Submissions

Author Guidelines

1. Introduction

The Dyal Singh Journal of Life Sciences (DSJLS) is a peer-reviewed, open-access scholarly journal committed to the publication of original, scientifically rigorous and ethically conducted research in the life sciences.

The journal provides a scholarly platform for researchers, teachers, scientists, postgraduate scholars, professionals and students working in Botany, Zoology, Microbiology, Biotechnology, Human Nutrition and Dietetics (HND) and related interdisciplinary areas.

DSJLS seeks to develop and maintain publication practices consistent with recognized national and international standards of scholarly publishing. The journal's editorial and publication policies are framed with due consideration to the requirements and quality expectations of the Higher Education Commission (HEC), Pakistan, applicable institutional requirements of the Higher Education Department, accepted principles of research integrity, and internationally established standards of publication ethics.

Compliance with these standards does not by itself imply recognition or accreditation of the journal by any regulatory body. Any formal recognition status of the journal shall be stated separately and accurately on the journal website.

2. Aim of the Author Guidelines

These guidelines are intended to:

1. assist authors in preparing scientifically sound manuscripts;
2. ensure consistency in manuscript preparation and presentation;
3. promote originality, transparency and reproducibility of research;
4. establish ethical standards for research involving humans, animals, microorganisms, biological materials and environmental specimens;
5. provide transparent requirements relating to authorship, plagiarism, conflicts of interest, funding and data;
6. facilitate efficient editorial screening and peer review;
7. support the development of DSJLS according to national and international standards for scholarly life-science journals; and
8. protect the integrity of the permanent scholarly record.

Authors must read these guidelines before submitting a manuscript.

3. Scope of the Journal

DSJLS considers manuscripts within the broad field of life sciences, including but not limited to the following areas.

3.1 Botany

The journal welcomes research in:

• plant taxonomy and systematics;
• plant anatomy and morphology;
• plant physiology;
• plant ecology;
• biodiversity and conservation;
• ethnobotany;
• medicinal and aromatic plants;
• plant pathology;
• plant genetics and breeding;
• plant-microbe interactions;
• environmental botany;
• phytochemistry;
• plant biotechnology;
• molecular plant sciences;
• algal and fungal biology where relevant;
• vegetation studies;
• conservation biology; and
• related areas of plant sciences.

3.2 Zoology

Relevant areas include:

• animal taxonomy and systematics;
• animal physiology;
• ecology;
• wildlife biology;
• biodiversity;
• conservation;
• entomology;
• parasitology;
• fisheries and aquatic biology;
• developmental biology;
• animal genetics;
• evolutionary biology;
• animal behaviour;
• environmental zoology;
• reproductive biology;
• toxicology; and
• related areas of animal sciences.

3.3 Microbiology

The journal considers studies in:

• general microbiology;
• bacteriology;
• virology;
• mycology;
• microbial ecology;
• environmental microbiology;
• medical microbiology;
• food microbiology;
• industrial microbiology;
• agricultural microbiology;
• microbial genetics;
• antimicrobial resistance;
• microbial biotechnology;
• fermentation;
• probiotics;
• microbial diversity; and
• molecular microbiology.

3.4 Biotechnology

Areas include:

• molecular biology;
• genetic engineering;
• genomics;
• transcriptomics;
• proteomics;
• bioinformatics;
• molecular diagnostics;
• industrial biotechnology;
• agricultural biotechnology;
• environmental biotechnology;
• medical biotechnology;
• fermentation technology;
• bioprocessing;
• enzyme technology;
• recombinant DNA technology;
• tissue culture;
• biosensors; and
• emerging biotechnological applications.

3.5 Human Nutrition and Dietetics

DSJLS welcomes research concerning:

• human nutrition;
• clinical nutrition;
• community nutrition;
• public health nutrition;
• nutritional epidemiology;
• food and nutrition;
• dietary assessment;
• nutritional status;
• maternal and child nutrition;
• therapeutic nutrition;
• diet-related diseases;
• nutritional interventions;
• functional foods;
• food safety;
• food quality;
• dietary patterns;
• malnutrition;
• micronutrient deficiencies;
• obesity and metabolic health; and
• evidence-based dietetic practice.

3.6 Interdisciplinary Research

Interdisciplinary manuscripts linking life sciences with agriculture, environmental science, public health, food science, computational biology, biostatistics, climate change, sustainability or other relevant fields may also be considered where a substantial life-science component is present.

4. Types of Manuscripts Accepted

DSJLS may consider the following categories.

4.1 Original Research Article

An Original Research Article should present new data obtained through laboratory, field, clinical, observational, experimental, computational or other scientifically appropriate methods.

Recommended length: 4,000–7,000 words, excluding references, tables and figure legends.

