final version of the manuscript and accept responsibility for the integrity of the work. Honorary authorship, ghost authorship, and coercive authorship are strictly prohibited under IBN policy.

 

Conflicts of interest

All authors must disclose any financial or non-financial relationships that could influence the interpretation of research findings. This includes funding sources, institutional affiliations, consultancy roles, or personal relationships that may affect objectivity. If no conflicts exist, authors must clearly state that no conflicts of interest are present. Transparency in this regard is essential to maintain trust in the scientific record.

 

Data integrity and transparency

IBN requires that all research data be accurate, reproducible, and accessible when ethically and legally possible. Authors are expected to retain raw data and make it available for verification upon request. Data fabrication, selective reporting, or failure to provide supporting datasets when required is considered a breach of research integrity. Data sharing should follow ethical, privacy, and legal constraints while promoting openness and reproducibility.

 

Editorial independence and peer review ethics

All manuscripts submitted to IBN are subjected to independent peer review conducted by qualified experts. Editorial decisions are based solely on scientific merit, methodological quality, and ethical compliance. Editors and reviewers must avoid conflicts of interest and maintain strict confidentiality throughout the review process. Authors may suggest reviewers; however, final selection remains entirely at the discretion of the editorial board.

 

Research involving cell lines

Research involving cell lines must be reported with full transparency regarding their origin, authentication status, and ethical compliance. In all manuscripts submitted to IBN, authors are required to clearly specify the source of each cell line used in the study. For established and widely used cell lines, the provenance must be explicitly stated, including whether the cells were obtained from recognized biological resource centers, commercial suppliers, or other academic laboratories. In such cases, appropriate citations to original publications describing the cell line or references to commercial catalog entries must be included to ensure traceability and reproducibility of the experimental system.

When previously unpublished or newly developed (de novo) cell lines are used, the manuscript must provide detailed information regarding their derivation, including the institutional approval process under which they were generated. If the cell line originates from human tissue, authors must confirm that written informed consent was obtained from donors or participants, and that the development of the cell line complied with applicable ethical standards and institutional review board (IRB) regulations. In addition, ethical approval codes, approval dates, and the name of the approving committee must be clearly stated in the ethics declaration section of the manuscript.

Cell line authentication is considered an essential requirement for publication. Authors are strongly encouraged to report validation methods such as short tandem repeat (STR) profiling, karyotyping, or other molecular authentication techniques used to confirm identity and exclude cross-contamination. Any modifications, genetic manipulations, or engineered derivatives of cell lines must also be described in sufficient detail to allow replication by independent researchers.

An example of appropriate reporting is as follows: the HCT116 colorectal carcinoma cell line was obtained from a certified cell repository and authenticated prior to experimentation; the MLH1-complemented variant was provided by an institutional collaborator under material transfer agreement; reporter constructs such as DR-GFP and SA-GFP were obtained from recognized academic sources, with full attribution provided in the manuscript.

Failure to provide adequate documentation regarding cell line origin and ethical compliance may result in editorial rejection or requests for revision prior to peer review.

 

Research involving plants

All experimental research involving plants, whether cultivated, domesticated, or wild species, must adhere to institutional, national, and international regulations governing biodiversity, conservation, and genetic resource use. Authors are expected to comply with relevant frameworks such as the Convention on Biological Diversity and the Convention on International Trade in Endangered Species of Wild Fauna and Flora (CITES), particularly when plant material is sourced from protected or regulated environments.

For each study involving plant material, authors must clearly document the taxonomic identity, genetic background (where applicable), and geographical origin of specimens. In studies involving non-model, rare, or endangered plant species, the deposition of voucher specimens in a recognized herbarium or botanical repository is strongly recommended and may be required for verification. Voucher records should include complete collection information, including geographic coordinates (GPS data), elevation where relevant, collection date, habitat description, and the specific plant parts used in the study.

Where plant materials are obtained through collaboration or donation, authors must acknowledge the provider and confirm compliance with all applicable material transfer and conservation agreements. For genetically modified plants or experimental cultivars, details of transformation methods, genetic constructs, and selection procedures must be fully described.

An example of proper reporting includes specifying cultivars, source institutions, and provider acknowledgments, ensuring traceability of biological material. For Arabidopsis or other model organisms, accession numbers for mutant lines or transgenic constructs should be included wherever applicable.

Submissions lacking adequate documentation of plant material origin, or failing to comply with biodiversity and conservation policies, may be subject to rejection by the editorial office.

 

Dual-use research of concern

IBN adheres to strict policies regarding dual-use research of concern (DURC), defined as scientific work that may reasonably be anticipated to provide knowledge, products, or technologies that could be misapplied to pose a significant threat to public health, agriculture, the environment, or national security.

