Egyptian society of Dairy science reviewers have a responsibility to report suspected duplicate publication, fraud, plagiarism, or concerns about animal or human experimentation to the Editor. A reviewer may recognize and report that he/she is refereeing, or has recently refereed, a similar or identical paper for another journal by the same author(s). Readers may report that they have seen the same article elsewhere, or authors may see their own published work being plagiarized. In all cases we address ethical concerns diligently following an issue-specific standard practice as summarized below.
The first action of the journal Editor is to inform the Editorial Office of Egyptian Journal of Dairy Science by supplying copies of 1) the relevant material and 2) a draft letter to the corresponding author asking for an explanation in a nonjudgmental manner. The Editorial Office must approve any correspondence before it is sent to the author. If the author’s explanation is unacceptable and it seems that serious unethical conduct has taken place, the matter is referred to the Publication Committee via Editorial Office. After deliberation, the Committee will decide whether the case is sufficiently serious to warrant a ban on future submissions to, and serving as a reviewer for, Science Alert Journals; and/or whether the offending author’s institution should be informed. The decision has to be approved by the Executive Cabinet of the Science Alert Council, and the author has the right to appeal a sanction, with the opportunity to present his/her position.
If the infraction is less severe, the Editor, upon the advice of the Publication Committee, will send the author a letter of reprimand and remind the author of Egyptian Journal of Dairy Science publication policies; if the manuscript has been published, the Editor may require the author to publish an apology in the journal to correct the record. If, through the author’s actions, Egyptian Journal of Dairy Science has violated the copyright of another journal, the Publication Committee writes a letter of apology to the other journal.
In serious cases of fraud that result in retraction of the article, a retraction notice will be published in the journal and will be linked to the article in the online version. The online version will also be marked “retracted” with the retraction date.
Suggesting the Reviewers
Authors are asked to facilitate the review process by providing the names and e-mail addresses of at least three suitable reviewers, on the understanding that the editor is not bound by any such nomination. Failure to follow this request may delay the handling of your paper, since the editorial office may specifically ask you to nominate potential reviewers for papers covering unfamiliar areas.
Note: According to the recent study, either suggesting or excluding reviewers can significantly increase a manuscript's chances of being accepted.
General Format
Before submission of the new manuscript authors should consider the following general rules for preparation of the manuscript. Please read these instructions carefully and follow the guidelines strictly.
• Fonts: Important – Use Times or Times New Roman 12 point size only (other sizes as specified), and Symbol font for mathematical symbols (in the text and in the figures).
° Justification should be set to full (or left only, if preferred).
° Do not underline: Use italics, bold or bold italics instead.
° Line spacing should be set at 2 (Double).
° Leave a line space between paragraphs and sections.
° Leave a line space between section titles and text.
° Leave only one space after a full stop.
• Manuscripts must be typed on A4 (210 × 297 mm) paper, double-spaced throughout and with ample margins of at least 2.5 cm. All pages must be numbered consecutively. Starting with the title page as p.1, the text, which begins with p.2, is to be arranged in the following order: abstract, brief introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, acknowledgements, references, figure legends, tables.
• The first page of the full manuscript must begin with the title of the paper centered on the page in 14 point Bold Title Case (title case means first letter of each main word capitalized), the names of the authors (Initials – followed by a period each – Family Name) with the main author’s name mentioned first, the names and locations of the authors’ affiliations (Title Case), and the e-mail address of the main author. The title page must provide the title in English, a short title of not more than 45 characters (including spaces) to be used as running head, up to five topical key words in English for subject indexing, the full postal address of the corresponding author to whom proofs will be sent. The title should be brief and should indicate the species studied. Subtitles are not encouraged.
• The abstract should not exceed 250 words, should be one paragraph and should be free of references and abbreviations. It should indicate clearly the scope and main conclusions of the paper.
• The introduction should give the pertinent background to the study and should explain why the work was done.
• The materials and methods (or methodology) should give essential details, including experimental design and statistical analysis.
• The results should present the findings of the research. They should be free from discussion. Results should be written in the past tense.
• The discussion should cover, but not simply repeat the new findings and should present the author's results in broader context of other work on the subject interpreting them with a minimum of speculation.
