About

Editorial Policies


Focus and Scope

NeoBiota is a peer-reviewed, open-access, rapid online journal on the underlying mechanisms and associated consequences of all types of alien species and biological invasions.

NeoBiota publishes papers across all disciplines interested in biological invasions, specifically on the ecology, evolution and biogeography of non-indigenous aquatic and terrestrial animals, plants, fungi and micro-organisms, on mechanisms that drive the introduction, establishment and spread of these species, on ecological, evolutionary, economic and other consequences of biological invasions, and on the management of invasions in any part of the world. NeoBiota also strongly encourages papers on ethical, social, legal and policy issues related to biological invasions.

NeoBiota considers the following categories of papers for publication:

  • Original research articles

  • Review articles, offering a comprehensive overview, historical analysis or/and future perspectives of a topic

  • Monographs and collection of papers with no limit in size, published as 'special issues'

  • Short communications

  • Letters to the editor and Discussion papers

  • Data papers

  • Book reviews

The journal will be published both online and in print.

The journal NeoBiota is a continuation of the former NEOBIOTA publication series founded in 2002 by the working group with the same name. This group meanwhile evolved into ‘NEOBIOTA, the European Group on Biological Invasions’ and decided in 2010 to transfer the publication series into the open-access, peer-reviewed journal NeoBiota. Previous volumes of NEOBIOTA (1-8) can be viewed at http://www.oekosys.tu-berlin.de/menue/neobiota/


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 exchange of knowledge.


Dryad Repository Submissions

This journal is integrated with the Dryad Digital Repository to make data publication simple and easy for authors. There is a $120 Data Publishing Charge for Dryad submissions, payable via the Dryad website.  For more information, please see their FAQ.


Printed Version and Reprints

NeoBiota is published in identical print (high-resolution, full-color) and online (PDF) versions.
Printed versions of this journal may be ordered in parts or subscribed (see the Table below).
To subscribe please use the Subscription Form (download as PDF file), or contact us by e-mail, letter, or fax. Please, include the full delivery address, if different from that of your registration, and indicate the payment method. Please, contact us if you need a quotation or proforma invoice.
Separate issues or any number of reprints ((high-resolution, full-color) may be ordered using the online Order Reprint(s) form available under each issue or article on the journal's website.
For more information you may also download the Order Information and Library Recommendation Form (PDF, 160K).
Prices are given in EURO and are exclusive of postage and handling. Payment in USD is also possible according to the exchange rate on the day of payment. IMPORTANT: Our prices do not include VAT. Orders from countries outside the European (EU) or from VAT-registered EU customers will be processed VAT-free. VAT (20%) will be added ONLY to NOT VAT-registered customers based in the European Union.

Prices of full-color, high-resolution printed version (separate article and complete issues)

Number of Pages Price in EURO Number of Pages Price in EURO Number of Pages Price in EURO
1-4 2,30 57-60 16,80 261-280 60,00
5-8 2,60 61-64 17,90 281-300 62,00
9-12 3,60 65-68 19,00 301-320 65,00
13-16 4,80 69-72 20,20 321-340 68,00
17-20 5,90 73-80 22,40 341-360 72,00
21-24 7,20 81-100 28,00 361-380 76,00
25-28 8,40 101-120 33,00 381-400 80,00
29-32 9,60 121-140 35,00 401-450 85,00
33-36 10,50 141-160 40,00 451-500 90,00
37-40 11,20 161-180 44,00 500-550 99,00
41-44 12,30 181-200 48,00 550-600 110,00
45-48 13,40 201-220 52,00 600-650 120,00
49-52 14,50 221-240 55,00 650-700 130,00
53-56 15,60 241-260 58,00 701-750 140,00

Copyright Notice

License and Copyright Agreement

In submitting the manuscript to any of Pensoft’s journals, the authors certify that: 

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements. 

  • The work described has not been published before (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review or thesis), that it is not under consideration for publication elsewhere, that its publication has been approved by all the author(s) and by the responsible authorities – tacitly or explicitly – of the institutes where the work has been carried out. 

  • They secure the right to reproduce any material that has already been published or copyrighted elsewhere. 

