Asian Science Citation Index is committed to provide an authoritative, trusted and significant information by the coverage of the most important and influential journals to meet the needs of the global scientific community.  
ASCI Database
308-Lasani Town,
Sargodha Road,
Faisalabad, Pakistan
Fax: +92-41-8815544
Contact Via Web
Suggest a Journal
Articles by Maryam Sayab
Total Records ( 6 ) for Maryam Sayab
  Mohammad Jalil Zorriehzahra , Ruchi Tiwari , Swati Sachan , Kumaragurubaran Karthik , Yashpal Singh Malik , Maryam Dadar , Muhammad Sarwar , Maryam Sayab and Kuldeep Dhama
  In the current scenario of increasing and emerging drug resistance in various microbial pathogens, traditional antibiotics are becoming less effective and thus globally research has focused on developing alternative therapeutic regimens having efficient germ killing abilities. The leading alternatives include use of phages, prebiotics, probiotics, cytokines, avian egg yolk antibodies, toll like receptors, medical herbs and various other immunomodulatory/immunotherapeutic approaches. Out of these valuable therapies, the application of oral passive immunization using avian egg yolk antibodies (Immunoglobulin Y, IgY) offers promising future avenues for designing and developing novel prophylactic and treatment strategies against infectious diseases in both humans and animals, particularly countering the enteric pathogens. Hitherto studies confirm beneficial applications of IgY antibodies in animals (Calves, lamb and goat, cats and dogs), poultry and humans, however such studies in fish and aquatic animals are comparatively less. The present study presents as overview on avian egg antibodies, their salient features, advantages and limitations and then describes the potential therapeutic applications of IgY for the prevention and treatment of infectious diseases of fish and aquatic animal species, as well as speculating the future prospects of upcoming IgY technology. Taking into account the valuable prophylactic and therapeutic applications of IgY antibodies, further explorative research in this area could pave way for designing and developing effective pharmaceuticals and treatment options for various infectious diseases of fish/aquaculture animals as well as for safeguarding health of humans and their companion animals.
  Zaib Ur Rehman , Ahsan Ul Haq , Naasra Akram , Mohamed E. Abd El-Hack , Muhammad Saeed , Shahid Ur Rehman , Chunchun Meng , Mahmoud Alagawany , Maryam Sayab , Kuldeep Dhama and Chan Ding
  Objective: The present study was performed to determine the influence of dietary Acetic Acid (AA) supplementation on growth performance, intestinal histomorphology, blood hematology and serum constituents of broilers. Methodology: A total 200 chicks were randomly divided into five experimental groups with four replicates each (10 chicks/replicate) in a complete randomized design experiment. Treatments were as follow: (AA0: control, AA1: basal diet+0.1% acetic acid kg–1, AA2: basal diet+0.2% acetic acid kg–1 and AA3: basal diet+0.3% acetic acid kg–1). Results: The results showed that AA supplementation improved weight gain (p<0.001) and feed conversion ratio (p<0.001). Generally, acetic acid supplementation at 0.3% level improved bird’s performance during 2-6 weeks of age. Increased intestinal length and higher intestinal weight were recorded in AA treated birds. Significant reduction in pH of proventriculus and ventriculus (p<0.01) was observed with in dose related manner. No significant effects were observed on dressing percentage. Histological observations revealed that intestinal morphology professed positive effects under AA treatment. Furthermore, the effect of dietary AA supplementation was significant (p<0.05) only on lymphocytes count and heterophil/lymphocyte ratio. It is obvious that blood of birds fed AA3 diet had the highest concentration of calcium, phosphorous, total protein and globulin comparing with the control diet and other levels of AA. The best results of all parameters were observed in AA3. Conclusion: Based on the results, it could be concluded that AA supplementations in feed employs positive effect on performance and intestinal histomorphology of broilers.
  Mahmoud Alagawany , Mayada Ragab Farag , Mohamed Ezzat Abd El-Hack , Elisabetta Casalino , Vincenzo Tufarelli , Maryam Sayab and Kuldeep Dhama