• The acknowledgements should be as brief as possible.
File Sizes
Manuscripts will be distributed to reviewers via the Web or hard copy. However, reviewers who use telephone modems may experience unacceptable download delays if the files are too large. A number of simple tricks can be used to avoid unnecessarily large files. Do not scan pages of text. Do not scan printed Figures unless no original digital document exists. If a scanned figure is unavoidable, please use Adobe PhotoShop or a similar program to edit the file and reduce the file size (not necessarily the image size) as much as possible before submission. For example, crop the picture to exclude surrounding "white space." Do not carelessly use colour. Black and white line drawings or gray-scale figures should not be saved as color documents; this will increase file sizes without increasing the information content of the file. Do not use colour unless absolutely needed to convey information.
Manuscript file format
We request to submit article in Microsoft Word format (.DOC). If you are using another word processor please save final version of the manuscript (using 'Save As' option of the file menu) as a Word document. In this case please double check that the saved file can be opened in Microsoft Word. We cannot accept Acrobat .PDF or any other text files.
Readability
A paper may be returned to the corresponding author for no other reason than that it suffers due to poor English. Papers must be understandable and communicate an unambiguous message. The editors and staff can make only a limited number of edits, and it is the responsibility of the authors to obtain help from a colleague who is fluent in English if that is needed. Most problems occur when there are nuances in meaning, and the authors bear the primary responsibility for clarity. Poor English may ultimately be a reason to refuse a paper.
Tables, figures & illustrations
• While presenting data, authors should anticipate the limitations set by the size and layout of the journal. Large and complex tables, figures and maps should be avoided in the main paper, but can be included in a data appendix for use by the reviewers.
• Figures should be saved in a neutral data format such as JPEG, TIFF or EPS. PowerPoint and Word graphics are unsuitable for reproduction. Please do not use any pixel-oriented programmes. Scanned figures (in JPEG and TIFF formats) should have a resolution of 300 dpi (halftone) or 600 to 1200 dpi (line drawings) in relation to the reproduction size.
• Any tables and figures that are included in the main text of the paper should be numbered separately, in the sequence that they are mentioned in the text.
• Each table and figure should be presented on a separate page of the manuscript, with a brief and self-explanatory title. All text should be clearly legible, and all graphics and legends should be easily distinguished when printed in black and white. Tables should use horizontal lines only, with only blank space to separate columns.
• Notes under each table and figure should be used to explain and specify the source of all data shown.
List of References
The list of references appears at the end of your work and gives the full details of everything that you have used, according to same chronological order as cited in the text.
All sources must be referred in a consistent manner. Choose from the list of sources below, the examples given, provide a guide to the format and punctuation you should use.
• Journal (Print)
• Journal (Electronic)
• Book
• Book Chapter
• Conference Papers
Journal Article (Print)
Elements:
1. Author’s surname, Initial
2. Publication Year
3. Article Title
4. Name of Journal (in standard abbreviation)
5. Volume
6. Starting Pages
7. Ending Pages
8. Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
9. Direct link of the published article
Example
Sepaskhah, A.R. and M.M. Ghasemi, 2008. Every-other-furrow irrigation with different irrigation intervals for grain sorghum. Pak. J. Biol. Sci., 11: 1234-1239. DOI: 10.3923/pjbs.2008.1234.1239; PMID 236548759;
Journal Article (Electronic)
Elements:
1. Author’s surname, Initial
2. Publication Year
3. Article Title
4. Name of Journal (with/without abbreviations)
5. Volume
6. Page Numbers (if applicable)
7. Available at
8. Accessed on (enter date you viewed the article)
9. Digital Object Identifier (DOI)
Example
Brittion, A., 2006. How much and how often should we drink? Br. Med. J., 332: 1224-1225. Available from: http://bmj.bjjournals.com/cgi/content/full/332/7552/1224 [Accessed 2 June 2006].
Book
• Author/Editor’s Surname and initials
• Year of publication
• Title of Book
• Edition (if applicable)
• Place of publication: (followed by a colon)
• Name of publisher
• ISBN Number
Example
Anderson, J. and M. Poole, 1998. Assignment and thesis writing. 3re Edn., John While and Sons.
