International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS)
IJCMAS is now DOI (CrossRef) registered Research Journal. The DOIs are assigned to all published IJCMAS Articles.
Index Copernicus ICI Journals Master List 2022 - IJCMAS--ICV 2022: 95.28 For more details click here
National Academy of Agricultural Sciences (NAAS) : NAAS Score: *5.38 (2020) [Effective from January 1, 2020] For more details click here

IJCMAS operates peer review process based on the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics

Call Us: +91 9566 45 2355

See Guidelines to Authors

Guidelines to Authors

The International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Science ISSN:2319-7692(Print), ISSN:2319-7706(Online) welcome the articles/ original research papers/ Manuscript from the Research scholars, Academicians, industrialists in the area of microbiology and applied science and Publish Monthly.

Papers submitted by the authors/ co-authors must be original in nature. No parts of the paper are not currently sent to any journal, international journal or any other publication company.

The author is responsible for ensuring the originating of the paper. The co-authors to ensure the originating of the paper. The authors who are willing to submit paper should ensure that they get approval from their institution or industry. After receipt of paper/ articles/ abstract acknowledgement will be sent within a day. Before publication of paper in the journal, further correspondence will be send to the respective author(s). The paper submitted by authors may be either for readability.

Submission of paper only send through e-mail, provides the table, chart, figures should be done in MS-wordfile in times new Roman. e-mail ID :, immediately after the receipt of paper of Manuscript Number will be sent to the concern author with in day or maximum of two days. The mail should contain the authors' full address, telephone number and designation. If any co author it should be followed by first author. IJCMAS follows Double-Blind Peer Review: Reviewers do not know the identity of the author(s), & the author(s) do not know the identity of the reviewer. (IJCMAS designate reviewers to review the articles from reviewers list) (see the review process)

Note: The International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences accept Manuscript only through e-mail.

Article Types

1) Original Research Articles:
The length of paper should be 10-15 pages. The paper should be original in nature, research findings and working relates to the research work to be given in detail to verify the work by others.

2) Short Communication
The Short communication is suitable for new models, innovative methods and techniques. It should be sent maximum of 2 to 4 pages in length.

3) Reviews
Review can be made by authors in the current topics and intensive areas. It must be 4 to 6 pages. Reviews are also peer-reviewed.
4)Case reports
Novel/interesting/extremely rare cases or rare presentations can be reported. Cases with clinical significance or implications will be given priority. Up to 3 - 4 Pages.
5) Letter to the Editor
Should reflect short, decisive observation. Up to 500-1000 words and five references

Review Process

Review process done by editor in chief and member of Executive editors. Decision will be made by editorial board with in two weeks.

Original Research Articles

Research Articles must be typed and all pages are to be numbered. Title page must include full name of the author, phone number, mobile number and e-mail Id and present address. The abstract state that the scope of research and point out materials and methods, findings and conclusion. The abstract should be 100 to 200 words. The abstract must be in complete sentences, verbs should be clear and abstract should be written in the past tense. Five to ten key words will be provide index reference should be listed.


Introduction must be in clear & stating that reasons for carry out of research work, background regarding the research nature of hypothesis should be clearly stated. The introduction should be understandable to reaches from various science disciplines.

Materials and Methods

Materials and methods do not refer to common place statistical test. It must be enough to allow experiments to be reproduced. If any previous published research work can also be cited and notification should be mentioning clearly. Subheadings should be used.


Results of research articles or manuscripts should be present with clarity and precise. Previous publisher’s findings should be written in present tense. Results should be explained. Discussion, interpretation should be included in the results but should be put into the discussion section.


Discussion part of the research paper includes the sub heading, significance of the results related to research work.


This section should be thanks to people, granting body, university departments, college departments should be in a brief manner.


Tables and chart in the research paper should be kept minimum and simple. It should be double line space including the heading and foot note. Table should be presented in separate page, it should be numbered. Table must be preparing in MS Word.

Figure legends

Figures in the paper brought in a numerical order on a separate sheet. Graphics should be preparing with resolution GIF, JPEG, TIFF and power point are pasting in MS word file. Use Arabic numerical for figures and upper case letter for their parts.