  • They agree to the following license and copyright agreement:

Copyright

  • Copyright on any article is retained by the author(s). Regarding copyright transfers please see below. 

  • Authors grant Pensoft Publishers a license to publish the article and identify itself as the original publisher. 

  • Authors grant Pensoft Publishers commercial rights to produce hardcopy volumes of the journal for sale to libraries and individuals. 

  • Authors grant any third party the right to use the article freely as long as its original authors and citation details are identified. 

  • The article and any associated published material is distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0):

Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0)

Anyone is free:

  to Share — to copy, distribute and transmit the work 

  to Remix — to adapt the work

Under the following conditions:

  Attribution. The original authors must be given credit. 

  • For any reuse or distribution, it must be made clear to others what the license terms of this work are. 

  • Any of these conditions can be waived if the copyright holders give permission. 

  • Nothing in this license impairs or restricts the author's moral rights.

The full legal code of this license.

Copyright Transfers

Any usage rights are regulated through the Creative Commons License. As Pensoft Publishers is using the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), anyone (the author, his/her institution/company, the publisher, as well as the public) is free to copy, distribute, transmit, and adapt the work as long as the original author is credited (see above). Therefore, specific usage rights cannot be reserved by the author or his/her institution/company, and the publisher cannot include a statement "all rights reserved" in any published paper.
This page was adapted from its equivalent at Copernicus Publications.
Website design and publishing framework: Copyright © 2011 Pensoft Publishers.


Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses entered in this journal site will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.


Author Guidelines


Main Text

Title: The title should be in a sentence case (only scientific, geographic or person names should be with a first capital letter, i.e. Elater ferrugineus L., Germany, etc.), and should include an accurate, clear and concise description of the reported work, avoiding abbreviations.

Authors and Affiliations: Provide the complete names of all authors, and their addresses for correspondence, including e.g., institutional affiliation (e.g. university, institute), location (street, boulevard), city, state/province (if applicable), and country. One of the authors should be designated as the corresponding author. It is the corresponding author's responsibility to ensure that the author list, and the individual contributions to the study are accurate and complete. If the article has been submitted on behalf of a consortium, all consortium members and their affiliations should be listed after the Acknowledgements section.

Abstract and Keywords: Please have your abstract and keywords ready for input into the submission module.
Body Text: Manuscripts must be submitted in English. Authors should confirm the English language quality of their texts or alternatively request thorough linguistic editing prior to peer-review at a price. Manuscripts written in poor English are a subject of rejection prior to peer-review. Use either British/Commonwealth or American English provided that the language is consistent within the paper. Each text must be written with precision, clarity, and economy, whenever appropriate in active voice and first person. Avoid the use of parenthetical comments and italics or bold for emphasis. This journal discourages the use of quotation marks except for direct quotations, words defined by the author, and words used in unusual contexts. Short quotations should be embedded in the text and enclosed in double quotation marks (''). Long quotations should be on a separate line, italicized, but without quotation marks. Single quotation marks are to be used only for a quotation that occurs within another quotation.

Spacing, Fonts, Line and Page Numbering: 1.5 or double space all text and quotations, single space figure legends, tables, references, etc. Separate paragraphs with a blank line. Use a 12-point font (preferably Times New Roman or Arial). Please provide line numbers as well as page numbers.
Capitals: First capital letters should be used only in the beginning of a sentence, in proper names and in headings and subheadings, as well as to indicate tables, graphs and figure/s within the text. Software programmes should be written with capital letters (e.g., ANOVA, MANOVA, PAUP).
Italicization/Underlining: Scientific names of species and genera, long direct quotations and symbols for variables and constants (except for Greek letters), such as p, F, U, T, N, r, but not for SD (standard deviation), SE (standard error), DF (degrees of freedom) and NS (non significant) should be italicized. These symbols in illustrations and equations should be in italics to match the text. Italics should not be used for emphasis, and not in abbreviations such as e.g., i.e., et al., etc., cf. Underlining of any text is not acceptable.
Abbreviations: Abbreviations should be followed by ‘.' (full stop or period; for instance: i.e., e.g., cf., etc.). Note that you shouldn't add a full stop at the end of abbreviated words if the last letter of the abbreviation is the same as the last letter of the full word. For example, you should abbreviate "Eds", "Dr", "Mr" without full stop at the end. All measures, for instance mm, cm, m, s, L, should be written without full stop.
On the use of dashes: (1) Hyphens are used to link words such as personal names, some prefixes and compound adjectives (the last of which vary depending on the style manual in use) (2) En-dash or en-rule (the length of an 'n') is used to link spans. In the context of our journal en-dash should be used to link numerals, sizes, dates and page numbers (e.g., 1977–1981; figs 5–7; pp. 237–258); geographic or name associations (Murray–Darling River; a Federal–State agreement); and character states combinations such as long–pubescent or red–purple. (3) Em-dash or em-rule (the length of an 'm') should be used rarely, only for introducing a subordinate clause in the text that is often used much as we use parentheses. In contrast to parentheses an em-dash can be used alone. En-dashes and em-dashes should not be spaced.