Book Chapter
• Author/Editor’s Surname and initials
• Year of publication
• Title of Chapter
• In: (enter editor’s surname and initials)
• Book Title
• Edition (if applicable)
• Place of publication: (followed by a colon)
• Name of publisher
• Page number
• ISBN
Example
Mason, J., 1999. Recent Developments in the Prediction of Global Warming. In: Energy Demand and Planning, McVeigh, J.C. and J.G. Morgue, (Eds.). E&FN Spon., pp: 34-52.
Conference Papers
Conference paper’s should be referenced using the following format and punctuation.
• Author’s surname, initials
• Date of publication
• Title of paper
• In: Editor’s surname, initials, (if applicable)
• Title of proceeding
• Place of conference
• Date of conference
• Publishers
• Page numbers of contribution
Example
Clifton, J.J., 1999. Hazard prediction. In: Disaster prevention, planning and limitation. University of Bradford, 12-13 September 1989. Technical Communications Ltd., pp: 54-64.
Preparing the Manuscript
Egyptian Journal of Dairy Science is an local, peer-reviewed and open access scientific journal that provides a high-visibility forum to the scientific community for the publication of top-tier original research according to the scope of the journal.
Egyptian Journal of Dairy Science publishes high quality research work in the following forms:
Research Articles
Research articles present original research and address a clearly stated specific hypothesis or question. Papers should provide novel approaches and new insights into the problem addressed. The research Article should arrange in the following order: abstract, brief introduction, materials and methods, results, discussion, acknowledgments, references, figures, tables.
The template consists of essential headings along with body text explaining what to include in each section. You should overwrite (or copy and paste) the body text with the corresponding section text for your article. Obviously, you should add other headings as needed.
The title should be specific to the study yet concise, and should allow sensitive and specific electronic retrieval of the article. It should be comprehensible to readers outside your field. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. Present this in title case, capitalizing all words except for prepositions, articles, and conjunctions. Titles should also include relevant information about the design of the study, e.g.: Television watching and family dysfunction in medical journal editors: a case-control study.
Provide the first names or initials (if used), middle names or initials (if used), surnames, and affiliations—department, university or organization, city, state/province (if applicable), and country—for all authors. One of the authors should be designated as the corresponding author. If the article has been submitted on behalf of a consortium, all author names and affiliations should be listed at the end of the article.
The abstract succinctly introduces the paper. We advise that it should not exceed 250–300 words. The abstract is conceptually divided into three sections. Background: include here a statement of the main research question. Methodology/Principal Findings. include here the techniques used without going into methodological detail, together with a summary of the most important findings with key numerical results given, with measures of error and not just p values. Conclusions/Significance: concisely summarize the study’s implications. Please do not include any citations in the abstract. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible.
The introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.
This section should provide enough detail to allow full replication of the study by suitably skilled investigators. Protocols for new methods should be included, but well-established protocols may simply be referenced. We encourage authors to submit, as separate supporting information files, detailed protocols for newer or less well-established methods. These are published online only, but are linked to the article and are fully searchable.
The results section should provide details of all of the experiments that are required to support the conclusions of the paper. There is no specific word limit for this section. The section may be divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading. Large datasets, including raw data, should be submitted as supporting information files; these are published online alongside the accepted article. We advise that the results section be written in past tense.
The discussion should spell out the major conclusions of the work along with some explanation or speculation on the significance of these conclusions. How do the conclusions affect the existing assumptions and models in the field? How can future research build on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done? The discussion should be concise and tightly argued. Conclusions firmly established by the presented data, hypotheses supported by the presented data, and speculations suggested by the presented data should be clearly identified as such. The results and discussion may be combined into one section, if desired.
People who contributed to the work but do not fit criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments, along with their contributions. It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that anyone named in the acknowledgments agrees to being so named. Details of the funding sources that have supported the work should be confined to the funding declaration provided on submission. Do not include them in the acknowledgments.
