Submission Guidelines (View the Scope)
Submit your manuscript at : editor@phytomedbotany.com
Submission of Manuscript: Authors are requested to submit their manuscripts only online (currently using email). Only papers of high scientific quality will be accepted for publication. The manuscript will be analyzed for plagiarism with Turnitin before acceptance for the review process. Acceptance of papers is the sole discretion of the Editor based on the recommendations from the Chief Editor, editorial board members, and additional reviewers. Manuscripts submitted will be subjected to peer review by two reviewers familiar with the relevant field of research, being from a different country or at least from another institution from the author. Authors may suggest names and addresses of two experts who, in their opinion, can review the paper. The choice of referees will, however, remain with the editorial board. After the review process, the Editor will inform the about the acceptance, rejection, or necessity of revision of the manuscript to the corresponding author.
Manuscript types:
Format of Manuscript: All manuscripts must be written in English and typed double-spaced with a 2.5 cm margin on all sides.
Submission Process, email us:
Research Articles and Research Notes:
The paper must be arranged in the following order with all pages with line numbers in a single word document:-
Title (Separate Page): The title page should contain the following details
Title of the article (maximum of 90 characters)
Name in full form of the author(s) (first name and last name)
Affiliation(s) of author(s) with full address including mail ID(s)
Contributions of the author(s) for the manuscript
Abstract must be compact and concise and written with up to 300 words highlighting the Background, Methods, Results, and Conclusion of the manuscript
Keywords: 5-6 keywords should be given for easy indexing of the article.
Introduction should review the relevant knowledge of the subject and with a concise statement of the objectives of the study.
Materials and Methods should include brief technical descriptions of the methodology adopted with proper citation, while a detailed description is required if the methods are new.
Results should contain observations on the experiment illustrated by tables and figures. Using a well-known statistical test, obscure and poor statistical methods might be liable for rejection.
Discussion must not recapitulate results but should relate the author's experiments to other work on the subject and give their conclusions.
Conclusions should summarize the central state of these findings, implications for further research, recommendations, and limitations.
Acknowledgments: If any, should be brief and given only for specific guidance, assistance, financial grants, etc., not for routine facilities.
Author contributions: This part should contain information about how the authors in which aspect they contributed to the development of the data and manuscript.
AI Tool Usage Declaration: The authors should declare that no AI and associated tools are used for writing scientific content in the article
References: Standard APA style.
Review Articles
Review articles are a great way to bring together existing research on a particular topic. They come in various formats, each with its own unique structure.
a. Systematic Reviews:
Title Page: Should be clear and informative, including the authors' affiliations.
Abstract: This should be structured (think Background, Objectives, Data Sources, Study Eligibility, Data Extraction and Synthesis, Results, Conclusions) and typically ranges from 250 to 300 words.
Keywords: Include 3 to 5 relevant keywords.
Introduction: Offer some background on the topic, explain why the review is necessary, and clearly state the research question(s) (using the PICO format is recommended for clinical topics).
Methods: Provide a detailed account of your search strategy (including databases, keywords, and filters), criteria for selecting studies (inclusion/exclusion), how you extracted data, assessed risk of bias, and the methods used for data synthesis (like qualitative synthesis or meta-analysis). Following PRISMA guidelines is highly encouraged.
Results: Present the search results (using a PRISMA flow diagram), describe the characteristics of the included studies, share findings from the risk of bias assessment, and summarize the synthesized evidence clearly.
Discussion: Interpret the findings, discuss the limitations of the review, consider implications for practice or future research, and draw overall conclusions.
Conclusion: Offer a brief recap of the main findings.
References: Include a comprehensive list of all works cited.
Appendices (Optional): You can add search strategies, data extraction forms, and risk of bias tools.
Word Limit (excluding abstract, references, tables, and figures): Aim for 5,000 to 8,000 words.
Figures/Tables: You can include up to 8.
b. Meta-Analyses:
Title Page: Should be concise and informative.
Abstract: An unstructured summary that captures the scope, key findings, and conclusions (200-250 words).
Keywords: Include 3-5 relevant keywords.
Introduction: Provides background on the topic, the rationale for the review, and outlines what the review will cover.
Methods: A thorough explanation of the statistical techniques used in the meta-analysis, such as fixed-effect and random-effect models, assessing heterogeneity, subgroup analysis, sensitivity analysis, and evaluating publication bias.
Results: This section showcases forest plots, funnel plots (if relevant), heterogeneity statistics, and pooled effect estimates along with their confidence intervals.
Word Limit (excluding abstract, references, tables, and figures): 5,000-8,000 words.
Figures/Tables: You can include up to 10, which can feature forest plots and funnel plots.
c. Comprehensive Narrative Reviews:
Title Page: Should be concise and informative.
Abstract: An unstructured summary that captures the scope, key findings, and conclusions (200-250 words).
Keywords: Include 3-5 relevant keywords.