The manuscript should normally contain:

• Abstract
• Keywords
• Introduction
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Discussion
• Conclusion
• Acknowledgements, where applicable
• Funding Statement
• Conflict of Interest Statement
• Author Contributions
• Data Availability Statement
• References

4.2 Review Article

Review Articles should provide a critical and scholarly synthesis of established and emerging literature rather than merely summarizing previous studies.

Recommended length: 5,000–8,000 words.

Reviews should:

• identify a clearly defined subject;
• critically evaluate relevant literature;
• identify inconsistencies and gaps in knowledge;
• discuss methodological or conceptual limitations;
• provide an integrated interpretation of available evidence; and
• identify future research directions.

Narrative reviews should explain how literature was identified and selected.

4.3 Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Systematic reviews and meta-analyses must use a transparent and reproducible methodology.

Authors should provide, where applicable:

• research question;
• eligibility criteria;
• databases searched;
• complete search strategy;
• dates covered;
• screening procedure;
• risk-of-bias assessment;
• methods of data extraction;
• synthesis methods;
• statistical methods;
• study-selection flow diagram;
• protocol-registration information, where applicable; and
• appropriate reporting checklist.

Systematic reviews should follow the applicable internationally recognized reporting standard.

4.4 Short Communication

Short Communications report scientifically important findings that can be communicated more concisely than a full Original Research Article.

Recommended length: 2,000–3,500 words.

The work must nevertheless be methodologically sound and sufficiently complete to support the conclusions.

4.5 Methodology / Methods Article

Methods papers may describe:

• new laboratory procedures;
• improved experimental techniques;
• analytical methods;
• sampling procedures;
• computational methods;
• diagnostic methods;
• field methods; or
• validation of existing procedures.

Authors should provide sufficient methodological detail to permit independent replication.

4.6 Case Report or Case Study

Case-based manuscripts may be considered where they provide a substantial scientific, educational or methodological contribution within the scope of the journal.

Routine or purely descriptive cases without clear scientific significance may be rejected during editorial screening.

4.7 Perspective or Commentary

These manuscripts may address emerging scientific developments, methodological questions, policy issues or important debates relevant to the life sciences.

Arguments must be scholarly, evidence-based and appropriately referenced.

4.8 Letter to the Editor

Letters may discuss recently published DSJLS articles or significant scientific matters within the scope of the journal.

Recommended length: 800–1,500 words.

5. General Conditions for Submission

By submitting a manuscript to DSJLS, the corresponding author confirms on behalf of all authors that:

1. the manuscript represents original scholarly work;
2. the manuscript has not been published previously in substantially the same form;
3. the manuscript is not simultaneously under consideration by another journal;
4. all listed authors have approved the manuscript;
5. all individuals who qualify for authorship have been appropriately identified;
6. all authors accept responsibility for the integrity of their contributions;
7. all relevant ethical approvals have been obtained;
8. all necessary permissions have been obtained for copyrighted or identifiable material;
9. funding and competing interests have been disclosed;
10. the data have not been fabricated, falsified or deliberately manipulated;
11. citations have not been manipulated;
12. the manuscript complies with applicable research and publication ethics;
13. the information entered in the OJS submission metadata is complete and accurate; and
14. the corresponding author is authorized to communicate with the journal on behalf of all co-authors.

Submission of a manuscript does not guarantee acceptance.

6. Language of Submission

Manuscripts should be submitted in English.

Authors are responsible for ensuring appropriate:

• grammar;
• spelling;
• punctuation;
• scientific terminology; and
• clarity of expression.

Either British or American English may be used, but usage must remain consistent throughout the manuscript.

Poor language alone should not be used to discriminate against scientifically valid work; however, manuscripts whose language prevents meaningful scientific assessment may be returned for revision before peer review.

7. Manuscript File Preparation

Authors should submit an editable Microsoft Word-compatible manuscript file unless otherwise instructed by the journal.

Recommended general formatting is:

• standard readable font;
• 11- or 12-point font size;
• 1.5 or double line spacing;
• continuous page numbering;
• continuous line numbering where possible;
• standard margins; and
• left-aligned text.

Do not unnecessarily format the manuscript as though it were the final published article.

Tables should be editable rather than submitted solely as images.

8. Title Page

The title page should contain:

8.1 Article Title

The title should:

• accurately describe the study;
• be concise;
• avoid unnecessary abbreviations;
• avoid exaggerated claims;
• avoid unsupported statements of causality; and
• facilitate electronic discovery of the article.

8.2 Authors

Provide for every author:

• full name;
• institutional affiliation;
• department;
• institution;
• city;
• country;
• institutional email address where available; and
• ORCID iD, where available.

