About the Journal

Focus and Scope

The main focus of Journal of Maize Research and Development (JMRD) is to serve as a platform for the international scholars, academicians, researchers, and extensonists to share the innovative research findings in maize. The JMRD is an online open access international, peer reviewed and official journal published annually in month of December by National Maize Research Program, Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal. This Journal is dedicated to publishing high-quality original research and review articles on the following fields:

maize breeding,
genetics,
agronomy,
entomology,
pathology,
post harvest,
soil science,
botany,
physiology,
conservation agriculture
climate change effect on maize,
maize economics,
up-scaling research on maize
plant biotechnological approaches for maize improvement.

Peer Review Process

Conducting the Review
The Journal of Maize Research and Development (JMRD) is peer review journal. Peer review is the collaborative process that allows manuscripts submitted to a journal to be evaluated and commented upon by independent experts within the same field of research. Upon receipt, manuscripts are assessed for their suitability for publication by the editorial staff. Only the manuscripts meeting the journal’s general criteria for consideration are sent out for review. Reviewing needs to be conducted confidentially, the articles should not be disclosed to a third party.

Peer-review publication policies
All contributions submitted to this journal that are selected for peer review are sent to at least one, but usually two or more, independent reviewers, selected by the editors. Authors are welcome to suggest suitable independent reviewers and may also request that the journal excludes one or two individuals or laboratories. The journal sympathetically considers such requests and usually honours them, but the editor’s decision on the choice of referees is final.

Editors, authors and reviewers are required to keep confidential all details of the editorial and peer review process on submitted manuscripts. Unless otherwise declared as a part of open peer review, the peer review process is confidential and conducted anonymously; identities of reviewers are not released. Reviewers must maintain confidentiality of manuscripts. If a reviewer wishes to seek advice from colleagues while assessing a manuscript, the reviewer must consult with the editor and should ensure that confidentiality is maintained and that the names of any such colleagues are provided to the journal with the final report. Regardless of whether a submitted manuscript is eventually published, correspondence with the journal, referees’ reports and other confidential material must not be published, disclosed or otherwise publicised without prior written consent. Reviewers should be aware that it is our policy to keep their names confidential and that we do our utmost to ensure this confidentiality. We cannot, however, guarantee to maintain this confidentiality in the face of a successful legal action to disclose identity.

The publisher reserves the right to contact funders, regulatory bodies, journals and the authors’ institutions in cases of suspected research or publishing misconduct.

Peer review process for JMRD journal
This journal follows a “Double Blind Review” where both the reviewer and the author are anonymous. Articles are considered on the basis of the content of papers. Reviewers can often identify the author through their writing style, subject matter or self-citation. Only research and review articles related to maize are considered for journal. Normally review process takes one month. Immediately after getting reviewer comments/ suggestions manuscripts are sent to authors for improvement of their article. Reviewer are invited by editor-in-chief or editors through request made via email. Reviewers come from national or international territory. Reviewers are assigned to review articles in their own particular field of expertise. The general process of review is as below;

Authors submit an article (referred as manuscript).
The editor-in-chief (EiC) verifies relevance of the manuscript to the journal’s scope, format, quality and its authorship.
EiC assign manuscript to associate EiC/ editors who evaluate the technical aspects of the paper fairly and fully.
Associate EiC/editors invite three referees to evaluate the technical quality of the paper.
When reviews are received from referees, associate EiC/editors evaluate the reviews and submit the final decision for acceptance/rejection of the manuscript.
All rejected manuscripts are permanently closed and authors are informed about the decision.
For accepted papers, authors are asked to revise manuscript according to reviewers comments and submit the final version within the given time period.
All final revised papers are returned to EiC who give final shape of the papers. Finally papers are published on journal website as soon as they become ready after typesetting and proof reading.

Reviewers should check the following parameters;

Articles are of outstanding scientific importance
Adherence to the Author Guidelines
complete organization of articles
Appropriateness of title and abstract
Appropriateness and adequacy of methodology
Appropriateness of figures and tables
Relevance of discussion
Soundness of conclusions and interpretation
Appropriateness of referencing

Structure
Is the article clearly laid out? Are all the key elements (where relevant) present: abstract, introduction, methodology, results, conclusions? Consider each element in turn:

