What To Evaluate

• Relevance to mammal science and the journal scope.
• Methodological rigor and appropriate analysis.
• Clarity of reporting and transparency of data.
• Interpretation and alignment of conclusions with results.

Reviewers should focus on scientific quality, not language alone. If language clarity is a concern, recommend editing rather than rejection.

Constructive Feedback

Reviews should be objective, respectful, and specific. Highlight both strengths and areas for improvement to help authors strengthen their work.

Avoid personal remarks and focus on evidence based recommendations that improve the manuscript.

Recommended Review Format

• Brief summary of the manuscript and its main contribution.
• Major concerns that affect validity or interpretation.
• Minor concerns such as clarity or formatting.
• Clear recommendation with rationale.

Transparency Checks

Confirm that ethics approvals, consent statements, and data availability information are provided. For computational work, note whether code or models are accessible.

Statistical And Method Review

• Check sample size rationale and inclusion criteria.
• Evaluate whether analyses match the study design.
• Confirm that outcomes are reported clearly and consistently.
• Note missing controls or potential confounds.

Standards And Guidelines

Encourage authors to follow appropriate reporting standards such as CONSORT, PRISMA, or STROBE when applicable. Transparent reporting improves reproducibility.

Confidentiality And Conflicts

Manuscripts are confidential. Reviewers must disclose conflicts of interest and decline reviews when impartiality is compromised.

When To Decline A Review

• Potential conflicts of interest or close collaboration with authors.
• Insufficient subject expertise for the manuscript topic.
• Inability to meet the review deadline.

Review Timelines

Please accept or decline review invitations promptly. Submit reviews within the agreed timeline to support efficient editorial decisions.

How To Frame Your Decision

Provide a clear recommendation such as accept, minor revision, major revision, or reject. Use evidence from the manuscript to justify your recommendation.

If major changes are required, list them in priority order.

Notes To The Editor

If necessary, include confidential notes to the editor about ethical concerns or conflicts. Keep public comments constructive and focused on scientific improvement.

Ongoing Responsibilities

If you agree to review revisions, confirm that key concerns have been addressed. Maintain confidentiality even after the review process ends.