8.3 Corresponding Author

Clearly identify one corresponding author and provide:

• full name;
• institutional affiliation;
• postal address where required;
• email address; and
• telephone number where requested by the editorial office.

The corresponding author is responsible for maintaining communication with the journal and coordinating communication among co-authors.

9. Authorship Criteria

Authorship must reflect genuine intellectual and scholarly contribution.

An individual should normally qualify as an author only where that person has made substantial contributions to appropriate aspects of the work, participated meaningfully in preparation or critical revision of the manuscript, approved the final version and accepts accountability for the work.

Persons who provide only:

• general administrative supervision;
• routine technical assistance;
• proofreading;
• funding acquisition alone;
• laboratory access alone;
• departmental position;
• institutional authority; or
• other contributions insufficient for authorship

should normally be acknowledged rather than listed as authors.

DSJLS does not permit:

• gift authorship;
• honorary authorship;
• guest authorship;
• coercive authorship; or
• ghost authorship.

Academic rank, administrative authority, supervisory status or institutional position does not automatically justify authorship.

10. Author Contribution Statement

For multi-author articles, authors should provide a contribution statement identifying the roles performed by individual contributors.

Relevant contributions may include:

• conceptualization;
• methodology;
• investigation;
• data collection;
• formal analysis;
• software;
• validation;
• visualization;
• resources;
• supervision;
• project administration;
• writing of the original draft;
• review and editing; and
• funding acquisition.

The journal may use the CRediT contributor taxonomy or an equivalent transparent contributorship model.

11. Changes in Authorship

Requests to add, remove or reorder authors after submission must:

1. provide a clear explanation;
2. be approved by all existing authors;
3. be approved by any author being added or removed; and
4. be submitted to the editorial office in writing.

Authorship changes after acceptance will be permitted only in exceptional circumstances.

The journal may contact the authors' institution where an unresolved authorship dispute or suspected misconduct exists.

12. Abstract

Original Research Articles should contain a structured abstract of approximately 200–300 words, using headings appropriate to the study, such as:

• Background / Introduction
• Objective
• Materials and Methods
• Results
• Conclusion

The abstract should:

• accurately represent the manuscript;
• state the purpose of the study;
• briefly describe the methodology;
• report principal findings;
• include important quantitative results where appropriate; and
• avoid claims unsupported by the results.

References should generally not be cited in the abstract.

13. Keywords

Provide approximately 4–8 keywords.

Keywords should:

• represent the principal subject of the study;
• not simply repeat every word in the title;
• use established scientific terminology; and
• facilitate electronic indexing and retrieval.

14. Introduction

The Introduction should:

1. establish the scientific background;
2. summarize relevant literature;
3. identify the research problem or gap;
4. provide the rationale for the study; and
5. clearly state the research objective, question or hypothesis.

The Introduction should not become an unnecessarily extensive literature review.

15. Materials and Methods

The Materials and Methods section must provide enough information for a competent researcher to understand, evaluate and, where reasonably possible, reproduce the research.

Depending on the study, authors should describe:

• study design;
• study setting;
• study period;
• population or biological material;
• sampling strategy;
• inclusion and exclusion criteria;
• sample-size determination;
• experimental groups;
• controls;
• randomization;
• blinding;
• reagents;
• equipment;
• manufacturer information where relevant;
• laboratory procedures;
• measurement techniques;
• data collection;
• quality-control procedures;
• statistical methods;
• software and version;
• ethical approval; and
• relevant registration numbers.

Established methods may be referenced, but modifications must be described.

Authors must not omit methodological information simply because the technique is familiar to them.

16. Statistical Reporting

Statistical analysis must be appropriate to the research question and study design.

Authors should report, where applicable:

• sample size;
• statistical tests;
• assumptions;
• measures of central tendency;
• measures of variability;
• confidence intervals;
• exact or appropriately reported p-values;
• effect sizes;
• correction for multiple comparisons;
• missing-data handling;
• relevant model assumptions; and
• statistical software used.

Authors should distinguish clearly between:

• statistical significance; and
• biological, clinical or practical importance.

Manipulation of statistical analyses to produce apparently significant results is unacceptable.

Where complex analysis is involved, the journal may seek statistical review.

17. Results

The Results section should present findings:

• clearly;
• logically;
• objectively; and
• without unnecessary duplication.

The main findings should be described in the text.

Authors should not reproduce the entire contents of a table in the narrative text.

Results should include negative or non-significant findings when scientifically relevant.

Data must not be selectively withheld to produce a misleading interpretation.

18. Discussion

The Discussion should:

1. interpret the principal findings;
2. relate findings to existing literature;
3. discuss agreements and disagreements with previous studies;
4. explain plausible mechanisms where appropriate;
5. distinguish evidence from speculation;
6. identify strengths of the study;
7. acknowledge limitations;
8. discuss implications; and
9. avoid conclusions that extend beyond the data.