Title: Does it clearly describe the article?
Abstract: Does it reflect the content of the article?
Introduction: Does it describe what the author hoped to achieve accurately, and clearly state the problem being investigated? Normally, the introduction should summarize relevant research to provide context, and explain what other authors’ findings, if any, are being challenged or extended. It should describe the experiment, the hypothesis(es) and the general experimental design or method.
Method: Does the author accurately explain how the data was collected? Is the design suitable for answering the question posed? Is there sufficient information present for you to replicate the research? Does the article identify the procedures followed? Are these ordered in a meaningful way? If the methods are new, are they explained in detail? Was the sampling appropriate? Have the equipment and materials been adequately described? Does the article make it clear what type of data was recorded; has the author been precise in describing measurements?
Results: This is where the author/s should explain in words what he/she discovered in the research. It should be clearly laid out and in a logical sequence. You will need to consider if the appropriate analysis has been conducted. Are the statistics correct? If you are not comfortable with statistics, please advise the editor when you submit your report. Interpretation of results should not be included in this section.
Conclusion/Discussion: Are the claims in this section supported by the results, do they seem reasonable? Have the authors indicated how the results relate to expectations and to earlier research? Does the article support or contradict previous theories? Does the conclusion explain how the research has moved the body of scientific knowledge forward?
Language: If an article is poorly written due to grammatical errors, while it may make it more difficult to understand the science, you do not need to correct the English. You should bring this to the attention of the editor, however.

Finally, on balance, when considering the whole article, do the figures and tables inform the reader, are they an important part of the story? Do the figures describe the data accurately? Are they consistent, e.g. bars in charts are the same width, the scales on the axis are logical.

Previous Research
If the article builds upon previous research does it reference that work appropriately? Are there any important works that have been omitted? Are the references accurate?

Ethical Issues

Plagiarism: If you suspect that an article is a substantial copy of another work, please let the editor know, citing the previous work in as much detail as possible
Fraud: It is very difficult to detect the determined fraudster, but if you suspect the results in an article to be untrue, discuss it with the editor. Whether it contains ideas and language without properly crediting the sources?
Other ethical concerns: Do you have any financial conflict with the authors of the manuscript?. Are the author accept the conditions to keep the used data at least for 3 years safe after the publication of the data?

The reviewers should reject the manuscripts if they observed below faults;

Mismatch with the journal

The manuscript does not make a contribution to new knowledge in the discipline or the application of knowledge
Manuscripts that lie outside the stated aims and scope of the journal
Topics that are not of interest to the journal’s readership
Manuscripts that do not follow the format specified by the journal

Flaws in study design

Poorly formulated research question
Choice of a weak or unreliable method
Choice of an incorrect method or model
Inappropriate statistical analysis
Unreliable or incomplete data
Inappropriate or suboptimal instrumentation
Small or inappropriately chosen sample

Poor writing and organization

Introduction that does not establish the background of the problem studied
Inadequate description of methods
Discussion that only repeats the results but does not interpret them
Insufficient explanation of the rationale for the study
Insufficient literature review
Conclusions that do not appear to be supported by the study data

Inadequate preparation of the manuscript

Failure to follow the journal’s Instructions for Authors
Sentences that are not clear and concise
Title, abstract are not persuasive
Wordiness and excessive use of jargon
Poor grammar or spelling mistakes
Poorly designed tables or figures

After reviewing the manuscripts carefully the reviewers should make their recommendations as below;

a) Rejected due to poor quality, or out of scope
b) Accept without revision
c) Accept but needs revision (either major, moderate or minor)

In the latter case, clearly identify what revision is required, and indicate to the editor whether or not you would be happy to review the revised articles.

During the manuscripts evaluation process, the reviewers should follow and fulfill the “Review Form” and it should be sent to editorial office along with revised manuscripts.

Publication Frequency

The journal will publish one issue per year.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global exchange of knowledge.

Editorial Board

Patron
Keshab Babu Koirala, Ph.D
National Maize Coordinator
National Maize Research Program
Ramput, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: koiralakb15@gmail.com

Govind KC
Senior Scientist
Former Maize Coordinator
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
Nepal
Email: kc.govindkc@gmail.com

Editor-in-Chief
Jiban Shrestha
Scientist (Plant Breeding and Genetics)
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: jibshrestha@gmail.com

Associate Editor-in-Chief
Subash Subedi, Ph.D
Scientist (Plant Pathology)
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: subedi.subash1@gmail.com

Editors
Renuka Shrestha, Ph.D
Principal Scientist
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
Agronomy Division, Khumaltar, Nepal
Email: renuka.shrestha@gmail.com

Tika Bahadur Karki, Ph.D Scholar
Senior Scientist (Agronomy)
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: tbkarki2003@gmail.com

Krishna Prasad Timsina, PhD
Senior Scientist (Agricultural Economics)
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
SARPOD, Khumaltar, Nepal
Email: krishnatimsina2000@gmail.com

Anoop Sindhu, Ph.D (Plant Breeding)
Plant Breeder, CHS, Inc USA
Email: anoopsindhu@gmail.com

Krishna H. Koirala, Ph.D (Agricultural Economics)
Model Development Officer
AVP at Comerica Bank, Dallas, Texas, USA
Email: kkoira1@lsu.edu