Footnotes: Avoid footnotes in the body text of the manuscript. It is always possible to incorporate the footnote into the main text by rewording the sentences, which greatly facilitates reading. Additionally, footnotes are not always handled well by the journal software, and their usage may cause a failure of submission. Footnotes are acceptable only below tables; instead of numbers, please use (in order): †, ‡, §, |, ¶, #, ††, ‡‡, §§, ||, ¶¶, ##.

Geographical coordinates: It is strongly recommended to list geographical coordinates as taken from GPS or online gazetteer, or georeferencer (

http://wwold.gbif.org/prog/digit/Georeferencing). Geographical coordinates must be listed in one of the following formats:

Definition: The locality consists of a point represented by coordinate information in the form of latitude and longitude. Information may be in the form of

  • Degrees, Minutes and Seconds (DMS),

  • Degrees and Decimal Minutes (DDM), or

  • Decimal Degrees (DD).

Records should also contain a hemisphere (E or W and N or S) or, with Decimal Degrees, minus (–) signs to indicate western and/or southern hemispheres.
Examples:

  • Example 1: 36° 31' 21" N; 114° 09' 50" W (DMS)

  • Example 2: 36° 31.46’N; 114° 09.84’W (DDM)

  • Example 3: 36.5243° S; 114.1641° W (DD)

  • Example 4: −36.5243; −114.1641 (DD using minus signs to indicate southern and western hemispheres)

Note on accuracy: Because GPS units are very commonly used today to record latitude/longitude, many authors simply give the GPS readings for their localities. However, these readings are much too accurate. For example, a GPS unit might give the latitude in decimal seconds as 28°16'55.87"N. Since one second of latitude is about 30 m on the ground, the second figure after the decimal in 55.87 represents 30 cm, yet a typical handheld GPS unit is only accurate at best to a few metres.
We therefore recommend two ways to report GPS-based locations. If you give the GPS reading without rounding off, make sure you include an uncertainty figure as a context for the over-accurate GPS reading. We recommend the Darwin Core definition of uncertainty (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/terms/index.htm#coordinateUncertaintyInMeters):
"The horizontal distance (in meters) from the given decimalLatitude and decimalLongitude describing the smallest circle containing the whole of the Location."
If you only give the GPS reading, please round it off to an implied precision appropriate to the error in the measurement, or to the extent of the area sampled. We suggest rounding off

  • to the nearest second in degree-minute-second format (28°16'56"N), which implies roughly ± 25-30 m at middle latitudes
  • to four decimal places in decimal degree format (28.2822°N), which implies roughly ± 10-15 m at middle latitudes
  • to two decimal places in decimal minute format (28°16.93'N), which implies roughly 15-20 m at middle latitudes

Altitude: Many GPS users simply record the elevation given by their GPS unit. However, GPS elevation is NOT the same as elevation above sea level. GPS units record the elevation above a mathematical model of the earth's surface. The difference between this elevation and elevation above sea level can be tens of metres. In any case, the accuracy of a GPS elevation is often the same as the usual accuracy in horizontal position, so a GPS elevation such as '753 m' is much too accurate and should be rounded off to 'ca 750 m'.

We strongly recommend the use of Example 2 (the DDM format). The other three are also possible but will be recalculated to DDM during the process of online mapping from the HTML version of the paper. 
The only restriction on format is in creating a KML (Keyhole Markup Language) file. KML latitudes and longitudes must be in the DD format shown above in Example 4.