Authors should not simply repeat the Results section.

Causal language must not be used for observational evidence unless scientifically justified.

19. Conclusion

The Conclusion should:

• directly reflect the study findings;
• address the original research objective;
• avoid exaggerated claims;
• avoid introducing new data;
• identify reasonable implications; and
• where appropriate, recommend future research.

Statements such as "the first-ever study" or "definitive proof" should be avoided unless they can be substantiated.

20. Tables

Each table must:

• be numbered consecutively;
• have a concise descriptive title;
• be cited in the text;
• be understandable without excessive dependence on the main text;
• define abbreviations in footnotes;
• identify units of measurement;
• avoid duplication of information already shown in figures; and
• be submitted in editable form.

Authors are responsible for the accuracy of all numerical information.

21. Figures and Images

Figures should:

• be numbered consecutively;
• have descriptive legends;
• be cited in the manuscript;
• be of adequate resolution;
• use readable labels;
• identify scale where applicable; and
• accurately represent the original data.

Image enhancement must not alter the scientific meaning of the image.

Selective modification of microscopy images, gels, blots or other scientific images that could misrepresent results is prohibited.

Where adjustments such as brightness or contrast are scientifically acceptable, they should be applied consistently and must not obscure or create features.

Original image data may be requested during editorial evaluation.

22. Research Involving Human Participants

Research involving human participants, identifiable human information or human biological material must comply with appropriate ethical requirements.

Authors must state:

• the name of the approving Institutional Review Board, Research Ethics Committee or equivalent body;
• approval/reference number, where issued;
• whether informed consent was obtained;
• whether consent was written or otherwise appropriately documented; and
• any relevant ethical safeguards.

Where ethical review was formally waived, the manuscript should identify the body granting the waiver and explain the basis where necessary.

Research involving vulnerable participants requires particular ethical care.

A statement that ethical approval was "not required" without appropriate justification may not be accepted.

23. Informed Consent and Identifiable Information

Information that could identify an individual should not be published without appropriate consent unless publication is otherwise ethically and legally justified.

Photographs, case histories or other identifiable information require appropriate consent for publication.

Removing only the eyes or partially masking a photograph may not necessarily provide adequate anonymity.

24. Research Involving Animals

Research involving vertebrate animals or other regulated animal species must have been conducted under applicable institutional and national ethical standards.

Authors should provide:

• name of the approving animal ethics committee;
• approval/reference number where available;
• species;
• strain where relevant;
• sex;
• number of animals;
• housing information where relevant;
• experimental procedures;
• anaesthesia and analgesia where relevant;
• humane endpoints;
• euthanasia methods; and
• measures used to minimize suffering.

In-vivo animal studies should be reported according to the applicable ARRIVE reporting principles.

The journal may reject research where the scientific value does not reasonably justify animal use or where ethical safeguards are inadequate.

25. Botanical and Field Research

Research involving plant specimens should provide sufficient information for identification and reproducibility.

Where applicable, authors should report:

• scientific name;
• taxonomic authority;
• collection locality;
• collection date;
• collector;
• voucher specimen number;
• herbarium or recognized collection in which material is deposited;
• identification method; and
• relevant collection permissions.

Research involving protected species or protected areas must comply with applicable legal and conservation requirements.

26. Microbiological and Molecular Research

Microbiology manuscripts should clearly identify organisms using accepted taxonomic nomenclature.

Where applicable, authors should report:

• strain or isolate designation;
• culture collection accession number;
• source of isolate;
• identification method;
• antimicrobial susceptibility methodology;
• biosafety procedures; and
• appropriate positive and negative controls.

Novel nucleotide or protein sequence data should, where scientifically appropriate, be deposited in an established public repository and the accession number provided in the manuscript.

27. Human Nutrition and Dietetics Research

Nutrition and dietetics studies should provide adequate information concerning:

• study population;
• participant selection;
• dietary assessment method;
• validation of dietary instruments where applicable;
• anthropometric methods;
• biochemical measurements;
• reference standards;
• nutrient databases;
• dietary intervention;
• duration of intervention;
• compliance assessment;
• confounders;
• statistical methodology; and
• ethical approval.

Observational nutritional epidemiology studies should use an appropriate recognized observational-study reporting framework.

Randomized nutritional interventions should follow the relevant randomized-trial reporting requirements.

28. Reporting Guidelines

Authors are expected to follow internationally recognized reporting guidelines appropriate to the study design.

Examples include:

• CONSORT for randomized controlled trials;
• STROBE for observational studies;
• PRISMA for systematic reviews and meta-analyses;
• ARRIVE for in-vivo animal experiments; and
• other relevant EQUATOR Network reporting guidelines.