In the text, a reference identified by means of an author‘s name should be followed by the date of the reference in parentheses. When there are more than two authors, only the first author‘s name should be mentioned, followed by ’et al‘. In the event that an author cited has had two or more works published during the same year, the reference, both in the text and in the reference list, should be identified by a lower case letter like ’a‘ and ’b‘ after the date to distinguish the works.


Sivakumar et al (2011), Prakash (2003), (Karmegam, 2004), (Jayakumar and Karmegam, 2012), (Sivakumar, 1998; Karmegam, 2000a,b; Prakash, 2010,2011), (Sathishkumar et al., 2008)

References should be listed at the end of the paper in alphabetical order. Articles in preparation or articles submitted for publication, unpublished observations, personal communications, etc. should not be included in the reference list but should only be mentioned in the article text (e.g., K.Tim, Chennai, Magazine or personal communication, Newsletter). Journal names are abbreviated according to Chemical Abstracts. Authors are fully responsible for the accuracy of the references.


Suthar, S., 2007. Vermicomposting potential of Perionyx sansibaricus (Perrier) in different waste materials. Bioresour. Technol. 98, 1231–1237.
Prakash, M., and Karmegam, N.2010.Vermistabilization of pressmud using Perionyx ceylanensis Mich. Bioresource Technology. 101 (21): 8464–8468.
Prakash, M., and Karmegam, N.2010.Dynamics of nutrients and microflora during vermicomposting of mango leaf litter (Mangifera indica L.) in presence of Perionyx ceylanensis Mich. International Journal of Global Environmental Issues.10(3/4): 339-353.
Prakash, M., and Karmegam, N. 2010. Shift of total microflora in the course of vermicomposting and their association with moisture content during incubation of vermicompost In: Microbial Biotechnology (Eds.) P. Ponmurugan and V. Balakrishnan. Excel India Publishers, New Delhi. Pp. 258-264.
Prakash, M., M.Jaikumar and Karmegam, N. 2008. Physico-chemical Characteristics and Fungal Flora in the Casts of the Earthworm, Perionyx ceylanensis Mich. Reared in Polyalthea longifolia Leaf Litter. Journal of Applied Sciences Research. 4(1): 53-57.
Ravikumar, M., K. R. Sridhar, T.Sivakumar, K. S. Karamchand, N. Sivakumar and Vellaiyan R. 2009. Diversity of filamentous fungi on coastal woody debris after tsunami on the southeast coast of India. Czech Mycol. 61(1): 107–115.
Sivakumar,T. 2007. Biodiversity and Biotechnological potentials of fungi from Muthupet Mangroves, Tamilnadu, India. Ph.D. Thesis, Bharathidasan University, Thiruchirappalli, India.
Edwards, C.A., and Arancon, N.Q.2004.The use of earthworms in the breakdown of organic wastes to produce vermicomposts and animal feed protein. In: Edwards, C.A. (Ed.), Earthworm Ecology, second ed. CRC Press, Boca Raton., pp. 345–438.

Short Communications

Short Communications are limited to a maximum of two figures and one table. They should present a complete study that is more limited in scope than is found in full-length papers. The items of manuscript preparation listed above apply to Short Communications with the following differences:
(1) Abstracts are limited to 100 words
(2) instead of a separate Materials and Methods section, experimental procedures may be incorporated into Figure Legends and Table footnotes
(3) Results and Discussion should be combined into a single section.

Proofs and Reprints

Electronic proofs will be sent (e-mail attachment) to the corresponding author as a PDF file. Page proofs are considered to be the final version of the manuscript. With the exception of typographical or minor clerical errors, no changes will be made in the manuscript at the proof stage. Because the IJCMAS will be published freely online to attract a wide audience), authors will have free electronic access to the full text (in PDF) of the article. Authors can freely download the PDF file from which they can print unlimited copies of their articles.


Submission of a manuscript implies; that the work described has not been published before (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, or thesis) that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere; that if and when the manuscript is accepted for publication, the authors agree to automatic transfer of the copyright to the publisher.

Fees and Charges

Authors are required to pay Rs.4000 for Indian Authors and 100U$ for foreign authors towards as processing fee. Publication of an article in the International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences is not contingent upon the author's ability to pay the charges. Neither is acceptance to pay the processing fee a guarantee that the paper will be accepted for publication. Authors may still request (in advance) that the editorial office waive some of the processing fee under special circumstances.