Authors are required to explicitly declare any potential dual-use implications of their work at the time of submission. This includes research involving pathogenic organisms, synthetic biology, genetic engineering, chemical agents, or technologies with potential military or harmful applications. When such concerns exist, authors must provide a detailed justification demonstrating that the anticipated societal and scientific benefits outweigh any associated risks.

Editorial evaluation of dual-use research includes assessment of biosafety measures, containment protocols, and compliance with relevant national and international regulations. Manuscripts identified as potentially high-risk may require additional expert review prior to acceptance.

 

Sex and gender in research

IBN encourages all authors to incorporate sex and gender considerations into study design, analysis, interpretation, and reporting wherever scientifically relevant. The distinction between sex as a biological attribute and gender as a social and cultural construct must be clearly maintained throughout the manuscript to avoid conceptual ambiguity.

Where applicable, manuscripts should specify the sex of biological samples, experimental organisms, or human participants in both the abstract and main text. If differences in sex or gender are expected based on prior literature or biological rationale, these should be explicitly addressed in the study design and hypothesis formulation. Furthermore, data should be disaggregated by sex or gender when statistically and methodologically appropriate.

If sex- or gender-based analyses are not performed, authors must provide a clear scientific justification in the discussion section. Failure to address these considerations without justification may be viewed as a methodological limitation during peer review.

 

Borders and territories

IBN maintains strict neutrality regarding geopolitical boundaries, territorial claims, and jurisdictional disputes. Any references to geographic regions, maps, institutional affiliations, or study locations must be presented in a manner that does not imply institutional or editorial endorsement of contested borders or political positions.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that all geographic descriptions are accurate, neutral, and consistent with internationally recognized standards. In cases where disputes exist, the editorial office reserves the right to modify or clarify such references to maintain neutrality.

 

Publication ethics statement

IBN is committed to maintaining the highest standards of publication ethics and fully adheres to the principles established by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). All submitted manuscripts are subject to rigorous ethical screening, including checks for plagiarism, data fabrication, image manipulation, inappropriate authorship practices, and citation manipulation.

Authors are expected to present their research findings accurately, transparently, and without fabrication or selective reporting. All methods and datasets must be described in sufficient detail to enable reproducibility by independent researchers. Any conflicts of interest, whether financial, institutional, or personal, must be disclosed clearly within the manuscript.

Simultaneous submission of the same manuscript to multiple journals is strictly prohibited. Likewise, redundant publication, including duplicate submission or salami slicing of datasets without justification, is not permitted. Translated versions of previously published work may be considered only when full transparency is provided and proper permissions are obtained.

IBN applies plagiarism detection tools to all submissions. Any form of plagiarism, including self-plagiarism without citation, is treated as a serious ethical violation. Manipulation of images, figures, or data is strictly prohibited, including inappropriate enhancement, duplication, or selective omission of data elements.

In cases of suspected misconduct, the editorial office reserves the right to contact authors’ institutions or funding bodies and to take corrective action, including rejection, correction, or retraction of published work.

 

 

 

Citation policy

All manuscripts submitted to IBN must adhere to strict citation standards to ensure academic integrity and intellectual honesty. Authors must properly acknowledge all sources of ideas, data, text, and figures used in their work, including their own previously published research when relevant.

Excessive self-citation, coercive citation, or citation of irrelevant sources is strongly discouraged. Authors must not reproduce references without having read the original source material, and must avoid citation of non-scholarly, promotional, or advertorial content unless scientifically justified.

Direct quotations from other works must be clearly indicated and appropriately referenced. Citation practices should be guided by fairness, relevance, and contribution to the scientific argument rather than personal or institutional preference.

 

Reviewer suggestions

During manuscript submission to IBN, authors are required to recommend three independent potential reviewers who possess relevant expertise in the subject area of the study. These suggested reviewers are intended to support the editorial evaluation process by providing informed, unbiased, and scientifically rigorous assessments of the submitted work. However, it is important to note that the editorial board retains full discretion in selecting reviewers, and the suggested individuals may or may not be invited to participate in the peer review process.

For each recommended reviewer, authors must provide complete and verifiable professional information. This includes full name, institutional affiliation, departmental address, country, official institutional email address, and, where available, a professional homepage or ORCID profile. In certain cases, contact telephone numbers may also be requested to ensure accurate identification and communication. All information provided must be current and accurate to facilitate reviewer verification.