The journal may request submission of the applicable completed checklist.

Use of a reporting checklist does not substitute for sound research design.

29. Clinical Trial Registration

Interventional clinical research should be prospectively registered in an appropriate publicly accessible clinical-trial registry where required by recognized international standards.

The manuscript should provide:

• registry name;
• registration number; and
• date of registration.

Retrospective registration should be clearly identified and may require explanation.

30. Research Data and Reproducibility

Authors are expected to preserve the underlying research data according to applicable institutional, ethical, legal and disciplinary requirements.

Where appropriate, authors should make supporting data available through:

• recognized repositories;
• supplementary files; or
• reasonable requests to the corresponding author,

unless sharing is restricted by:

• participant confidentiality;
• ethical approval;
• data-protection requirements;
• national security;
• contractual obligations; or
• legitimate intellectual-property restrictions.

The journal may request raw or underlying data during:

• editorial evaluation;
• peer review;
• investigation of an integrity concern; or
• post-publication review.

Failure to provide requested supporting data without reasonable explanation may affect editorial decisions.

31. Data Availability Statement

Research Articles should include a Data Availability Statement.

Examples include:

Publicly available data:
"The data supporting the findings of this study are available in [repository] under accession/DOI [number]."

Available on reasonable request:
"The data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request."

Restricted data:
"The data are not publicly available because of ethical/confidentiality restrictions. Access may be considered subject to the applicable ethical and institutional requirements."

Authors should select wording that truthfully represents the status of their data.

32. Plagiarism and Originality

DSJLS is committed to academic integrity.

All submitted manuscripts may be screened using plagiarism/similarity-detection software and may additionally be evaluated manually.

The following practices are unacceptable:

• plagiarism;
• verbatim copying without appropriate quotation and attribution;
• appropriation of another person's ideas or data;
• substantial unattributed paraphrasing;
• self-plagiarism or unacceptable text recycling;
• duplicate publication;
• redundant publication;
• salami publication designed to fragment one study improperly;
• fabricated references; and
• deliberate concealment of previously published overlapping material.

A similarity percentage alone does not determine whether plagiarism has occurred. Similarity reports must be interpreted according to the nature, location and scholarly legitimacy of matched material.

The editorial office reserves the right to:

• return manuscripts for correction;
• reject manuscripts;
• request an explanation;
• contact authors' institutions where serious misconduct is suspected; and
• take appropriate post-publication action where misconduct is discovered after publication.

33. Duplicate and Simultaneous Submission

Authors must not submit the same or substantially the same manuscript simultaneously to more than one journal.

If related manuscripts have been:

• published;
• accepted;
• submitted elsewhere;
• presented as conference papers;
• posted as preprints; or
• derived from a thesis,

authors must disclose the relevant circumstances to the editor.

Legitimate secondary analyses from an existing dataset must present a sufficiently distinct research question and transparently cite related publications.

34. Thesis-Derived Manuscripts

Manuscripts derived from:

• BS research projects;
• MPhil/MS dissertations;
• PhD dissertations; or
• other academic theses

may be considered provided that they have been converted into a proper scholarly journal article and comply with authorship, originality and ethical requirements.

The existence of a thesis should be disclosed where appropriate.

Supervisory status alone does not automatically establish authorship.

35. Conference Abstracts and Preprints

Previous presentation of a study as a conference abstract does not necessarily prevent journal consideration, provided that this is disclosed.

Where a manuscript has previously appeared as a preprint, the author should disclose:

• the preprint server;
• DOI or persistent identifier; and
• relevant version information.

The final journal publication should be clearly linked to the scholarly version of record where appropriate.

36. Fabrication, Falsification and Data Manipulation

DSJLS has zero tolerance for fabrication or falsification of research.

Examples include:

• inventing data;
• altering measurements;
• deleting inconvenient observations without scientific justification;
• manipulating images to create or remove findings;
• altering laboratory records;
• fabricating participant responses;
• changing statistical procedures solely to obtain significance;
• falsifying ethical approval;
• falsifying authorship;
• falsifying reviewer identities; and
• fabricating citations.

Suspected serious research misconduct may be referred to the relevant institution for investigation.

37. Citation Practices

References must be selected because they are relevant to the scientific work.

The journal does not permit:

• citation padding;
• coercive citation;
• citation cartels;
• unnecessary self-citation;
• irrelevant citation of editors or reviewers; or
• fabricated references.

Authors should cite the original research source whenever practical rather than repeatedly citing secondary summaries.

References should be verified by the authors before submission.

38. Reference Style

DSJLS uses APA 7th Edition author-date referencing, unless a specific article category requires an alternative format approved by the editorial office.