Only published or accepted manuscripts should be included in the reference list. Meetings abstracts, conference talks, or papers that have been submitted but not yet accepted should not be cited. Limited citation of unpublished work should be included in the body of the text only. Because all references will be linked electronically as much as possible to the papers they cite, proper formatting of the references is crucial. Please read guide to authors carefully to prepare a list of references.
The aim of the figure legend should be to describe the key messages of the figure, but the figure should also be discussed in the text. An enlarged version of the figure and its full legend will often be viewed in a separate window online, and it should be possible for a reader to understand the figure without switching back and forth between this window and the relevant parts of the text. Each legend should have a concise title of no more than 15 words. The legend itself should be succinct, while still explaining all symbols and abbreviations. Avoid lengthy descriptions of methods.
The table title should be concise, no more than one sentence. The rest of the table legend and any footnotes should be placed below the table. Footnotes can be used to explain abbreviations.
Tables must be cell-based, such as would be produced in a spreadsheet program or in Microsoft Word. Do not provide tables as graphic objects. Tables must be no larger than one printed page (7inches x 9.5inches). Larger tables can be published as online supporting information. Bold and italics formatting will be preserved in the published version; however, more extensive formatting will be lost. Do not include color, shading, lines, rules, text boxes, tabs, returns, or pictures within the table.
Reviews/Mini-Reviews
Review articles are an attempt by one or more authors, to sum up, the current state of the research on a particular topic. Ideally, the author searches for everything relevant to the topic and then sorts it all out into a coherent view of the “state of the art” as it now stands. Review Articles should inform about:
• the main researchers working in a field
• recent major advances and discoveries
• significant gaps in the research
• current debates
• future directions
Only review articles from the experts in relevant field will be considered for publication.
The template consists of essential headings along with body text explaining what to include in each section. You should overwrite (or copy and paste) the body text with the corresponding section text for your article. Obviously, you should add other headings as needed.
The title should be specific to the study yet concise, and should allow sensitive and specific electronic retrieval of the article. It should be comprehensible to readers outside your field. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. Present this in title case, capitalizing all words except for prepositions, articles, and conjunctions. Titles should also include relevant information about the design of the study, e.g.: Television watching and family dysfunction in medical journal editors: a case-control study.
Provide the first names or initials (if used), middle names or initials (if used), surnames, and affiliations—department, university or organization, city, state/province (if applicable), and country—for all authors. One of the authors should be designated as the corresponding author. If the article has been submitted on behalf of a consortium, all author names and affiliations should be listed at the end of the article.
The abstract succinctly introduces the paper. We advise that it should not exceed 250–300 words. The abstract is conceptually divided into three sections. Background: include here a statement of the main research question. Methodology/Principal Findings. include here the techniques used without going into methodological detail, together with a summary of the most important findings with key numerical results given, with measures of error and not just p values. Conclusions/Significance: concisely summarize the study’s implications. Please do not include any citations in the abstract. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible.
The introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.
The required format for review articles is similar to that used for research articles, with the exception that headings such as "Methodolgy," "Results and Discussion," and "Conclusions" should be replaced with more appropriate headings, consistent with the contents of the article.
People who contributed to the work but do not fit criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments, along with their contributions. It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that anyone named in the acknowledgments agrees to being so named. Details of the funding sources that have supported the work should be confined to the funding declaration provided on submission. Do not include them in the acknowledgments.
Only published or accepted manuscripts should be included in the reference list. Meetings abstracts, conference talks, or papers that have been submitted but not yet accepted should not be cited. Limited citation of unpublished work should be included in the body of the text only. Because all references will be linked electronically as much as possible to the papers they cite, proper formatting of the references is crucial. Please read guide to authors carefully to prepare a list of references.
The aim of the figure legend should be to describe the key messages of the figure, but the figure should also be discussed in the text. An enlarged version of the figure and its full legend will often be viewed in a separate window online, and it should be possible for a reader to understand the figure without switching back and forth between this window and the relevant parts of the text. Each legend should have a concise title of no more than 15 words. The legend itself should be succinct, while still explaining all symbols and abbreviations. Avoid lengthy descriptions of methods.
The table title should be concise, no more than one sentence. The rest of the table legend and any footnotes should be placed below the table. Footnotes can be used to explain abbreviations.