After acceptance of the manuscript with the journal formatted proof, authors must pay the processing charges as prescribed in the guidelines to authors. Once paid the processing fees it should not be refund from publishers. Because we are charging only the processing fees, it includes reviewers report preparation, editing, proof reading, design, formatting and maintenance.

Pay Now

Guidelines for Reviewers

The peer-review process is mainly to identify scientifically sound research articles or to make suggestions to improve the article or to reject the articles without any innovation, standard methodology and repetitive results. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS) operates peer review process based on the guidelines of Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE: The following COPE model is adopted by IJCMAS during review process.




Double blind


Editors mediate all interactions between reviewers and author


Peer reviews are not published


Review facilitated by the journal


Review owned by the journal or third party

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Peer reviewers play a role in ensuring the integrity of the scholarly record. The peer review process depends to a large extent on the trust and willing participation of the scholarly community and requires that everyone involved behaves responsibly and ethically. Peer reviewers play a central and critical part in the peer review process, but may come to the role without any guidance and be unaware of their ethical obligations. Journals have an obligation to provide transparent policies for peer review, and reviewers have an obligation to conduct reviews in an ethical and accountable manner. Clear communication between the journal and the reviewers is essential to facilitate consistent, fair and timely review. Reviewers may directly view the peer review models recommended by COPE at

Being a reviewer

Professional responsibility

Authors who have benefited from the peer review process should consider becoming peer reviewers as a part of their professional responsibilities. Some journals require a formal process of appointment to the review panel, and some require specific expertise; anyone interested in becoming a reviewer should look for the journal guidelines on peer review and follow any requirements posted. In order to assign appropriate reviewers, editors must match reviewers with the scope of the content in a manuscript to get the best reviews possible. Potential reviewers should provide journals with personal and professional information that is accurate and a fair representation of their expertise, including verifiable and accurate contact information. It is important to recognize that impersonation of another individual during the review process is considered serious misconduct (e.g. see COPE Case 12-12: Compromised peer review in published papers). When approached to review, agree to review only if you have the necessary expertise to assess the manuscript and can be unbiased in your assessment. It is better to identify clearly any gaps in your expertise when asked to review.

Competing interests

Ensure you declare all potential competing, or conflicting, interests. If you are unsure about a potential competing interest that may prevent you from reviewing, do raise this. Competing interests may be personal, financial, intellectual, professional, political or religious in nature. If you are currently employed at the same institution as any of the authors or have been recent (e.g., within the past 3 years) mentors, mentees, close collaborators or joint grant holders, you should not agree to review. In addition, you should not agree to review a manuscript just to gain sight of it with no intention of submitting a review, or agree to review a manuscript that is very similar to one you have in preparation or under consideration at another journal.


It is courteous to respond to an invitation to peer review within a reasonable time-frame, even if you cannot undertake the review. If you feel qualified to judge a particular manuscript, you should agree to review only if you are able to return a review within the proposed or mutually agreed time-frame. Always inform the journal promptly if your circumstances change and you cannot fulfill your original agreement or if you require an extension. If you cannot review, it is helpful to make suggestions for alternative reviewers if relevant, based on their expertise and without any influence of personal considerations or any intention of the manuscript receiving a specific outcome (either positive or negative).

Conducting a review

Initial steps

Read the manuscript, supplementary data files and ancillary material thoroughly (e.g., reviewer instructions, required ethics and policy statements), getting back to the journal if anything is not clear and requesting any missing or incomplete items you need. Do not contact the authors directly without the permission of the journal. It is important to understand the scope of the review before commencing (i.e., is a review of raw data expected?).


Respect the confidentiality of the peer review process and refrain from using information obtained during the peer review process for your own or another’s advantage, or to disadvantage or discredit others (e.g. see COPE Case 14-06: Possible breach of reviewer confidentiality). Do not involve anyone else in the review of a manuscript (including early career researchers you are mentoring), without first obtaining permission from the journal (e.g. see COPE Case 11-29: Reviewer asks trainee to review manuscript). The names of any individuals who have helped with the review should be included so that they are associated with the manuscript in the journal’s records and can also receive due recognition for their efforts.