In-text citation examples

Single author:

(Khan, 2025)

Two authors:

(Khan & Ahmed, 2025)

Three or more authors:

(Khan et al., 2025)

Journal article example

Khan, A., Ahmed, S., & Ali, R. (2025). Effects of environmental stress on plant physiological responses. Journal Name, 12(2), 101–115. https://doi.org/xx.xxxx/xxxxx

Book example

Smith, J. A. (2024). Principles of molecular biology. Academic Publisher.

Authors should provide DOI information where available.

References must be:

• complete;
• accurate;
• cited in the text;
• included in the reference list; and
• formatted consistently.

39. Use of Artificial Intelligence and AI-Assisted Tools

Artificial intelligence tools, large language models, chatbots and automated image or writing systems cannot be listed as authors or co-authors.

Human authors remain fully responsible for:

• originality;
• accuracy;
• citations;
• interpretation;
• confidentiality;
• integrity of data;
• integrity of images; and
• all statements contained in the manuscript.

Authors must disclose substantive use of generative AI or AI-assisted technologies in manuscript preparation or research.

Where AI is used for writing assistance, this should be appropriately disclosed.

Where AI is used for:

• data collection;
• data analysis;
• coding;
• image generation;
• figure generation;
• modelling; or
• another research method,

the tool, version where relevant, purpose and manner of use should be described sufficiently in the Materials and Methods section.

Routine spelling or basic grammar correction may be treated differently from substantive generation of scientific content, but authors remain responsible for the final text.

AI-generated references must not be accepted without verification against the original source.

Fabricated references, quotations or data generated by AI remain the responsibility of the authors.

Failure to disclose substantial AI use may be treated as a publication-integrity concern.

40. Conflicts of Interest / Competing Interests

All authors must disclose financial and non-financial interests that could reasonably be perceived as influencing the work.

Potential interests may include:

• employment;
• consultancy;
• honoraria;
• grants;
• commercial relationships;
• stock ownership;
• patents;
• intellectual-property interests;
• institutional relationships;
• personal relationships;
• academic competition; or
• other relevant circumstances.

Having a competing interest does not automatically prevent publication. Failure to disclose a relevant interest may, however, constitute a breach of publication ethics.

Where no conflict exists, authors should state:

Conflict of Interest: The authors declare that they have no competing interests relevant to this work.

41. Funding Statement

All sources of financial or material support should be disclosed.

Authors should identify:

• funding agency;
• grant number, where applicable; and
• role of the funder, where relevant.

Example:

Funding: This research was supported by [Funding Agency] under Grant No. [number].

If no specific funding was received:

Funding: The authors received no specific funding for this work.

42. Acknowledgements

Individuals who contributed to the research but do not satisfy authorship requirements may be acknowledged with their permission.

Examples include:

• laboratory assistance;
• field assistance;
• statistical advice;
• technical support;
• language assistance; or
• access to specialized facilities.

Acknowledgement must not be used to imply endorsement by an individual or organization without permission.

43. Copyright and Open-Access License

DSJLS is an open-access journal.

Articles are published under the:

Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (CC BY 4.0).

Under CC BY 4.0, published material may be:

• shared;
• copied;
• redistributed;
• adapted;
• remixed;
• transformed; and
• built upon,

including for commercial purposes, provided appropriate attribution is given to the original author(s) and source, the applicable license is identified, and changes are indicated where required.

Authors are responsible for ensuring that third-party content included in their manuscripts can legally be published under the applicable terms.

44. Publication Charges and Financial Transparency

Any submission fee, article-processing charge, publication fee or other mandatory charge applicable to authors shall be stated transparently on the journal website.

Authors will not be required to pay undisclosed publication charges.

The existence or absence of publication charges shall not influence the scientific evaluation of a manuscript.

Waiver arrangements, where available, should be stated transparently by the journal.

45. Peer-Review Process

Research manuscripts considered suitable after initial editorial screening will normally undergo independent scholarly peer review.

DSJLS follows a double-anonymous peer-review model, under which the identities of authors and reviewers are normally concealed from one another during the review process.

The journal normally seeks evaluation from at least two suitably qualified reviewers for substantive research manuscripts whenever practicable.

Reviewers are selected on the basis of:

• subject expertise;
• research experience;
• independence;
• absence of material conflicts of interest; and
• suitability for the manuscript.

Peer review is advisory. The final editorial decision rests with the Editor or designated academic editor.

Possible decisions include:

• accept;
• minor revision;
• major revision;
• resubmit for review; or
• reject.

Acceptance is based on scholarly merit and not on the author's institutional designation, seniority, gender, nationality or administrative position.