  Objective: The current study was conducted to assess the biological in vitro impacts of cyadox (CYA) as growth promoter on erythrocytes isolated from rabbits. Methodology: Suspensions of erythrocytes were divided into 6 groups (5 replicates each), 1st group served as control; 2nd, 3rd, 4th, 5th and 6th groups were respectively subjected to CYA at 2.5, 5, 10, 20 and 40 μg mL–1, then incubated for 3 and 6 h at 37°C and shaken gently from 3-4 times per hour. Results: The data obtained revealed that the low doses of CYA (2.5 and 5 μg mL–1) diminished the reduced glutathione (GSH) content and enhanced the catalase (CAT) and superoxide dismutase (SOD) activities even after incubation with CYA for 6 h. These concentrations also had no linear or quadratic influences on the values of malonaldehyde (MDA) and protein carbonyl (PrC) as well as the hemoglobin (Hb), adenosine triphosphate (ATP) and total protein (TP) levels in erythrocytes. Increasing the concentration of CYA (10, 20 and 40 μg mL–1) and increasing the incubation period resulted in depletion of GSH, inhibited the CAT and SOD activities and decreased the protein content in the treated RBCs while the levels of PrC, MDA, Hb, TP and ATP were increased in response to increasing the dose and incubation time. Conclusion: From these results it could be concluded that CYA may be safe at recommended doses (2.5 and 5 μg mL–1) while using at high concentrations revealed pro-oxidant properties which could in turn affect cell survival.
  Mohamed Ezzat Abd El-Hack , Mahmoud Alagawany , Mayada Ragab Farag , Muhammad Arif , Mohamed Emam , Kuldeep Dhama , Muhammad Sarwar and Maryam Sayab
  The concept of "Nanoparticle" is not applied to the individual molecules but it is usually used to indicate to the inorganic materials. These particles vary into different kinds due to their ability to carry different components and act to various conditions of the environment. The different sorts of nanoparticles are used in various sectors such as nutrition, pharmacy, medicine, drug delivery, therapeutics, vaccine formulations, diagnostics, chemical industry, biotechnology and biomedicine for safeguarding health of humans and animals as well as enhancing growth and production performances. The application of nanotechnology is very important in the 21st century to clean up the environment from contaminants by eco-friendly, sustainable, green and economically technologies. Nanotechnology became an essential element of pharmaceutical sciences and nanomaterials have found many applications in systems of drug delivery to enhance the therapeutic performance and efficacy of different drugs and medicines. Most of the current "Nano" systems of drug delivery are linage of conventional dosage forms like nanomicelles, nanoemulsions and nanosuspensions. Also, nanotechnology will have a major role in the future areas of animal nutrition research. Nano additives could be incorporated in capsules or micelles of protein or other natural feed or food component. The use of nutrient nanoparticles may improve the bioavailability of carried nutrients by the epithelial barriers of the gut and their susceptibility to gastrointestinal degradation by digestive enzymes. Offering the matter in a nano form may also improve the functionality of feed/food molecules to the benefit of final product quality.
  Muhammad Saeed , Mohamed E. Abd El-Hack , Mahmoud Alagawany , Muhammad A. Arain , Muhammad Arif , Muhammad A. Mirza , Muhammad Naveed , Sun Chao , Muhammad Sarwar , Maryam Sayab and Kuldeep Dhama
  Chicory (Cichorium intybus) is a perennial herbal plant of the dandelion family Asteraceae, usually with bright blue flowers, rarely pink or white. Several varieties are cultivated for salad leaves, chicons or roots which are baked, ground and used as a coffee substitute and supplement. It is also grown as a forage plant for poultry and animal. In addition, chicory herb plays a key role as antioxidant, anti-inflammatory, sedative, immunological, productive and reproductive enhancer, cardiovascular, hypolipidemic, anticancer, anti-protozoal, gastroprotective, antidiabetic, analgesic, anthelmintic, antimicrobial, wound healing and bitter tonic without inducing therapeutic adverse effect. Regarding the hepatoprotective activity, chicory extract reduced the levels of hepatic enzymes such as alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alkaline phosphatase (ALP). Also, chicory plant is a good and very important protective source for hepatocytes and other liver cells as well as it is used as prebiotic against some species of pathogenic bacteria for both in vitro and in vivo. Moreover, it enhances immunity and feed efficiency by decreasing pathogenic microorganisms of gastrointestinal tract. Cichorium intybus roots also were used for the relief of mild digestive disorders, such as feeling of flatulence, abdominal fullness, temporary loss of appetite and slow digestion. The present study highlights the importance of chicory as a feed additive used to improve growth and productive performance of poultry as well as salient beneficial applications in animals and humans. Furthermore, it explains the mechanisms of action underlying the beneficial effects of chicory and to find the effective level in poultry that would act as liver tonic.
  Maryam Sayab , Muhammad Sarwar and Ravindra P. Veeranna