Bias and competing interests

It is important to remain unbiased by considerations related to the nationality, religious or political beliefs, gender or other characteristics of the authors, origins of a manuscript or by commercial considerations. If you discover a competing interest that might prevent you from providing a fair and unbiased review, notify the journal and seek advice (e.g. see COPE Case 15-05: Reviewer requests to be added as an author after publication). While waiting for a response, refrain from looking at the manuscript and associated material in case the request to review is rescinded. Similarly, notify the journal as soon as possible if you find you do not have the necessary expertise to assess the relevant aspects of a manuscript so as not to unduly delay the review process. In the case of double-blind review, if you suspect the identity of the author(s) notify the journal if this knowledge raises any potential competing or conflict of interest.

Suspicion of ethics violations

If you come across any irregularities with respect to research and publication ethics do let the journal know (e.g. see COPE Case 02-11: Contacting research ethics committees with concerns over studies). For example, you may have concerns that misconduct occurred during either the research or the writing and submission of the manuscript, or you may notice substantial similarity between the manuscript and a concurrent submission to another journal or a published article. In the case of these or any other ethical concerns, contact the editor directly and do not attempt to investigate on your own. It is appropriate to cooperate, in confidence, with the journal, but not to personally investigate further unless the journal asks for additional information or advice.

Transferability of peer review

Publishers may have policies related to transferring peer reviews to other journals in the publisher’s portfolio (sometimes referred to as portable or cascading peer review). Reviewers may be asked to give permission for the transfer of their reviews if that is journal policy. If a manuscript is rejected from one journal and submitted to another, and you are asked to review that same manuscript, you should be prepared to review the manuscript afresh as it may have changed between the two submissions and the journal’s criteria for evaluation and acceptance may be different. In the interests of transparency and efficiency it may be appropriate to provide your original review for the new journal (with permission to do so from the original journal), explaining that you had reviewed the submission previously and noting any changes.

Preparing a report


Follow journals’ instructions for writing and posting the review. If a particular format or scoring rubric is required, use the tools supplied by the journal. Be objective and constructive in your review, providing feedback that will help the authors to improve their manuscript. For example, be specific in your critique, and provide supporting evidence with appropriate references to substantiate general statements, to help editors in their evaluation. Be professional and refrain from being hostile or inflammatory and from making libellous or derogatory personal comments or unfounded accusations (e.g. see COPE Case 08-13: Personal remarks within a post-publication literature forum).

Appropriate feedback

Bear in mind that the editor requires a fair, honest, and unbiased assessment of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript. Most journals allow reviewers to provide confidential comments to the editor as well as comments to be read by the authors. The journal may also ask for a recommendation to accept/revise/reject; any recommendation should be congruent with the comments provided in the review. If you have not reviewed the whole manuscript, do indicate which aspects of the manuscript you have assessed. Ensure your comments and recommendations for the editor are consistent with your report for the authors; most feedback should be put in the report that the authors will see. Confidential comments to the editor should not be a place for denigration or false accusation, done in the knowledge that the authors will not see your comments.

Language and style

Remember it is the authors’ paper, so do not attempt to rewrite it to your own preferred style if it is basically sound and clear; suggestions for changes that improve clarity are, however, important. In addition, be aware of the sensitivities surrounding language issues that are due to the authors writing in a language that is not their first or most proficient language, and phrase the feedback appropriately and with due respect.

Suggestions for further work

It is the job of the peer reviewer to comment on the quality and rigour of the work they receive. If the work is not clear because of missing analyses, the reviewer should comment and explain what additional analyses would clarify the work submitted. It is not the job of the reviewer to extend the work beyond its current scope. Be clear which (if any) suggested additional investigations are essential to support claims made in the manuscript under consideration and which will just strengthen or extend the work.


Prepare the report by yourself, unless you have permission from the journal to involve another person. Refrain from making unfair negative comments or including unjustified criticisms of any competitors’ work that is mentioned in the manuscript. Refrain from suggesting that authors include citations to your (or an associate’s) work merely to increase citation counts or to enhance the visibility of your or your associate’s work; suggestions must be based on valid academic or technological reasons. Do not intentionally prolong the review process, either by delaying the submission of your review or by requesting unnecessary additional information from the journal or author. If you are the editor handling a manuscript and decide to provide a review of that manuscript yourself (perhaps if another reviewer could not return a report), do this transparently and not under the guise of an anonymous additional reviewer.