To maintain transparency and avoid conflicts of interest, proposed reviewers must not have any recent or ongoing collaborative relationships with any of the manuscript’s authors. Specifically, individuals who have co-authored publications, shared research grants, or engaged in institutional collaborations with any author within the past three years are considered ineligible. Furthermore, reviewers should not be affiliated with the same institution as any of the authors, as institutional independence is required to ensure objectivity in peer review.

Authors are encouraged to select reviewers based on demonstrable expertise in the relevant field of study. Suitable reviewers may include researchers whose work is frequently cited in the manuscript, subject-matter experts in closely related disciplines, or members of recognized editorial boards of international journals. However, citation alone does not imply suitability, and all suggestions must meet ethical and professional standards.

IBN emphasizes that reviewer selection is guided by integrity, impartiality, and scientific competence. Detailed information regarding reviewer qualifications, responsibilities, confidentiality obligations, and ethical standards can be accessed through the official reviewer guidelines provided by the journal.

 

Extensive english editing

It is the responsibility of the authors to ensure that all manuscripts submitted to IBN are written in clear, correct, and scientifically appropriate English. The linguistic quality of a manuscript plays a critical role in the peer review process, as clarity of expression directly affects the interpretation of scientific findings, methodological rigor, and overall scholarly communication.

The publication fee associated with IBN includes only basic language correction, which is limited to minor grammatical, typographical, and stylistic improvements performed by professional language editors. This basic level of editing is intended solely to enhance readability and does not involve substantial rewriting, restructuring of scientific content, or improvement of argumentation flow.

If a manuscript requires extensive language correction—such as major grammatical restructuring, reorganization of paragraphs, rewriting of unclear sections, or improvement of academic tone—the responsibility remains with the authors to address these issues prior to submission. Manuscripts requiring extensive English editing may be returned during the technical screening stage or editorial pre-review stage, which can significantly delay the publication timeline.

Authors are strongly encouraged to seek assistance from qualified English-speaking colleagues, institutional language support services, or professional scientific editing providers before submission. Ensuring linguistic quality at the submission stage increases the likelihood of smooth peer review progression and reduces editorial delays. In addition, professional editing services can assist in improving clarity, coherence, and adherence to international scientific writing standards.

IBN reserves the right to request language revision at any stage of the editorial process if the quality of English is deemed insufficient for accurate scientific evaluation.

 

Copyediting and english editing services

We do not offer extensive copy editing as part of the production process. If you believe that your manuscript would benefit from professional editing, we recommend considering a copy editing or language editing service. You can opt for this service either before submission or during the revision stage.

We have an affiliated service provider, Genesis Research Consultancy Limited that offers these services. As an author submitting to IBN, you are eligible for a 15% discount on your first submission to either of these services.

-Claim your 15% Discount on English editing from Genesis Research Consultancy Limited

Please be aware that the use of an editing service is at your own expense and does not guarantee the selection of your article for peer review or its acceptance for publication.

 

Preprints and conference papers

IBN supports the dissemination of scientific knowledge through responsible pre-publication practices. Manuscripts that have previously been shared as preprints on recognized servers are eligible for submission, provided that they have not undergone formal peer review in any journal prior to submission. Authors must clearly disclose the existence of any preprint version at the time of submission, including the repository name and permanent digital identifier.

The posting of a manuscript as a preprint does not influence the peer review or editorial decision-making process within IBN. Preprint servers operate independently, and prior dissemination in such platforms does not constitute prior publication. However, authors must ensure that any subsequent revisions made during journal submission are clearly distinguished from the preprint version, and that the final published article accurately reflects all editorial and peer review changes.

Conference papers may also be considered for publication in IBN, provided that they have been substantially expanded and revised into a full-length research article. Acceptable expansion includes significant addition of experimental data, methodological improvement, deeper analysis, and extended discussion that goes beyond the original conference proceedings. Simply reproducing or lightly modifying a conference paper is not sufficient for journal publication.

Where a conference paper forms the basis of a submitted manuscript, authors must clearly cite the original version and explicitly state the nature and extent of modifications in the cover letter and manuscript introduction. In cases where copyright of the conference material is held by a third party, authors must obtain appropriate permissions prior to submission. Unpublished or minimally modified conference manuscripts that do not meet these requirements may be redirected to appropriate proceedings journals.

 

Authorship

IBN follows internationally recognized authorship standards consistent with the guidelines of the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE). Authorship is reserved exclusively for individuals who have made substantial intellectual contributions to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the research.

To qualify as an author, an individual must have contributed meaningfully to at least one of the core components of the research process, including study design, data acquisition, data analysis, interpretation of findings, or the development of new methodologies or software tools. In addition, all authors must have participated in drafting the manuscript or critically revising it for important intellectual content. Final approval of the submitted version is mandatory for all listed authors.