Please also consider submitting a table of localities with your manuscript, either as a spreadsheet or in CSV text format. By doing so you will make your specimen localities much more easily available for use in biodiversity databases and geospatial investigations. The geospatial table will be put online as supplementary material for your paper. A minimum table will have three fields: species (or subspecies) name, latitude and longitude. A full table will have the same data for each specimen lot as appears in the text of your paper. Please check latitude/longitude carefully for each entry.

Units: Use the International System of Units (SI) for measurements. Consult Standard Practice for Use of the International System of Units (ASTM Standard E−380−93) for guidance on unit conversions, style, and usage. 
Statistics: Use leading zeroes with all numbers, including probability values (e.g., P < 0.001). For every significant F−statistic reported, provide two df values (numerator and denominator). Whenever possible, indicate the year and version of the statistical software used.
Web (HTML) links: Authors are encouraged to include links to other Internet resources in their article. This is especially encouraged in the reference section. When inserting a reference to a web-page, please include the http:// portion of the web address.
Supplementary files: Larger datasets can be uploaded separately as Supplementary Files. Tabular data provided as supplementary files can be uploaded as an Excel spreadsheet (.xls), as an OpenOffice spreadsheets (.ods) or comma separated values file (.csv). As with all uploaded files, please use the standard file extensions.
Headings and subheadings: Main headings: The body text should be subdivided into different sections with appropriate headings. Where possible, the following standard headings should be used: Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion,
Conclusions, Acknowledgements, References. These headings need to be in bold font on a separate line and start with a first capital letter. Please do not number headings or subheadings.

  • Introduction − The motivation or purpose of your research should appear in the Introduction, where you state the questions you sought to answer, and then provide some of the historical basis for those questions.

  • Methods − Provide sufficient information to allow someone to repeat your work. A clear description of your experimental design, sampling procedures, and statistical procedures is especially important in papers describing field studies, simulations, or experiments. If you list a product (e.g., animal food, analytical device), supply the name and location of the manufacturer. Give the model number for equipment used. Supply complete citations, including author (or editor), title, year, publisher, and version number, for computer software mentioned in your article.

  • Results − Results should be stated concisely and without interpretation.

  • Discussion − Focus on the rigorously supported aspects of your study. Carefully differentiate the results of your study from data obtained from other sources. Interpret your results, relate them to the results of previous research, and discuss the implications of your results or interpretations. Point out results that do not support speculations or the findings of previous research, or that are counter-intuitive. You may choose to include a Speculation subsection in which you pursue new ideas suggested by your research, compare and contrast your research with findings from other systems or other disciplines, pose new questions that are suggested by the results of your study, and suggest ways of answering these new questions.

  • Conclusion −This should state clearly the main conclusions of the research and give a clear explanation of their importance and relevance. Summary illustrations may be included.

  • References − The list of References should be included after the final section of the main article body. A blank line should be inserted between single-spaced entries in the list. Authors are requested to include links to online sources of articles, whenever possible!

 Where possible, the standard headings should be used in the order given above. Additional headings and modifications are permissible.

Subordinate headings: Subordinate headings (e.g. Field study and Simulation model or Counts, Measurements and Molecular analysis), should be left-justified, italicized, and in a regular sentence case. All subordinate headings should be on a separate line.


English Language Editing

This journal has well-defined policies for English language editing. Involving mandatory outsourced language editing services would considerably increase the price of the Article Processing Charges, which would become an additional obstacle for persons and institutions to publish in the journal. Therefore we rely both on the conscience of our authors to provide stylistically written texts and our editors and reviewers to filter out badly written manuscripts.

Manuscripts must be submitted in English. Authors should confirm the English language quality of their texts or alternatively request thorough linguistic editing prior to peer-review at a price. Manuscripts written in poor English are a subject of rejection prior to peer-review. Authors have to confirm by checking a tick box in the submission process that they have followed the above requirement:

[ ] I confirm that the use of English language in this manuscript is proficient. I am aware that  manuscripts in poor English will be rejected prior to peer-review.
The submission process includes an option to request a professional linguistic and copy editing at a price of EUR 15 per 1800 characters:

[ ] I would like to request thorough linguistic editing prior to peer review at a price. I agree to cover the costs even if my manuscript is not accepted for publication.