Shrawan K. Sah, Ph.D
Professor (Agronomy)
Agriculture and Forestry University
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: profshrawan@gmail.com

Krishna Hari Dhakal, Ph.D
Assistant Professor and Head
Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding,
Agriculture and Forestry University,
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: khdhakal@afu.edu.np

Mahendra Prasad Tripathi, Ph.D Scholar
Scientist (Plant Breeding)
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: mptripathi@gmail.com

Jhalendra Rijal, Ph.D (Entomology)
Area IPM Advisor
Division of Agriculture and Natural Resources,
University of California, USA
Email: rijaljhalendra@gmail.com

Syed Baker, Ph.D (Microbiology)
Research Scientist and Associate Professor
Laboratory of Biotechnology of New Materials
Siberian Federal University, Siberia
Email: syedbaker3@gmail.com

Mumtaz A. Cheema, Ph.D
Associate Professor-Agronomy
Memorial Univeristy Grenfell Campus
20 University Drive, Corner Brook, NL.
A2H 5G4, Canada
Email: mcheema@grenfell.mun.ca

Santosh Subedi, Ph.D
Biometrician, Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, Virginia, USA
Email: subedis@vt.edu

Abdul Majeed, Ph.D
Lecturer, Department of Botany
Government Degree College Naguman
Peshawar, Pakistan
Email: majeedpsh@gmail.com

Dinesh Panday, Ph.D Scholar (Soil Science)
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture
University of Nebraska-Lincoln, Nebraska, USA
Email: dinesh.panday@huskers.unl.edu

Saraswati Neupane, Ph.D
Scientist (Entomology)
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan, Nepal
Email: sarusanu2017@gmail.com

Idress Hamad Attitalla, Ph.D
Professor, Department of Microbiology
Faculty of Science,
Omar Al-Mukhtar University
Libya
Email: idressattitalla2004@yahoo.com

Senakpon Eric Haroll Kokoye, Ph.D
Agricultural Economist
Auburn University, Auburn, Alabama, USA
Email: sek0013@tigermail.auburn.edu

Tariq Shehzad, Ph.D
Assistant Research Scientist/Assistant Professor
College of Agricultural & Environmental Sciences
Plant Genome Mapping Laboratory,
University of Georgia, 111 Riverbend Road
Rm 236 Athens GA 30602, USA
Email: shehzad@uga.edu

Entessar Al Jbawi, Ph.D
Head of Sugar Beet Department
General Commission for Scientific Agricultural Research (GCSARS)
Baramqa, Damascus, Syria
Email: dr.entessara@gmail.com

Soumendra Chakraborty, Ph.D
Assistant Professor, Division of Genetics and Plant Breeding
Uttar Banga Krishi Viswavidyalaya Pundibari, India
Email: soumendra1@gmail.com

Papita Hiramanji Gourkhede, Ph.D
Assistant Professor
Department of Soil Science and Agricultural Chemistry
Vasantrao Naik Marathwada Krishi Vidyapeeth, Parbhani, India
Email: pathrikar2012@gmail.com

Kazi Noor-E-Alam Jewel
Scientist (Agroforestry and Environment)
Vice President, Agrofoudation, A1,
Bismillah Housing, 91-Shah Kabir Mazar Road,
Azampur, Uttara Dhaka-1230,Bangladesh
Email: wwwjewel@gmail.com

Ashwani Kumar Dubey, Ph.D
Executive Director (Honorary)
Godavari Academy of Science & Technology,
Environment and Social Welfare Society,
Chhatarpur 471001 India
Email: ashwanikhajuraho@gmail.com

Editorial Board-2016

Editorial Board-2015

Publication Ethics

Our publication ethics and publication malpractice statement is mainly based on the Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors (Committee on Publication Ethics, 2011).

Responsibilities of Editors

The Chief editor/editor is responsible for deciding which of the papers submitted to the journal will be published. The decision will be based on the paper’s importance, originality and clarity, and the study’s validity and its relevance to the journal's scope. The publishing decision is based on the recommendation of the journal's reviewers. Current legal requirements regarding copyright infringement, and plagiarism should also be considered.

The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted paper will not be used by the editor or the members of the editorial board for their own research purposes without the author's explicit written consent.

Editors should aim to ensure timely peer review and publication and should avoid unnecessary delays. Editors should consider how best to share information with authors about any delays that occur.

Editors or board members should not be involved in editorial decisions about their own scholarly work. If chief editor/editor contributes his/her papers, these papers will be reviewed by those reviewers which are outside the journal team.

Responsibilities of Reviewers

The peer-reviewing process assists the editor and the editorial board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper.

Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and withdraw from the review process.

Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be disclosed to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published work referred to in the paper has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether observations or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers will notify the editor of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions associated with the papers.

Responsibilities of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable. Reviews and other articles should also be accurate and objective, and should unfailingly cite the work on which they are based.

Data Access and Retention

Authors are asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data, if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

Authors should ensure that submitted work is original and has not been published elsewhere in any language, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others that this has been appropriately cited or quoted. Applicable copyright laws and conventions should be followed. Plagiarism in any form, including the touting of material contained in another paper (of the same authors or some other author) with cosmetic changes as a new paper; copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), and claiming results from research conducted by others are among the numerous forms of plagiarism. In all its forms plagiarism constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal or primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable. In general, an author should not submit for consideration to another journal a previously published paper, or the one under consideration with another journal, without the written consent of the two journals involved.

Acknowledgement of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written, permission from the source.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Changes in authorship: Authors are expected to consider carefully the list and order of authors before submitting their manuscript and provide the definitive list of authors at the time of the original submission. Any addition, deletion or rearrangement of author names in the authorship list should be made only before the manuscript has been accepted. The addition, deletion or rearrangement of authors is not possible after the manuscript has been accepted.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the journal Chief Editor/Editor or publisher and cooperate to retract or correct the paper.

If the Chief Editor/Editor or the publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper or provide evidence to the Chief Editor/Editor of the correctness of the original paper.

References

Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). (2011, March 7). Code of Conduct and Best-Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Retrieved from http://publicationethics.org/files/Code_of_conduct_for_journal_editors_Mar11.pdf

Plagiarism Policy

JMRD follows the plagiarism policy. Manuscripts submitted to JMRD should be original and must not be plagiarized. Every submitted article is checked for plagiarism through PlagScan software.If plagiarism is proved after publication of the article, that article will be immediately withdrawn and removed from the website and the concerned authors will be considered ineligible for publication of their articles in JMRD in future.

Reviewer Acknowledgements 2016

The Editor-In-Chief would like to acknowledge following reviewers who generously contributed their time and efforts to review manuscripts for this issue;

Adhikari Kamal Prasad
Institute of Agriculture and Environment,
College of Sciences,
Massey University, Private Bag 11222
Palmerston North 4442,
New Zealand

Bajracharya Ajaya Shree Ratna
Entomology Division
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
Khumaltar, Lalitpur,
Nepal

Chaudhary Dhiraj Kumar
Dept. of Life Science, Kyonggi University
Suwon, Gyeonggi- Do 443-760
South Korea

Chiluwal Kashinath
College of Agriculture and Life Sciences
Gyeongsang National University Jinju, Gyeongsangnam-Do,
Republic of Korea

Darai Rajendra
Nepal Agricultural Research Council,
Nepal

Dhakal Krishna Hari
Department of Genetics and Plant Breeding,
Agriculture and Forestry University, Rampur, Chitwan,
Nepal

Dhungana Surya Mani
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness Management,
Faculty of Agriculture
Agriculture and Forestry University,
Nepal

Joshi Bal Krishna
Genebank-NARC, Khumaltar PO Box 3055,
Kathmandu,
Nepal

Kattel Rishi Ram
Department of Agricultural Economics and Agribusiness Management
Agriculture and Forestry University (AFU)
Rampur, Chitwan,
Nepal

Koirala Krishna Hari
Model Development Officer
AVP at Comerica Bank, Dallas,
Texas,
USA

Majeed Abdul
Department of Botany Government Degree College
Naguman Peshawar,
Pakistan

Panday Dinesh
Department of Agronomy and Horticulture
University of Nebraska-Lincoln,
Nebraska,
USA

Paudel Gokul
International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center (CIMMYT),
Nepal

Sah Shrawan Kumar
Agriculture and Forestry University
Rampur, Chitwan,
Nepal

Shrestha Jiban
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan,
Nepal

Subedi Subash
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan,
Nepal

Timsina Krishna Prasad
Nepal Agricultural Research Council (NARC)/
Socioeconomics and Agricultural Research Policy Division (SARPOD),
Khumaltar, Lalitpur,
Nepal

Tripathi Mahendra Prasad
Nepal Agricultural Research Council
National Maize Research Program,
Rampur, Chitwan,
Nepal

Abstracting and Indexing of JMRD

The Journal title and articles published in Journal of Maize Research and Development are available under the below abstracting, Indexing and University Libraries database.

1) AGORA-Access to Global Online Research in Agriculture

2) CAB Abstracts (CABI)

3) DOAJ – Directory of Open Access Journals

4) Google Scholar

5) JournalTOCs

6) NARC Library

7) NepJOL (INASP)

8) ResearchGate

9) TEEAL- The Essential Electronic Agricultural Library