Furthermore, each author must agree to be accountable for the integrity of the entire work, including ensuring that any questions regarding accuracy, transparency, or ethical compliance are appropriately addressed. This shared responsibility extends beyond individual contributions and encompasses the overall reliability of the published study.

Individuals who contribute to the research but do not meet all authorship criteria should be acknowledged in the acknowledgments section rather than listed as authors. This includes technical assistants, administrative support staff, or individuals who provided general supervision without direct intellectual contribution.

Any changes to authorship, including addition, removal, or reordering of authors, must be agreed upon by all co-authors, including those affected by the change. The corresponding author serves as the primary communication link between the journal and all co-authors and is responsible for ensuring full transparency in authorship declarations.

IBN reserves the right to verify authorship compliance and request confirmation that all listed authors meet the required criteria.

 

Editorial independence

IBN maintains a strict policy of editorial independence to ensure that all publication decisions are based solely on scientific merit and ethical standards. Editorial decisions are made independently by qualified academic editors and peer reviewers, without influence from journal administrative staff, sponsors, or external parties.

Manuscript evaluation is guided by three fundamental principles: the appropriateness and expertise of selected reviewers, the scientific quality and validity of reviewer assessments and author responses, and the overall originality, rigor, and contribution of the research to the field. Decisions regarding acceptance, revision, or rejection are based exclusively on these criteria.

Editorial staff and journal management are strictly prohibited from influencing acceptance decisions. All manuscripts undergo independent peer review, and final decisions are made by academic editors or editorial board members who have no conflict of interest with the authors or subject matter.

In cases where editorial board members or staff submit manuscripts to IBN, such submissions are handled independently and are assigned to external reviewers and independent editors to eliminate conflicts of interest. Staff members involved in journal administration are excluded from any editorial handling of their own work.

 

Conflicts of interest

Transparency in potential conflicts of interest is a fundamental requirement for publication in IBN. Authors must disclose any financial, institutional, professional, or personal relationships that could be perceived as influencing the interpretation or presentation of research findings.

Financial conflicts may include employment, consultancy roles, honoraria, stock ownership, funded research, patent applications, or any other form of monetary benefit related to the subject of the manuscript. Non-financial conflicts may include personal relationships, academic competition, ideological positions, or institutional affiliations that could influence objectivity.

All disclosures must be clearly stated in a dedicated “Conflicts of Interest” section within the manuscript, placed immediately before the reference list. Authors must ensure that all relevant disclosures are complete, accurate, and consistent with submission system declarations.

If no conflicts exist, authors must explicitly state this by declaring that there are no conflicts of interest. In cases where funding sponsors have no role in study design, data collection, analysis, interpretation, manuscript preparation, or publication decisions, this must also be clearly indicated.

IBN adheres to international ethical standards, including those established by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors, and enforces strict policies to ensure transparency and integrity in all published research.

 

Editorial process and peer review

IBN follows a structured, transparent, and integrity-driven editorial workflow designed to ensure that all published manuscripts meet high scientific, methodological, and ethical standards. The editorial process is organized into sequential stages including initial technical assessment, academic evaluation, peer review, decision-making, revision, and final production. Each stage is governed by strict quality-control mechanisms to ensure fairness, consistency, and scientific rigor.

 

Pre-check

Immediately after submission, each manuscript undergoes an initial technical pre-check conducted by the journal’s Managing Editor. This stage serves as a preliminary screening step to ensure that the submission meets the basic requirements for further consideration within IBN. The evaluation focuses on several key aspects, including the overall relevance of the manuscript to the journal’s scope, adherence to submission guidelines, and compliance with fundamental ethical and scientific standards. Manuscripts that fail to meet these baseline criteria may be returned to authors for correction or may be declined without proceeding to peer review.

In addition to technical screening, the manuscript is forwarded to the appropriate academic editor, such as the Editor-in-Chief for standard submissions, a Guest Editor for Special Issue submissions, or an assigned Editorial Board Member in cases where conflicts of interest exist. The academic editor is responsible for conducting an independent editorial pre-assessment of the manuscript.

During this phase, the academic editor evaluates the scientific merit of the submission, including the clarity of the research question, appropriateness of methodology, adequacy of experimental design, and relevance of cited literature. The academic editor also assesses whether the manuscript demonstrates sufficient originality and contribution to the field to justify external peer review. Based on this evaluation, the academic editor may decide to reject the manuscript at this stage, request preliminary revisions before peer review, or proceed with the full peer review process. When appropriate, the academic editor may also recommend suitable reviewers based on subject-matter expertise.