What to consider after peer review

If possible, try to accommodate requests from journals to review revisions or resubmissions of manuscripts you have reviewed previously. It is helpful to respond promptly if contacted by a journal about matters related to your review and to provide the information required. Similarly, contact the journal if anything relevant comes to light after you have submitted your review that might affect your original feedback and recommendations. Continue to respect the confidential nature of the review process and do not reveal details of the manuscript after peer review unless you have permission from the author and the journal (e.g. see COPE Case 13- 05: Online posting of confidential draft by peer reviewer). See the COPE discussion document Who “owns” peer reviews?2 for a fuller discussion of the issues.

Source: COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

For more information on guidelines and best practice recommendations visit COPE website:

Journal Policies

Copyright and Licensing Policy

The copyright the articles published on open access policy in IJCMAS is retained by the author(s). The authors of each article grant IJCMAS, a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. The authors also grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its integrity is maintained and its original authors, citation details and publisher are identified. The copyright form for IJCMAS is available at

Open Access License

IJCMAS  publishes articles on open access basis and the license permits user to freely share (copy, distribute and transmit) and adapt the contribution for commercial purposes, as long as the author is properly attributed.

Publishing Rights

IJCMAS allows its author(s) to retain publishing rights without any restrictions.

Editorial Policy

Editorial Review and Acceptance

IJCMAS is a peer-reviewed, open access international journal. The journal publishes high quality reviews, research articles and case studies in Microbiology and its allied disciplines. The articles submitted to IJCMAS  for publication must strictly adhere to the following guidelines:


Ethical Policy

IJCMAS  follows a strict publication ethics along with the malpractice policy. IJCMAS is committed to protect the integrity of the academic record and it is intended to help and support the scientific community in all aspects of research and publishing ethics.

Ethical responsibilities of authors are set out below:

The authors are expected to adhere to the highest standard with respect to publication ethics. Any cases of ethical misconduct are treated very seriously and vigorously. It is to inform that the authors must state that the protocol for the research project has been approved by a suitably constituted Ethical Committee constituted in the institution within which the work has been undertaken and all necessary consents and approvals which have been obtained to publish their work. During submission where the manuscript reports on commercial software, hardware or other products, author/s must include a disclosure statement in the body of the manuscript and declare any conflict of interest or any affiliation or involvement in any organization whether it is academic, commercial, financial, personal and professional relevant to the work under consideration to avoid the potential for bias and accept responsibility for what has been included in the manuscript and also disclosed all sources of financial support for conducting the research in the manuscript.

The author(s) should declare that all text, data, figures/tables or other illustrations presented in the manuscript are completely original and does not contain or include material taken from other copyrighted sources and wherever such material has been included, proper citation is included in reference section and also affirm that the work does not violate any proprietary or personal rights of others. It is insisted to the author(s) that the article submitted must state that it has neither been previously published (in part or in full) nor submitted elsewhere in any form or media whatsoever for publication or for simultaneous consideration in any other journal. Authors also must not reuse their previously published work without making substantial changes and without specific justification as it is considered self-plagiarism.

The authors should state that they have substantially participated in research and in preparation of the manuscript representing that work is adequate and original to claim the authorship. It is compulsory to all authors that they must agree invariably that no author can publish his/her contribution anywhere else, without the knowledge of the corresponding or senior author. Where an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in an article of his/her that has been published in IJCMAS , he/she has an obligation to promptly notify the editors to cooperate with them for correcting the article or retract it, whatever is appropriate.

Ethics of Experimentation with Animals and Human

The corresponding author, on behalf of all the authors, should ensure that studies involving experiments on humans must have institutional committee and/or national research ethics committee approval. The manuscripts of such articles should include a statement that the informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects in conformity with the standards currently applied in the country of origin along with the approval number. The name of the authorizing body should be stated in the paper. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

Research with Animals

The author should ensure that studies involving experiments on animals must include a statement in the manuscript indicating that the international, national, and/or institutional guide lines for the care and use of animals have been followed, and that the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Procedures should be such that experimental animals do not have to suffer unnecessarily. Papers should include details of the procedures and of anaesthetics used.