46. Initial Editorial Screening

Before peer review, submissions may be screened for:

• journal scope;
• manuscript completeness;
• originality;
• ethical compliance;
• scientific quality;
• methodological adequacy;
• plagiarism/similarity;
• reporting quality;
• reference quality;
• language sufficient for review;
• authorship information; and
• compliance with submission requirements.

A manuscript may be rejected without external peer review where it is clearly:

• outside scope;
• scientifically inadequate;
• methodologically unsound;
• unethical;
• substantially plagiarized;
• improperly prepared; or
• unlikely to make a meaningful scholarly contribution.

Such a decision does not imply that every editorially rejected paper has undergone full peer review.

47. Reviewer Suggestions

Where the journal permits authors to suggest reviewers, authors must not nominate:

• close collaborators;
• current departmental colleagues;
• recent supervisors or students;
• close personal associates; or
• individuals with a significant financial or academic conflict.

The editorial office is under no obligation to use an author-suggested reviewer.

Fabricating reviewer names or email addresses constitutes serious publication misconduct.

48. Revision of Manuscripts

When revision is requested, authors should submit:

1. a revised manuscript;
2. a point-by-point response to reviewers;
3. a clear explanation of changes made; and
4. justification for any reviewer recommendation not followed.

Responses should remain professional and evidence-based.

Authors are not required to agree with every reviewer recommendation, but disagreement must be scientifically justified.

49. Editorial Independence

Editorial decisions must be based on:

• scientific merit;
• originality;
• methodological quality;
• ethical acceptability;
• relevance to journal scope; and
• contribution to knowledge.

Institutional management, administrative officers, sponsoring bodies or financial considerations should not improperly determine the acceptance or rejection of individual scholarly manuscripts.

Manuscripts submitted by editors, editorial-board members or individuals associated with the publishing institution must undergo an appropriately independent editorial process.

50. Public-Sector Institutional Research

DSJLS particularly encourages high-quality research originating from:

• public-sector colleges;
• universities;
• research institutes;
• teaching laboratories;
• government scientific institutions; and
• collaborative national and international research groups.

However, affiliation with a public-sector institution, the Higher Education Department or the institution publishing the journal does not guarantee preferential publication.

All manuscripts must satisfy the same scientific and ethical standards.

The journal particularly encourages faculty and emerging researchers in the public higher-education sector to develop research that is:

• hypothesis-driven or question-driven;
• ethically approved;
• methodologically sound;
• properly documented;
• statistically justified;
• reproducible where possible; and
• relevant to scientific or societal needs.

51. Research by Students

DSJLS welcomes scientifically sound research conducted by undergraduate and postgraduate students.

Student status does not lower scientific standards.

Where a manuscript originates from supervised student research:

• authorship must reflect genuine contributions;
• supervisors should not be included automatically;
• institutional approval must be obtained where required;
• ethical approval must have been secured before data collection where applicable; and
• raw data should be retained according to institutional requirements.

52. HEC and National Quality Expectations

DSJLS aims to maintain editorial policies consistent with the academic-quality, transparency and ethical principles expected of reputable research journals in Pakistan.

The journal therefore places particular emphasis on:

• clearly defined aims and scope;
• genuine peer review;
• publication ethics;
• transparent authorship;
• originality;
• conflict-of-interest disclosure;
• research ethics;
• editorial independence;
• accurate journal metadata;
• transparent publication charges;
• regular publication;
• maintenance of electronic archives;
• accurate author affiliations;
• responsible citation practices;
• correction of the scholarly record; and
• prevention and investigation of research misconduct.

Authors must understand that publication in DSJLS is based on scholarly evaluation and does not by itself create entitlement to recognition, promotion, appointment, degree completion or any other regulatory benefit. Such matters are determined by the applicable HEC, HED, university, college or other competent authority under the rules in force at the relevant time.

53. Publication Ethics

DSJLS is committed to internationally accepted principles of publication ethics.

Publication misconduct may include, but is not limited to:

• plagiarism;
• fabrication;
• falsification;
• duplicate publication;
• inappropriate authorship;
• undeclared competing interests;
• peer-review manipulation;
• citation manipulation;
• unethical research;
• data manipulation;
• image manipulation;
• fraudulent ethical approval;
• fraudulent identities;
• misuse of confidential material; and
• deliberate misrepresentation of research findings.

The journal may use procedures consistent with recognized publication-ethics guidance when dealing with suspected misconduct.

54. Corrections, Retractions and Expressions of Concern

Scientific literature must remain as accurate as reasonably possible.

After publication, the journal may publish:

• corrections;
• corrigenda;
• errata;
• retractions;
• expressions of concern; or
• other notices necessary to maintain the scholarly record.