 

Peer review

Once a manuscript successfully passes the pre-check stage, it enters the formal peer review process. At least two independent external experts are assigned to evaluate the manuscript. IBN employs a single-blind peer review model in which reviewers are aware of the authors’ identities, while the authors remain unaware of the reviewers’ identities. This approach is designed to ensure accountability while maintaining reviewer confidentiality.

Peer review is intended to provide an objective and critical assessment of the manuscript’s scientific validity, methodological robustness, originality, clarity, and significance. Reviewers are expected to evaluate the study design, data quality, analytical methods, interpretation of results, and overall contribution to the field. All peer review reports are treated as strictly confidential documents.

In-house editorial staff coordinate the reviewer selection process, which may include recommendations from academic editors and members of the Editorial Board. Authors may also suggest potential reviewers; however, all suggested reviewers are subject to strict eligibility screening. Individuals who have co-authored with any of the manuscript’s authors within the past three years, who share institutional affiliation with the authors, or who have any conflict of interest are excluded from participation.

IBN maintains rigorous conflict-of-interest safeguards during reviewer selection to ensure impartiality and scientific objectivity. Detailed ethical guidelines governing reviewer conduct and eligibility are applied throughout the process.

The journal also offers an optional open peer review model. Under this system, authors may choose to publish peer review reports and editorial decisions alongside the final article. In addition, reviewers may opt to disclose their identities and sign their reviews. Participation in open peer review is voluntary and may be modified by authors prior to publication. Once the manuscript is published, changes to open peer review status are made only at the discretion of the editorial leadership.

 

Editorial decision and revision

Following peer review, the handling editor communicates the editorial decision based on reviewer reports and academic evaluation. All manuscripts published in IBN undergo at least two independent peer reviews before a final decision is made.

The editorial decision may fall into one of several categories. A manuscript may be accepted following minor revision when the scientific content is fundamentally sound but requires limited corrections, clarifications, or improvements in presentation. Authors are typically given a short timeframe to address minor revisions, although extensions may be granted upon justified request.

In cases requiring substantial modification, the manuscript may be designated for major revision. This indicates that while the study has potential scientific merit, significant improvements are required in methodology, analysis, interpretation, or presentation. Authors are required to provide a detailed, point-by-point response to all reviewer and editorial comments, clearly explaining how each concern has been addressed or, where applicable, providing a scientific justification for any disagreement. Revised manuscripts may undergo additional rounds of review, typically limited to two major revision cycles.

If the manuscript requires further experimental validation or substantial additional data to support its conclusions, it may be rejected with encouragement to resubmit after major revision. In such cases, authors are expected to conduct additional research and submit a substantially improved version for fresh evaluation.

Manuscripts that contain fundamental methodological flaws, lack originality, or fail to meet the scientific standards of the journal may be rejected outright without the possibility of resubmission. Such decisions are final unless explicitly stated otherwise by the editorial office.

Authors must respond to reviewer comments in a structured and transparent manner. Disagreements with reviewer recommendations must be scientifically justified and clearly articulated. Failure to provide adequate responses may delay the editorial process or result in rejection.

If communication between the editorial office and authors is interrupted for an extended period during review or production, the journal reserves the right to withdraw the manuscript from consideration after appropriate notification.

Author appeals

IBN maintains a formal appeal process for authors who wish to contest a rejection decision. Appeals must be submitted within three months of the editorial decision and must include a detailed justification for reconsideration. Authors are required to provide a comprehensive, point-by-point response addressing all reviewer and editorial comments.

Appeals are reviewed independently and are forwarded to a designated Editorial Board Member who was not involved in the original decision. This ensures an impartial reassessment of the manuscript. The assigned academic editor evaluates the appeal and may recommend acceptance, additional peer review, or confirmation of the original rejection.

The final decision is validated by the Editor-in-Chief or designated senior editorial authority. Appeal decisions are considered final and cannot be further contested within the journal system.

 

Production and publication

Once a manuscript is accepted for publication, it enters the production phase. During this stage, the article undergoes professional copy-editing, formatting, language polishing, and typographical correction. Authors are given the opportunity to review proofs and approve final corrections prior to publication.

The production process includes pagination, metadata assignment, indexing preparation, and final online publication on the official IBN platform. Authors are expected to carefully review all proofs to ensure accuracy and completeness.

After acceptance, major modifications to the scientific content are generally not permitted. Only minor corrections related to formatting, grammar, or typographical errors may be allowed. Any request for substantive changes to the main text must be submitted to the editorial office with clear justification and is subject to additional editorial evaluation.

IBN is committed to ensuring rapid yet rigorous publication, maintaining both scientific integrity and production quality at every stage of the editorial workflow.