Tables must be cell-based, such as would be produced in a spreadsheet program or in Microsoft Word. Do not provide tables as graphic objects. Tables must be no larger than one printed page (7inches x 9.5inches). Larger tables can be published as online supporting information. Bold and italics formatting will be preserved in the published version; however, more extensive formatting will be lost. Do not include color, shading, lines, rules, text boxes, tabs, returns, or pictures within the table.
Short Communications
Short communication is for a concise, but independent report representing a significant contribution in the field. Short communication is not intended to publish preliminary results. But if these results are of exceptional interest and are particularly topical and relevant will be considered for publication. It should be no more than 2500 words, and could include two figures or tables. It should have at least 8 references. Short communications will also send for peer review.
The template consists of essential headings along with body text explaining what to include in each section. You should overwrite (or copy and paste) the body text with the corresponding section text for your article. Obviously, you should add other headings as needed.
Short Communication should be no more than 2500 words, and could include two figures or tables. It should have at least 8 references.
Short communications must report completed work, not preliminary findings: they are an alternative format for describing smaller pieces of work.
The title should be specific to the study yet concise, and should allow sensitive and specific electronic retrieval of the article. It should be comprehensible to readers outside your field. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. Present this in title case, capitalizing all words except for prepositions, articles, and conjunctions. Titles should also include relevant information about the design of the study, e.g.: Television watching and family dysfunction in medical journal editors: a case-control study.
Provide the first names or initials (if used), middle names or initials (if used), surnames, and affiliations—department, university or organization, city, state/province (if applicable), and country—for all authors. One of the authors should be designated as the corresponding author. If the article has been submitted on behalf of a consortium, all author names and affiliations should be listed at the end of the article.
The abstract succinctly introduces the paper. We advise that it should not exceed 250–300 words. The abstract is conceptually divided into three sections. Background: include here a statement of the main research question. Methodology/Principal Findings. include here the techniques used without going into methodological detail, together with a summary of the most important findings with key numerical results given, with measures of error and not just p values. Conclusions/Significance: concisely summarize the study’s implications. Please do not include any citations in the abstract. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible.
The introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.
This section should provide enough detail to allow full replication of the study by suitably skilled investigators. Protocols for new methods should be included, but well-established protocols may simply be referenced. We encourage authors to submit, as separate supporting information files, detailed protocols for newer or less well-established methods. These are published online only, but are linked to the article and are fully searchable.
The results section should provide details of all of the experiments that are required to support the conclusions of the paper. There is no specific word limit for this section. The section may be divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading. Large datasets, including raw data, should be submitted as supporting information files; these are published online alongside the accepted article. We advise that the results section be written in past tense.
The discussion should spell out the major conclusions of the work along with some explanation or speculation on the significance of these conclusions. How do the conclusions affect the existing assumptions and models in the field? How can future research build on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done? The discussion should be concise and tightly argued. Conclusions firmly established by the presented data, hypotheses supported by the presented data, and speculations suggested by the presented data should be clearly identified as such. The results and discussion may be combined into one section, if desired.
People who contributed to the work but do not fit the criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments, along with their contributions. It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that anyone named in the acknowledgments agrees to being so named. Details of the funding sources that have supported the work should be confined to the funding declaration provided on submission. Do not include them in the acknowledgments.
Only published or accepted manuscripts should be included in the reference list. Meetings abstracts, conference talks, or papers that have been submitted but not yet accepted should not be cited. Limited citation of unpublished work should be included in the body of the text only. Because all references will be linked electronically as much as possible to the papers they cite, proper formatting of the references is crucial. Please read guide to authors carefully to prepare a list of references.
The aim of the figure legend should be to describe the key messages of the figure, but the figure should also be discussed in the text. An enlarged version of the figure and its full legend will often be viewed in a separate window online, and it should be possible for a reader to understand the figure without switching back and forth between this window and the relevant parts of the text. Each legend should have a concise title of no more than 15 words. The legend itself should be succinct, while still explaining all symbols and abbreviations. Avoid lengthy descriptions of methods.
The table title should be concise, no more than one sentence. The rest of the table legend and any footnotes should be placed below the table. Footnotes can be used to explain abbreviations.