Citations and References

Citations within the text: Before submitting the manuscript, please check each citation in the text against the References and vice-versa to ensure that they match exactly. Citations in the text should be formatted as follows: Smith (1990) or (Smith 1990), Smith et al. (1998) or (Smith et al. 1998) and (Smith et al. 1998, 2000, Brock and Gunderson 2001, Felt 2006).
References: It is important to format the references properly, because all references will be linked electronically as completely as possible to the papers cited. It is desirable to add a DOI (digital object identifier) number for either the full-text or title and abstract of the article as an addition to traditional volume and page numbers. If a DOI is lacking, it is recommended to add a link to any online source of an article. Please use the following style for the reference list (or download the Pensoft EndNote style): here 

Published Papers:

Araújo MB, Cabeza M, Thuiller W, Hannah L, Williams PH (2004) Would climate change drive species out of reserves? An assessment of existing reserve-selection methods. Global Change Biology 10: 1618-1626.
Accepted Papers:

Same as above, but ''in press'' appears instead the year in parentheses.  

Electronic Journal Articles:

Thuiller W, Araújo MB, Pearson RG, Whittaker R J, Brotons L, Lavorel S (2004) Biodiversity conservation - Uncertainty in predictions of extinction risk. Nature 430: doi: 10.1038/nature02716.

Paper within conference proceedings:

Orr AG (2006) Odonata in Bornean tropical rain forest formations: Diversity, endemicity and applications for conservation management. In Cordero Rivera A (Ed.) Forests and Dragonflies: Fourth WDA International Symposium of Odonatology, Pontevedra (Spain), July 2005. Pensoft Publishers (Sofia-Moscow): 51-78. 

Book chapter: 

May RM, Lawton JH, Stork NE (1995) Assessing extinction rates. In: Lawton JH, May RM (Eds) Extinction rates. Oxford University Press (New York): 1-24.
Book:

Hanski I (2005) The shrinking world: Ecological consequences of habitat loss. International Ecological Institute (Oldendorf/Luhe): 1-307.

Book with institutional author:

European Environment Agency (2005) Vulnerability and Adaptation to Climate Change in Europe. EEA Technical Report 7/2005: 1-84.
PhD thesis:

Kawanishi K (2002) Population status of tigers (Panthera tigris) in a primary rainforest of Peninsular Malaysia. PHD Thesis. University of Florida (Gainesville).

Link/URL:

BBC News:  Plants 'can recognise themselves'.http://news.bbc.co.uk/earth/hi/earth_news/newsid_8076000/8076875.stm

Citations of Public Resource Databases:
It is highly recommended all appropriate datasets, images, and information to be deposited in public resources. Please provide the relevant accession numbers (and version numbers, if appropriate). Accession numbers should be provided in parentheses after the entity on first use. Examples of such databases include, but are not limited to:

Providing accession numbers to data records stored in global data aggregators allows us to link your article to established databases, thus integrating it with a broader collection of scientific information. Please hyperlink all accession numbers through the text or list them directly after the References in the online submission manuscript.

All journal titles should be spelled out completely and should not be italicized.

Provide the publisher's name and location when you cite symposia or conference proceedings; distinguish between the conference date and the publication date if both are given. Do not list abstracts or unpublished material in the References. They should be quoted in the text as personal observations, personal communications, or unpublished data, specifying the exact source, with date if possible. When possible, include URLs for articles available online through library subscription or individual journal subscription, or through large international archives, indexes and aggregators, e.g., PubMedCentral, Scopus, CAB Abstracts, etc. URLs for pdf articles that are posted on personal websites only should be avoided.


