About AAS

  1. Home
  2. >
  3. About AAS
% Acceptance Rate
Weeks Editorial Time
Weeks for Publication
Issues per Year


About AAS journal

Advances in Agricultural Science (AAS) journal is an international scientific journal that publishes results of novel, high impact original research, critical reviews and short communications on any aspect of agricultural science. AAS journal welcomes research articles from scientists, scholars and researchers from all over the world to publish problem-oriented, high quality and refereed articles. AAS journal seeks clearly written articles from experts in the field, to promote insightful understanding of the current trends in the agricultural systems.

All papers published by AAS journal are peer reviewed.

AAS journal editorial board makes objective and quick decision on each manuscript and informs the corresponding author within five weeks of submission. If the editorial board accepts the paper, it will be published in the next available issue. We are committed to providing rapid response in all our manuscripts with one (1) issue published every month.


Open Access

Open access is the practice of providing unrestricted access to peer-reviewed academic journal articles via the internet. It is also increasingly being provided to scholarly monographs and book chapters.

All original research papers published by AAS journal are available freely and permanently accessible online immediately after publication.

Readers are free to copy and distribute the contribution under creative commons attribution-non commercial license. Authors can benefit from the open access publication model a lot from the following aspects:

● High Availability and High Visibility-free and unlimited accessibility of the publication over the internet without any restrictions.

● Rigorous peer review of research papers—-Fast, high-quality double blind peer review.

● Faster publication with less cost—-Papers published on the internet without any subscription charge.

● Higher Citation– open access publications are more frequently cited.

The peer review process

1. Submission of Paper

The corresponding or submitting author submits the paper to the journal.

2. Editorial Office Assessment

The journal checks the paper’s composition and arrangement against the journal’s Author Guidelines to make sure it includes the required sections and stylizations. The quality of the paper is not assessed at this point.

3. Appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief (EIC)

The EIC checks that the paper is appropriate for the journal and is sufficiently original and interesting. If not, the paper may be rejected without being reviewed any further.

4. Invitation to Reviewers

The handling editor sends invitations to individuals he or she believes would be appropriate reviewers. As responses are received, further invitations are issued, if necessary, until the required number of acceptances is obtained – commonly this is 2

5. Response to Invitations

Potential reviewers consider the invitation against their own expertise, conflicts of interest and availability. They then accept or decline. If possible, when declining, they might also suggest alternative reviewers.

6. Review is Conducted

The reviewer sets time aside to read the paper several times. The first read is used to form an initial impression of the work. If major problems are found at this stage, the reviewer may feel comfortable rejecting the paper without further work. Otherwise they will read the paper several more times, taking notes so as to build a detailed point-by-point review. The review is then submitted to the journal, with a recommendation to accept or reject it – or else with a request for revision (usually flagged as either major or minor) before it is reconsidered.

7. Journal Evaluates the Reviews

The handling editor considers all the returned reviews before making an overall decision. If the reviews differ widely, the editor may invite an additional reviewer so as to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

8. The Decision is Communicated

The editor sends a decision email to the author including any relevant reviewer comments. Whether the comments are anonymous or not will depend on the type of peer review that the journal operates.

9. Next Steps

If accepted, the paper is sent to production. If the article is rejected or sent back for either major or minor revision, the handling editor should include constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the article. At this point, reviewers should also be sent an email or letter letting them know the outcome of their review. If the paper was sent back for revision, the reviewers should expect to receive a new version, unless they have opted out of further participation. However, where only minor changes were requested this follow-up review might be done by the handling editor.

Reference: Wiley peer review procedure