Tables must be cell-based, such as would be produced in a spreadsheet program or in Microsoft Word. Do not provide tables as graphic objects. Tables must be no larger than one printed page (7inches x 9.5inches). Larger tables can be published as online supporting information. Bold and italics formatting will be preserved in the published version; however, more extensive formatting will be lost. Do not include color, shading, lines, rules, text boxes, tabs, returns, or pictures within the table.
Research Note
A technical note is an article giving a brief description of a technique or procedure. It may also refer to the modification of a technique, procedure or equipment of interest to the journal. It should be no more than 2500 words, and could include two figures or tables. It should have at least 8 references. Technical notes will also send for peer review
Technical Notes are concise but complete descriptions of a limited investigation, which will not be included in a later paper, describing some innovative technical aspects of methods related to the topic of the selected journal. Technical Notes should be as completely documented as an Original Research Paper, with special attention to the description of experimental procedures employed.
The template consists of essential headings along with body text explaining what to include in each section. You should overwrite (or copy and paste) the body text with the corresponding section text for your article. Obviously, you should add other headings as needed.
The title should be specific to the study yet concise, and should allow sensitive and specific electronic retrieval of the article. It should be comprehensible to readers outside your field. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible. Present this in title case, capitalizing all words except for prepositions, articles, and conjunctions. Titles should also include relevant information about the design of the study, e.g.: Television watching and family dysfunction in medical journal editors: a case-control study.
Provide the first names or initials (if used), middle names or initials (if used), surnames, and affiliations—department, university or organization, city, state/province (if applicable), and country—for all authors. One of the authors should be designated as the corresponding author. If the article has been submitted on behalf of a consortium, all author names and affiliations should be listed at the end of the article.
Authors are strongly encouraged to include a statement in the end notes to specify the actual contribution of each coauthor to the completed work. Science Alert allows two coauthors to be specified as having contributed equally to the work being described. Author contribution statement should be clear like the following example:
Example
S.C.W., P.R.J.B., P.V.W. and I.K.T developed the concept and designed experiments. S.C.W. and S.G. performed P. infestans transformations and plant inoculations. P.C.B. carried out confocal microscopy and advised on cell biology. S.C.W. performed GUS assays and light microscopy. A.O.A. and J.G.M. quantified gene expression. Antibody detection of tagged transformants was performed by I.H. and S.C. L.M., J.G.M., E.M.G. and M.R.A. carried out experiments with P. atrosepticum. L.P. conducted all bioinformatics analyses.
Abstract
The abstract succinctly introduces the paper. We advise that it should not exceed 250–300 words. The abstract is conceptually divided into three sections. Background: include here a statement of the main research question. Methodology/Principal Findings. include here the techniques used without going into methodological detail, together with a summary of the most important findings with key numerical results given, with measures of error and not just p values. Conclusions/Significance: concisely summarize the study’s implications. Please do not include any citations in the abstract. Avoid specialist abbreviations if possible.
The introduction should put the focus of the manuscript into a broader context. As you compose the introduction, think of readers who are not experts in this field. Include a brief review of the key literature. If there are relevant controversies or disagreements in the field, they should be mentioned so that a non-expert reader can delve into these issues further. The introduction should conclude with a brief statement of the overall aim of the experiments and a comment about whether that aim was achieved.
This section should provide enough detail to allow full replication of the study by suitably skilled investigators. Protocols for new methods should be included, but well-established protocols may simply be referenced. We encourage authors to submit, as separate supporting information files, detailed protocols for newer or less well-established methods. These are published online only, but are linked to the article and are fully searchable.
The results section should provide details of all of the experiments that are required to support the conclusions of the paper. There is no specific word limit for this section. The section may be divided into subsections, each with a concise subheading. Large datasets, including raw data, should be submitted as supporting information files; these are published online alongside the accepted article. We advise that the results section be written in past tense.
The discussion should spell out the major conclusions of the work along with some explanation or speculation on the significance of these conclusions. How do the conclusions affect the existing assumptions and models in the field? How can future research build on these observations? What are the key experiments that must be done? The discussion should be concise and tightly argued. Conclusions firmly established by the presented data, hypotheses supported by the presented data, and speculations suggested by the presented data should be clearly identified as such. The results and discussion may be combined into one section, if desired.