Illustrations, Figures and Tables

Figures and illustrations are accepted in the following image file formats:

  • EPS (preferred format for diagrams)

  • TIFF (at least 300dpi resolution, with LZW compression)

  • PNG (preferred format for photos or images)

  • JPEG (preferred format for photos or images)

  • GIF

  • BMP

  • SVG

Should you have any problems in providing the figures in one of the above formats, or in reducing the file below 20 MB, please contact the Editorial Office at

neobiota@pensoft.net

Figure legends: All figures should be referenced consecutively in the manuscript; legends should be listed consecutively immediately after the References. For each figure, the following information should be provided: Figure number (in sequence, using Arabic numerals − i.e. Figure 1, 2, 3 etc.); short title of figure (maximum 15 words); detailed legend, up to 300 words.
Please note that it is the responsibility of the author(s) to obtain permission from the copyright holder to reproduce figures or tables that have previously been published elsewhere.
On the use of Google Maps
Please do NOT use maps produced by Google Earth and Google Maps in your publications, as these are subject of copyright! Here is an excerpt from Google Maps/Earth Additional Terms of Service:
Restrictions on Use. Unless you have received prior written authorization from Google (or, as applicable, from the provider of particular Content), you must not: (a) copy, translate, modify, or make derivative works of the Content or any part thereof; (b) redistribute, sublicense, rent, publish, sell, assign, lease, market, transfer, or otherwise make the Products or Content available to third parties; (c) reverse engineer, decompile or otherwise attempt to extract the source code of the Service or any part thereof, unless this is expressly permitted or required by applicable law; (d) use the Products in a manner that gives you or any other person access to mass downloads or bulk feeds of any Content, including but not limited to numerical latitude or longitude coordinates, imagery, and visible map data; (e) delete, obscure, or in any manner alter any warning or link that appears in the Products or the Content; or (f) use the Service or Content with any products, systems, or applications for or in connection with (i) real time navigation or route guidance, including but not limited to turn-by-turn route guidance that is synchronized to the position of a user's sensor-enabled device; or (ii) any systems or functions for automatic or autonomous control of vehicle behavior; (g) use the Products to create a database of places or other local listings information.
Tables: Each table should be numbered in sequence using Arabic numerals (i.e. Table 1, 2, 3 etc.). Tables should also have a title that summarizes the whole table, maximum 15 words. Detailed legends may then follow, but should be concise.

Small tables can be embedded within the text, in portrait format (note that tables on a landscape page must be reformatted onto a portrait page or submitted as additional files). These will be typeset and displayed in the final published form of the article. Such tables should be formatted using the 'Table object' in a word processing program to ensure that columns of data are kept aligned when the file is sent electronically for review. Do not use tabs to format tables or separate text. All columns and rows should be visible, please make sure that borders of each cell display as black lines. Colour and shading should not be used; neither should commas be used to indicate decimal values. Please use a full stop to denote decimal values (i.e., 0.007 cm, 0.7 mm).

Larger datasets can be uploaded separately as Supplementary Files. Tabular data provided as supplementary files can be uploaded as an Excel spreadsheet (.xls), as an OpenOffice spreadsheets (.ods) or comma separated values file (.csv). As with all uploaded files, please use the standard file extensions.


Materials and Methods

In line with responsible and reproducible research, as well as FAIR (Findability, Accessibility, Interoperability and Reusability) data principles, we highly recommend that authors describe in detail and deposit their science methods and laboratory protocols in the open access repository protocols.io.

Once deposited on protocols.io, protocols and methods will be issued a unique digital object identifier (DOI), which could be then used to link a manuscript to the relevant deposited protocol. By doing this, authors could allow for editors and peers to access the protocol when reviewing the submission to significantly expedite the process.  

Furthermore, an author could open up his/her protocol to the public at the click of a button as soon as their article is published.

Stepwise instructions:

  1. Prepare a detailed protocol via protocols.io.

  2. Click Get DOI to assign a persistent identifier to your protocol.

  3. Add the DOI link to the Methods section of your manuscript prior to submitting it for peer review.

  4. Click Publish to make your protocol openly accessible as soon as your article is published (optional).

  5. Update your protocols anytime.


Supplementary Files

Online publishing allows an author to provide data sets, tables, video files, or other information as supplementary information, greatly increasing the impact of the submission. Uploading of such files is possible in Step 4 of the submission process.

The maximum file size for each Supplementary File is 20 MB.

The Supplementary Files will not be displayed in the printed version of the article, but will exist as linkable supplementary downloadable files in the online version.

