Objetives and scope

The Journal of Bat Research & Conservation publishes a wide range of manuscripts, covering all aspects of bat biology and conservation. Articles, reviews, meta-analyses, natural history notes, methodological tests and evaluations, results of monitoring programs, articles or opinion letters may be considered for publication in the journal. We accept descriptive studies, preliminary work, new opinions and ideas related to bat research and conservation.

Our journal considers research in various areas, including, but not limited to, ecological and evolutionary processes, interactions between individuals and their environment, population genetics, behavior, biodiversity, and conservation policy, among many other topics.

The special issues are of special interest, particularly in relation to specific topics of current relevance. Thesis summaries may also be considered. All contributions can be published together with supplementary material (video, multimedia material, presentations, etc.).

Reasons to publish

The Journal of Bat Research & Conservation prioritizes finding reasons to publish manuscripts rather than rejecting them. There are no rejection targets or page limits, reflecting a commitment to inclusivity. Instead of an outright rejection, efforts are made to address concerns raised by reviewers. Comments on novelty or methodology do not justify rejection; If the science is sound, there is inherent value.
Unlike journals that adopt “rejection without review” policies, JBRC accepts submissions without such restrictions. With online open access and no limits on the origin of the work presented, the objective is to review the maximum number of presentations possible. We encourage reviewers to make firm decisions and provide constructive reviews to improve submitted articles.

Review policy

The Journal of Bat Research & Conservation employs a confidential, double-anonymous peer review process, where the identities of the author and reviewer are concealed. Editors and reviewers handle manuscripts confidentially and refrain from revealing details outside of the review process. Reviewers’ identities remain confidential unless they choose to sign their review. Peer review comments remain confidential even after a final decision. Manuscripts are usually reviewed by two independent experts. Correspondence between the parties remains confidential unless everyone involved gives explicit consent or in exceptional ethical or legal circumstances.