People who contributed to the work but do not fit criteria for authorship should be listed in the Acknowledgments, along with their contributions. It is the authors’ responsibility to ensure that anyone named in the acknowledgments agrees to being so named. Details of the funding sources that have supported the work should be confined to the funding declaration provided on submission. Do not include them in the acknowledgments.
Only published or accepted manuscripts should be included in the reference list. Meetings abstracts, conference talks, or papers that have been submitted but not yet accepted should not be cited. Limited citation of unpublished work should be included in the body of the text only. Because all references will be linked electronically as much as possible to the papers they cite, proper formatting of the references is crucial. Please read guide to authors carefully to prepare a list of references.
The aim of the figure legend should be to describe the key messages of the figure, but the figure should also be discussed in the text. An enlarged version of the figure and its full legend will often be viewed in a separate window online, and it should be possible for a reader to understand the figure without switching back and forth between this window and the relevant parts of the text. Each legend should have a concise title of no more than 15 words. The legend itself should be succinct, while still explaining all symbols and abbreviations. Avoid lengthy descriptions of methods.
The table title should be concise, no more than one sentence. The rest of the table legend and any footnotes should be placed below the table. Footnotes can be used to explain abbreviations.
Tables must be cell-based, such as would be produced in a spreadsheet program or in Microsoft Word. Do not provide tables as graphic objects. Tables must be no larger than one printed page (7inches x 9.5inches). Larger tables can be published as online supporting information. Bold and italics formatting will be preserved in the published version; however, more extensive formatting will be lost. Do not include color, shading, lines, rules, text boxes, tabs, returns, or pictures within the table.
Final Proof Corrections and Submission
The next step in the publication process involves reviewing the galley proofs for your article. Please return the checked galley proofs via e-mail (dairyscience21@yahoo.com) or via Secretary of the Egyptian Society of Dairy Sciences within 72 hours of receipt. Late return of galley proofs may mean postponement to a later issue. Please make a copy of the corrected proofs before returning them; keep the copy for your records.
This step is entirely the responsibility of the corresponding author. The galley proofs will not be read by editorial staff. Errors that you fail to mark will be published.
The corresponding author of an accepted manuscript will receive e-mail notification or by hand from Secretary of the Egyptian Society of Dairy Sciences and complete instructions when page proofs are available for review. Final proof will be provided in Portable document format (PDF) files of the typeset pages. The attention of the authors is directed to the instructions which accompany the proof, especially the requirement that all corrections, revisions, and additions be entered on the proof and not on the manuscript.
Note that you are being asked to correct errors, not to revise the paper. You will not be charged for our editing mistakes or typographical errors, but you will be charged for any alterations from the original text that you make on the galley proofs. Extensive alteration may require Editorial Board approval, possibly delaying publication.
Please follow these guidelines when reviewing the galley proofs:
•Mark your corrections, in red ink, directly on the galley proofs. Make sure that your corrections are noticeable and easy to understand.
•Check all type on the galley proofs. Check the title, the abbreviations list, and the author–paper documentation paragraph.
•Check the table data against that in your original tables.
•Check any equations against those in your original manuscript. Make sure special characters have not dropped out.
•Check to be sure that figures are entirely legible, including any small-print text.
•If you find an error, look again at the lines around the error. Mistakes tend to cluster.
Submission of Final Proof Corrections
The next step in the publication process is to submit finally checked galley proof. Take the following steps to provide the final proof corrections:
Scan only those pages marked with corrections.
Save each scanned page in JPG format.
Submit all scanned pages via e-mail to (dairyscience21@yahoo.com) or via hand to the Secretary of the Egyptian Society of Dairy Sciences
Write the statement like “No modification on page number 1, 2, 3, 7, 8” about the pages required no corrections.
Note: If you are completely SATISFIED from the final proof, just inform the Editorial Office about your satisfaction via e-mail or by hand to the Secretary of the Egyptian Society of Dairy Sciences. Only on the receipt of your final satisfaction opinion, Editorial Office will send your article for final publication.