About the Journal

Focus and Scope


HAJAS aims to publish original research results and reviews on farm tropical animals such as cattle, buffaloes, sheep, goats, pigs, horses, and poultry, as well as non-domesticated Indonesian endemic animals, such as deers, anoa, babirusa, etc.


HAJAS encompasses a broad range of research topics in animal sciences:

  • breeding and genetics
  • reproduction and physiology
  • nutrition
  • feed sciences
  • agrostology
  • animal products
  • biotechnology
  • behavior
  • welfare
  • health
  • livestock farming system
  • socio-economic
  • policy

Publication Frequency

May and November

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content on the principle that making research freely available to the public supports a greater global knowledge exchange.

Publication Ethics

Hasanuddin Journal of Animal Science (HAJAS) is a peer-reviewed electronic international journal. This statement clarifies the ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing an article in this journal, including the author, the chief editor, the Editorial Board, the Peer-reviewer­­­­­ and the Publisher (Hasanuddin University). This statement is based on COPE’s Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors.

Ethical Guideline for Journal Publication

The publication of an article in HAJAS is an essential building block in developing a coherent and respected knowledge network. It directly reflects the quality of the authors' work and the institutions that support them. Peer-reviewed articles support and embody the scientific method. It is therefore important to agree upon standards of expected ethical behavior for all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher, and the society.  

Hasanuddin University, as the publisher of Hasanuddin Journal of Animal Science, takes its duties of guardianship over all stages of publishing extremely seriously, and we recognize our ethical and other responsibilities. We are committed to ensuring that advertising, reprint, or other commercial revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions. In addition, Hasanuddin University and the Editorial Board will assist in communications with other journals and publishers where this is useful and necessary.

Review Process and Policy

The editor-in-chief will assign the manuscript to the relevant Editor or Managing Editor for further handling. The editor or managing editor will ask at least two scientists to review the research or the article's manuscript. All manuscripts are subject to double-blind peer review, where the identity of the reviewers will remain anonymous to the author. The reviewer also does not know the author's identity, so they are expected to meet standards of academic excellence. The reviewers selected are appropriate to the field of science of the manuscript to be reviewed.

The following image shows detailed information about the flow of a manuscript submission (author) until the editor accepts it.

The steps are:

Manuscript Submission (by author)

Manuscript Examination and Selection (by the chief editor and manager). HAJAS conducts an initial evaluation to determine the general suitability of the manuscript submitted to the journal. All Editorial decisions will be communicated to the author approximately 30-90 days after online submission, either via the system or e-mail. With our online journal management system, authors can monitor progress through the editorial process. The editor-in-chief or manager will send the manuscript to the editor; then the editor will send it to 2 or more reviewers. The reviewer's recommendation determines whether the manuscript is accepted or rejected.

The author makes revisions based on the reviewer's suggestions. The editor's revision results are then put into Turnitin, and if the similarity is more than 25%, the author must paraphrase. If the author cannot reduce similarity, the manuscript will be rejected. However, if the reviewer and editor are satisfied with the revision, they will notify them of acceptance. The manuscript then proceeds to copyedit and Galley for publication.

Publication decisions

The  Hasanuddin Journal of Animal Science editor is responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published. The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always drive such decisions. The editors may be guided by the policies of the journal's editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The editors may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

Fair play

The editor evaluates manuscripts for their intellectual content at any time without regard to the author's race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy.


The editor and any editorial staff must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

Disclosure and conflicts of interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor's research without the author's express written consent.

Duties of Reviewers

Contribution to Editorial Decisions

Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions, and the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper.


Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor and excuse himself from the review process.


Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorized by the editor.

Standards of Objectivity

Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Reviewers should identify relevant published work that the authors have not cited. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also be aware of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper they have personal knowledge.

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

Duties of Authors

Reporting standards

Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

Data Access and Retention

Authors can be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. If practicable, they should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases) and, in any event, be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

Originality and Plagiarism

The authors should guarantee that they have written entirely original works and, if the authors have used the work and words of others, that this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

Multiple, Redundant, or Concurrent Publication

An author should not generally publish manuscripts describing the same research in multiple journals or primary publications. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

Acknowledgment of Sources

Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work.

Authorship of the Paper

Authorship should be limited to those who have contributed significantly to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where others have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included in the paper and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

If the work involves chemicals, procedures, or equipment with any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

Fundamental errors in published works

When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their published work, the author should promptly notify the journal editor or publisher and cooperate with the editor to retract or correct the paper.


Prof. Dr. drh. Ratmawati Malaka, M.Sc.
Editor-in-Chief | Hasanuddin Journal of Animal Science