Open Access Policy

The International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS ) is an open access journal. This open access means that articles in the journal can be freely accessible, downloadable and can be used by all researchers, scholars, teachers, students and others who would like to get the material available online. This is to enhance and to encourage the research for the exchange of knowledge worldwide. The open access of article is entirely in accordance with global open access policy of publications.

Peer Review Policy

The practice of peer review is strictly adhered to ensure that the research with high quality standard is published. International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS ) is committed to prompt evaluation and publication of fully accepted articles and operates a conventional blind reviewing policy in which the author name remains anonymous to reviewers and vice versa. Upon submission of an article, all articles undergo a rigorous review process to ensure a thorough and detailed review by experts in the article’s interest area.

All articles are peer reviewed following the procedure outlined below:

The author submits an article and it receives an article tracking number which is required to be indicated in subsequent communications between the corresponding author and the editor. The article is initially assessed by journal editor against the scope of the journal and to confirm journal requirements. The editor decides whether to send the article to review or not. If the initial screening decision is acceptable by the editor, then it is sent for peer review to assess the scientific quality of the article and accordingly the editor will make a final decision. The final decision is mainly based on reviewer(s) recommendation of the article. However, the final decision relies with the editor. Finally, the editor contacts the author with the final decision. If the article is recommended for revisions, the authors will be informed to make the necessary changes/revisions. In case of revisions, the corresponding author is instructed to submit the revised article within a stipulated time. If the article is accepted by the editor, it is transferred to production and will be published upon fulfilling the final requirements. The articles with rejection decision are notified promptly to the authors.

Plagiarism Prevention Policy

International Journal of Current Microbiology and Applied Sciences (IJCMAS ) follows a strong plagiarism policy and is committed to protect the integrity of the scholarly record and feels its duty to help and support the scientific community in all aspects of research and publication ethics. IJCMAS  initially checks for plagiarism using plagiarism software and based on the check, the article will be preceded further. By submitting articles to IJCMAS, the author(s) confirm the following:


Article Correction, Retraction and Withdrawal Policy

The Policy of Regulation

IJCMAS  is intended in protecting and maintaining the integrity of the research repositories. The articles published in IJCMAS  are considered as the final version which has passed through revision, proof correction, and others. Very rarely, when the scientific information in an article is substantially undermined then it becomes necessary for IJCMAS  to publish corrections to the article, or retractions of articles in published form, at the discretion of the editors.

The Correctness of the Final Published Articles

The authors are encouraged to report errors in their articles with regard to the accuracy of published information. Only errors that impact the article significantly will be considered. The corrections will be made at the editor in line with the journal’s discretion. The correction procedure depends on the publication stage of the article. The corrections will be published under corrections and addendum in a later issue of the journal, whatever the case applicable.

Article Retractions

The article may be retracted because of scientific misconduct in cases such as multiple submission, bogus claims of authorship, plagiarism or fraudulent use of data. A signed statement from the concerned authors will be required to be submitted before an article can be retracted. Agreement of all authors of a paper is required before a retraction can be published. A notice of retraction will be published and linked to the original article clearly marked as “Retracted”. The notice will also include the reason for the retraction and who is retracting the article. The original article will not be removed from online or print versions of IJCMAS , but will be identified as a retracted article. Retractions will also be listed on the contents page.

Withdrawal of the Article

The articles submitted by the author(s) can be withdrawn either by the authors or the publisher. Article withdrawal by authors may be permitted only for the most compelling and unavoidable reasons, after submitting a letter signed by all the authors of the article to the editorial office stating the reason for article withdrawal. Authors must not assume that their article has been withdrawn until they have received appropriate notification to this effect from the editorial office. If an article is found to violate the ethical publishing guidelines of the IJCMAS , similar to that of duplicate publication, plagiarism, fraudulent use of data, multiple submission or bogus claims of authorship, the publisher has all the rights to withdraw that article.

Digital Archiving Policy

The contents published in IJCMAS  are archived with a permanent DOI link and can be retrieved at any time from the journal’s archives page.