A retraction may be considered where findings are unreliable because of:

• fabrication;
• falsification;
• major error;
• plagiarism;
• unethical research;
• duplicate publication; or
• other serious integrity problems.

Retraction is intended primarily to correct the literature rather than to serve as personal punishment.

55. Complaints and Appeals

Authors may submit a reasoned appeal against an editorial decision where they believe that:

• a material factual error affected the decision;
• important evidence was misunderstood;
• a serious procedural irregularity occurred; or
• a significant conflict of interest affected the review.

An appeal should:

• identify the manuscript;
• clearly explain the basis of the appeal; and
• provide relevant supporting information.

Disagreement with an editorial judgment by itself does not guarantee reconsideration.

Ethics complaints and allegations may be referred to an appropriate independent editor, institutional authority or ethics body where necessary.

56. Confidentiality

Manuscripts submitted to DSJLS are treated as confidential scholarly communications.

Authors should likewise maintain appropriate confidentiality concerning:

• reviewer reports;
• editorial correspondence;
• unpublished revisions; and
• confidential information received during the publication process.

Confidential personal or research information must not be disclosed improperly.

57. Submission Through OJS

All manuscripts should be submitted through the journal's Open Journal Systems (OJS) platform.

The submitting author should:

1. register or log in to the journal website;
2. start a new submission;
3. select the appropriate article section;
4. complete all submission requirements;
5. upload the manuscript;
6. upload figures or supplementary files where required;
7. enter complete metadata;
8. enter every author's information in the correct order;
9. provide title and abstract;
10. enter keywords;
11. provide funding and other required information;
12. confirm submission requirements; and
13. complete the submission.

Information entered into OJS forms part of the official publication metadata and must therefore be accurate.

58. Files Recommended at Initial Submission

Depending on article type, authors may be asked to provide:

• main manuscript;
• separate title page;
• figures;
• supplementary material;
• ethical approval documentation where requested;
• reporting checklist;
• data files where appropriate;
• cover letter; and
• relevant permissions.

The editorial office may request additional documentation when necessary.

59. Cover Letter

A concise cover letter should state:

• manuscript title;
• article type;
• significance of the research;
• relevance to DSJLS;
• confirmation of originality;
• confirmation that the manuscript is not under simultaneous consideration elsewhere;
• disclosure of related manuscripts or preprints;
• ethical approval information where applicable;
• competing interests; and
• any information the editor should know before evaluation.

60. Submission Checklist

Before completing submission, authors should confirm that:

• The manuscript falls within the scope of DSJLS.
• The work is original.
• The manuscript is not under consideration elsewhere.
• All authors have approved the submission.
• The author order has been agreed by all authors.
• Affiliations are complete and accurate.
• The corresponding author has been identified.
• ORCID iDs have been supplied where available.
• The abstract complies with journal requirements.
• Appropriate keywords have been provided.
• The methodology is described sufficiently.
• Statistical methods are appropriate.
• Ethical approval has been reported where required.
• Informed consent has been reported where required.
• Animal-welfare requirements have been addressed where applicable.
• Appropriate reporting guidelines have been followed.
• Tables and figures are numbered and cited.
• References have been checked for accuracy.
• Funding has been disclosed.
• Conflicts of interest have been disclosed.
• Author contributions have been stated.
• Data availability has been addressed.
• Substantive use of AI-assisted tools has been disclosed.
• Necessary permissions have been obtained.
• The manuscript has been checked for plagiarism and inappropriate text recycling.
• The OJS metadata matches the manuscript.

61. Final Responsibility of Authors

Authors remain responsible for the integrity and accuracy of their work before and after publication.

Acceptance by the journal, peer review, editorial review, copyediting or publication does not transfer responsibility for:

• accuracy of data;
• ethical conduct;
• authenticity of results;
• correctness of references;
• permissions;
• conflicts of interest; or
• statements made in the article

from the authors to the journal.

Authors are expected to cooperate with the journal if legitimate concerns arise regarding their work after publication.

62. Open Science and Responsible Scholarship

DSJLS encourages responsible scientific practices that improve:

• transparency;
• reproducibility;
• data quality;
• accessibility;
• research integrity;
• methodological clarity; and
• public confidence in science.

Authors are encouraged to retain well-organized research records, make data and methods available where ethically and legally possible, report negative findings where scientifically important, distinguish exploratory from confirmatory analysis, and avoid overstating the significance of results.

63. Guiding Principle

The principal criterion for publication in the Dyal Singh Journal of Life Sciences (DSJLS) is the quality and integrity of the scholarly work.

The journal seeks research that is:

Original — Ethical — Methodologically Sound — Transparently Reported — Scientifically Relevant — Reproducible Where Possible — and Useful to the Advancement of Life Sciences.