IJARD provides reviewers with resources to support consistent, high quality feedback on aquaculture research. Resources include checklists, guidance on trial validation, and reporting standards.

• Trial validation checklist
• Data transparency guidance
• Reviewer report template
• Ethics and conflict of interest guidelines

Reviewers should focus on methodological rigor, clarity of assumptions, and the reproducibility of results. Provide actionable recommendations that help authors improve transparency.

For additional resources or questions about review expectations, contact [email protected].

Clearly report water quality metrics and monitoring frequency for transparency.

Provide validation evidence or benchmark comparisons to show trial reliability.

Describe data sources and preprocessing steps so other researchers can reproduce results.

Clarify how health or survival outcomes were measured and interpreted.

Use consistent terminology and define acronyms at first use.

If code or data sharing is restricted, describe access limitations and provide detailed methods.

Summarize how results support sustainable aquaculture practices without overstating conclusions.

Report the primary outcome measures used to evaluate performance or health.

Note any limitations related to sample size or trial duration.

Provide clarity on reviewer or editor expectations to support consistent decision making.

Highlight how ethical compliance and conflict disclosures are verified during review.

Recommend specific statistical checks or validation steps for performance outcomes.

Describe how reviewers should document major versus minor concerns.

Encourage concise summaries of key strengths and limitations for author guidance.

State the importance of data availability statements in reviewer assessments.

Note best practices for evaluating replicates, controls, and sample sizes.

Remind reviewers to flag unclear husbandry or water quality reporting.

Suggest timelines for responding to review invitations and completing reviews.

Explain how editors can request additional reviews for interdisciplinary studies.

Provide guidance on assessing translational relevance without overstating conclusions.

Encourage confidential notes to editors for ethical or methodological concerns.

Remind reviewers and editors to note missing data or unclear methods during initial assessment.

IJARD is committed to rigorous, transparent publishing in aquaculture research. We emphasize reproducible methods, complete data statements, and ethical compliance across all article types.

The editorial office supports authors, editors, and reviewers with clear guidance and responsive communication. For questions about scope or workflow, contact [email protected].

We encourage continuous improvement in reporting practices and share updates that help the community maintain high standards in aquaculture and fisheries research.