Manuscript Processing

1. Review Process
Journal of Natural Resources adheres to a double-blind peer review system and a three-stage review process. The manuscript review process includes the following steps:
After a manuscript is successfully submitted, the managing editor conducts an initial review. This focuses on evaluating whether the topic and writing quality of the submission meet the journal's basic requirements.
Manuscripts that pass the initial review are sent to two independent experts in the relevant research field for peer review. The journal employs a double-blind peer review system. The editorial office will not disclose the identities of authors and reviewers to each other in order to ensure objectivity and fairness in the review process. When selecting reviewers, the editorial office will ensure that reviewers come from institutions and research teams different from those of the authors. For manuscripts involving interdisciplinary research, experts from the relevant fields are engaged to review the work.
If revisions are required after peer review, authors must revise the manuscript according to the reviewers' comments, respond to the comments point by point, and submit a revised manuscript for another round of peer review. This process is repeated until the reviewers and editors are satisfied with the manuscript or it is ultimately rejected.
Once the manuscript successfully passes peer review, it is subjected to a final review by the Editor-in-Chief, who makes the final decision on acceptance. The Editor-in-Chief holds full responsibility for the entire content of the journal.

2. Manuscript Review for Special Issues
The review process described above also applies to submissions for special issues. Manuscripts submitted for special issues undergo the same review process as other manuscripts, with the final decision on acceptance made by the Editor-in-Chief.
For certain special issues, the journal may invite leading experts in relevant areas of research to serve as guest editors. Their role is to assist the editorial office in soliciting submissions, organizing the review of manuscripts, etc. The work of guest editors is supervised by the Editor-in-Chief and the editorial office to ensure the fairness and integrity of the review process.

3. Review for In-house Submissions
Submissions from the journal's editorial board members, editors, and guest editors are also subject to the journal's full review process. The peer review will be conducted independently of the submitting editorial board member, editor, guest editor, or their research groups. In addition, editorial board members, editors, and guest editors may not participate in the review of manuscripts written by themselves, their families, colleagues, or other authors with whom they have a conflict of interest.

4. Author Appeals
For authors who disagree with the review outcome of their manuscript, they may submit a written appeal to the editorial office. The appeal must include detailed explanations and responses to each of the reviewers' comments and should be sent to the journal's official email address. Upon receiving the appeal, the editorial office will review it promptly and communicate the outcome to the author. Please note that typically only one appeal per manuscript is accepted.

5. Academic Misconduct Detection & Handling
Before the initial review, the editorial office screens all submissions for plagiarism using the Academic Misconduct Literature Check (AMLC) System developed by CNKI. If the similarity rate exceeds 10%, the manuscript will be immediately rejected.
The journal strictly prohibits any form of academic misconduct, such as multiple submissions and plagiarism. If such misconduct is found in a submission, the manuscript will be rejected immediately. In severe cases, the author will be blacklisted and reported to other journals in the field.
If academic misconduct is discovered after the article has been officially published, the editorial office will retract the article. Any resulting consequences are the sole responsibility of the authors to address and resolve.

6. Corrections & Retractions
Corrections or retractions of officially published articles will be made by the journal when necessary:
(1) Correction: If a published article is found to have unintentional scientific errors that do not significantly affect the results and conclusions of the article, the editorial office will promptly publish a correction notice in the journal. This notice will detail the changes made to the original article and will cite the source of the article. A new version of the article with corrections will be published, detailing the changes made to the original article and indicating the date of the update. When citing, please refer to the most recent version of the article.
(2) Retraction: For articles that have been formally published, if serious scientific errors are discovered that render the results and conclusions unreliable, the editorial office will proceed with a retraction. In addition, if a published article is reported for academic misconduct, the editorial office will initiate an investigation and publish a statement to inform readers of the potential risks associated with the article. Once the investigation is complete, the results will be made public. If it is confirmed that the article involved misconduct, the editorial office will retract it. Any resulting consequences are the sole responsibility of the authors to address and resolve.