Redundant Publication, also known as duplicate/dual publication is an unethical practice and a serious threat to research integrity which must not be ignored, either if done accidentally or by choice. International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICMJE) narrates redundant publication as “Publication of a paper that overlaps substantially with one already published in print or electronic media”1.

Redundant Publications are most often the result of duplicate or multiple submissions of a single manuscript by the author to different journals either simultaneously or after getting a concurrent review by another journal. This act of misconduct not only damages the research integrity but also wastes the efforts and time of editors, peer reviewers and editorial staff. An author must be careful enough and submit the original findings to only one Journal at a time, which haven’t been published yet or under consideration by any other journal(s). Preserving the research integrity, the journals must also publicly declare their Dual Submission Policy and consequences according to the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) and should not consider manuscripts that are simultaneously under review by other journals. Moreover, the copyright agreement should clearly state “That the submitted paper has not been submitted elsewhere and will not submit to any other journals for publication unless being rejected or un-notified within some period of time, clearly stated”.

Recently one of the Journal members of the Asian Council of Science Editors (ACSE) has requested the council’s guidance, advice and opinion on a case on Dual Submissions leading to Dual Publication2. The case concerns the duplicate submission of a manuscript by the same authors who had first published their article in a Journal A in the year 2011, which was also the year of submission of the manuscript to this journal. Soon after the paper was published by the journal A the same author submitted the very same paper to another local journal, named Journal B and he was successful in getting the same paper published in Journal B.

Upon receiving the notification and queries from indexing databases for the dual publication of their paper, the author immediately wrote to Journal A, to withdraw their published paper because the article is also published in another local Journal B.

In this situation, the editor of Journal A wrote the author several times that it’s unethical and counted as misconduct under the category of dual submission and publication. Editor of Journal A also explained to the author that as the article was first published with Open Access in Journal A, so the author has no right to withdraw this paper because the findings have been open for the entire research community to read and reproduce. Also, Journal A had the copyright statement from the authors, at the time of acceptance of the paper prior to its publication so the author cannot claim to withdraw the paper at this stage.

Rather than understanding the editorial policies and admitting the misconduct, the author insists to withdraw his article from Journal A, which published this manuscript before Journal B.

With reference to this case, the editor of Journal A has submitted the following questions to the Asian Council of Science Editors to help them figure out the best solution follow up to this misconduct case:

• What should be the practical advice to Publisher of Journal A?
• Who is responsible for such misconduct?
• If the author is responsible what should we do for the author’s wrongdoing?
• Should we pursue the matter with the editor of the journal (Journal B) who has published the duplicate submission?

This case detail was also circulated among the members of the ACSE via the official blog of the ACSE, getting 2,347 views and 64 real-time comments from the Asian research community. All the members of the council have participated actively in discussion over this case and the diverse suggestions, opinions, views from the scholarly community for each of the question are:

What should be the practical advice to Publisher of Journal A?

• Journal A has published the manuscript earlier than Journal B and should retain the publication
• Journal A should retract the paper because of dual publication
• Both Journals should remove the paper from their website
• Blacklist such authors and inform their employer
• Officially inform both the author and author’s institution that this article has been retracted due to the unethical practices of the author
• Contact the editor of Journal B and discuss the misconduct and accordingly blacklist the author
• Both the Journals are suggested to write an editorial on “Dual submission and publication and its consequences” to spread awareness among the research community and to avoid such next cases

Who is responsible for such misconduct?

• The approximate ratio calculated from the collective analysis of discussion is as
• 85% audience blamed the author
• 10% audience blamed both the editor of journal B and author
• 4% audience blamed Journal B
• 1% audience blamed Journal A

If the author is responsible, what should we do for the author’s wrongdoing?

• The author should be blacklisted
• The misconduct case must be reported to the author’s institute along with details
• The paper must be retracted from both of the journals
• Author should be given a chance of explanation to both journals and accordingly withdrawing the article from one of the journals. ( most probably B)
• Journal A should publish an editorial depicting this misconduct and retract the paper

Should we pursue the matter with the editor of the journal (Journal B) who has published the duplicate submission?

