Düzce University Journal of Forestry (DUJOF), established in 2005, is the official publication of Düzce University Faculty of Forestry and has been published electronically since 2015. It publishes full text original research and review manuscripts in Turkish and English languages twice a year (June-December). An author can publish a maximum of one article per year in the journal.

Indexes: CAB Full-text and Abstracts, EBSCO

The article evaluation process can be summarised in 8 stages. These stages are listed below.


1. Submission of the article application

The corresponding author submits the manuscript via the online journal system https://dergipark.org.tr/tr/pub/duzceod.

2. Editor-in-chief evaluation

The editor checks the composition and organisation of the manuscript to ensure that it contains the required sections and formatting, and an editor is assigned to the manuscript to check for spelling, plagiarism and grammar. The quality of the article is not assessed at this point.

3. Appointment of a field editor

The field editor checks the originality and suitability of the article for the journal. If the manuscript does not fulfil these conditions, it may be rejected without proceeding to the peer review stage.

4. Referee invitation

The field editor invites those whom he/she believes to be appropriate to review the manuscript. This process continues until a response is received from at least two referees.

5. Referee evaluation

In our journal, blind peer review is carried out according to the method of peer review without the information of the authors on the article. The referees are provided with an automatic evaluation form by the system together with the article, and it is mandatory for the referees to fill out this form. They can upload additional material if they deem necessary. Referees are given a minimum of 15 days and a maximum of 30 days for their evaluation. Referees who do not evaluate within this period are replaced by the field editor. The referee arranges time to read the article several times. The first reading is used to form a first impression of the work. If significant problems are found at this stage, the referee may reject the manuscript without further work. Otherwise, the referee reads the manuscript several more times for a more detailed examination and takes the necessary notes. The referee then makes recommendations to the editor for acceptance or rejection of the article. The reviewer may also suggest minor or major changes to the manuscript.

6. Editor's review of the referee reviews

The site editor considers all reviews submitted to him/her before making an overall decision. If the assessments are very different, the editor may request an additional review authorisation to get an extra opinion before making a decision.

7. Communication of the decision

The editor sends the decision information including the comments of the referees to the author via e-mail via the journalipark system.

8. Next steps

Articles that have completed the peer review process positively are sent to the relevant unit for layout. If the manuscript is rejected or returned for major or minor revision, the field editor provides constructive comments from the reviewers to help the author improve the manuscript. If the manuscript is sent back for revision, the referees re-evaluate the revised manuscript in the second stage. If minor corrections are given by the referees, the field editor may not send the article back to the referees.