• Majority recommends approaching Journal B to explore the actual details of misconduct and accordingly deal with the misconduct case under the guidelines of ethical committees
• Minority recommends to not to approach Journal B and retract the paper from Journal A

Seeking out the expert guidance on this submitted case, the description of this case along with the opinions of ACSE members on the Blog was sent to the Advisory Board Members of the ACSE as well as their members of Committee on Asian Publishing Standard (CAPS) for the proficient suggestions and remedies.

According to the Experts of the ACSE dual submissions is the least understood category of publishing misconduct and imparts a significant negative impact on the scholarly research community. The main cause leading to dual submissions include the researcher’s fast approach to publishing the research results, especially early career researchers.

Dr. Kasier Jamil, Vice President of the ACSE emphasized that the author should never submit the article to two journals simultaneously. Journal A is at no fault if they had the signed copyright agreement. However, publisher A has a choice of not withdrawing the paper and informing the author about unethical practice. On the other hand, Journal B did not check properly if the paper has already been published to any other journal.

Because the author submitted the paper after the paper had been published in Journal A, there are only two cases according to Charley Miao, Regional Director of the ACSE, as below:

Case one: Journal A signed an agreement. The author should be clearly asked to retract the paper from Journal B (in case Journal A has not done so yet) and Journal B should agree on this requirement and retract the paper as soon as possible.

However, if the author still insisted on his opinion, the paper should be retracted from both Journal A and Journal B, after Journal A has contacted Journal B and Journal B have also agreed to do so. In addition, Journal A should also notify the author’s working unit about the author’s unethical behavior.

Case two: Journal A had not signed an agreement, then Journal A has to retract the paper unluckily, while Journal B could decide independently whether to retract the paper or not.

The author has to commit that the article has not been sent to another journal in part or whole article. If the author has submitted such a letter to both the publishers, then it’s the author’s fault. And the article must be withdrawn from both journals.

One of the Advisory board members of the ACSE Prof. Dr. Muhammad Aslam, Pro-VC, NUMS, Pakistan, shared the possible approach of this case as:

• The author may be asked to withdraw the article for journal B and this fact be published in the journal
• If the author doesn’t agree, then ACSE may write to journal B with evidence to withdraw and publicize the dual/ duplicate publication in the journal
• If author, as well as journal B, don’t agree, then journal A may withdraw and publicize the fact in the journal. The author may be issued a written warning and penalty NOT to accept his article(s) in Journal A for the next 3-5 years

Highlighting the importance of this Issue Dr. Ravindra P. Veeranna, one of the ambassadors of the ACSE from Department of Biochemistry, CSIR-CFTRI, India brought a few points under consideration:

• Since the article is published first in the journal A, it is the responsibility of the authors (all the authors of the manuscript not only corresponding author) and also the editor of journal B to make sure that the manuscript is not submitted any other journal for publication
• Include the concept of ORCID in this case report, i.e., the journals should make ORCID mandatory so that the manuscript submitted simultaneously to more than one journal can be checked easily based on ORCID in the online interface
• The author should not only withdraw the manuscript from journal B, the author(s) involved in the dual publication should also apologize to both the journals
• It is mentioned in the present case that the authors go for dual publications mainly because of the fast publication of results especially in the early career researchers. Considering this perspective of the young researchers, the committee on publication ethics should make it mandatory to give the first decision from journals at the earliest, maybe a fixed period of 10 or 15 days

Further to the submitted case, the editor must contact with the corresponding author asking the detailed explanation about this and also figure out the time duration between both publications. As Journal A has prior published the paper and if it holds the agreement of the copyright, the publication must retain with Journal A. The editor of Journal A may communicate the author to withdraw the paper from Journal B and explain to them the situation of being guilty or the editor of Journal A may share the article history with the editor of Journal B and request them to withdraw this paper as they re-published the already published paper.

Also, both Journals should initiate a letter of warning to ban the author on submission for both journals for 1 or 2 years and inform the author’s supervisor about his unethical act to ensure that the author does not repeat this practice in the future. Moreover, the suggestion for journals is to revise their policy requiring copyright transfer on submission and make sure that the submissions must not be published already before accepting the article.

Copyright   |   Desclaimer   |    Privacy Policy   |   Browsers   |   Accessibility