While submitting a supplementary file the following information should be completed:

  • File format (including name and a URL of an appropriate viewer if format is unusual)

  • Title of data

  • Description of data

All supplementary files should be referenced explicitly by file name within the body of the article, e.g. 'See supplementary file 1: Movie 1" for the original data used to perform this analysis.

Ideally, the supplementary files should not be platform-specific, and should be viewable using free or widely available tools. Suitable file formats are:

For supplementary documentation:

  • PDF (Adobe Acrobat)

For animations:

  • SWF (Shockwave Flash)

For movies:

  • MOV (QuickTime)

  • MPG (MPEG)

For datasets:

  • XLS (Excel spreadsheet)

  • CSV (Comma separated values)

  • ODS (OpenOffice spreadsheets)

As for images, file names should be given in the standard file extensions. This is especially important for Macintosh users, since the Mac OS does not enforce the use of standard file extensions. Please also make sure that each additional file is a single table, figure or movie (please do not upload linked worksheets or PDF files larger than one sheet).


Revising your article

Authors must submit the revised version of the manuscript using Track Changes/Comments tools of Word so that the Subject Editor can see the corrections and additions.

Authors must address all critiques of the referees in a response letter to the editor and submit it along with the revised manuscript through the online editorial system. In case a response letter is not submitted by the authors, the editor has the right to reject the manuscript without further evaluation.


Submission Guidelines


Submission Procedure

Already have a Username/Password ?

Go to Login

Need a Username/Password?

Go to Registration

Registration and login are required to submit items online and to check the status of current submissions.

Submission of manuscripts to this journal is possible only through the online submission module. We kindly request authors to consult the Focus and Scope section prior to submission. In order to submit a manuscript to the journal, authors are required to register with the journal and/or to login. Once logged in, you will find the online submission system either by clicking the "Submit a manuscript" button.

The manuscript submission process is separated into the following steps:

  • Step 1: Specifying the manuscript type and completing the submission checklist

  • Step 2: Typing in the author(s) names, contact information, title, abstract, keywords, and other metadata

  • Step 3: Uploading the submission file (see below for details on how to prepare it)

  • Step 4: Uploading additional and supplementary files (see below for details) and associated metadata

  • Step 5: Final verification of the submitted files and confirmation


Organizing Your Submission

Before starting your submission please make sure that your manuscript is formatted in accordance to the Authors Guidelines.

Please note that the maximum file size that may be uploaded through our online submission system is 20 MB.

Manuscripts submitted to this journal must be divided into separate files (no larger than 20 MB each) to allow their processing by our software. Before attempting an online submission, please consider preparing the following file types:

1. Submission file

Review the version of the manuscript in PDF format with all figures embedded. The total file size must be no larger than 20 MB.

2. Additional files

Original text file and high-resolution figures must be submitted during the same submission process as the additional files (Step 4) in one of the accepted file formats (see below). These may be compressed in order to reduce bandwidth during upload:

  • Text of the manuscript (DOC, DOCX, RTF, OpenDocument Format, ODF) with tables embedded in the text)

  • Figures (each figure as an individual file in one of the following image file formats: EPS, TIFF, JPEG, PNG, GIF, BMP, not larger than 20 MB each)

  • Equations (each equation as an individual file in one of the above mentioned image file formats)

3. Supplementary files (appendices)

Large datasets or multimedia files, usually published as appendices in conventional print journals, should be uploaded as supplementary files complete with the associated metadata on the online submission form. Supplementary files should have their own legends.

Most file formats are accepted. Text-only appendices must be in DOC, DOCX, RTF, or ODF formats.

Should you have any technical problems in submitting a manuscript to this journal, please contact the Editorial Office at journals@pensoft.net

We encourage authors to send an inquiry to the respective Subject Editor prior to submitting a manuscript. The purpose of the presubmission inquiry is to solicit rapid initial feedback on the suitability of the manuscript for publication in this journal. Pre-submission enquiries may also be sent to the Editorial Office at journals@pensoft.net


Article Charges


Core Charges

Core services included in our Article Processing Charges:

  • Online submission and editorial management system, professional peer-review and editorial assistance.
  • Personal attitude, technical support and fast reply to any inquiry coming from authors, editors, or reviewers.
  • Automated email notification and alert system saving your time to track the progress of your manuscript.
  • Automated registration of peer reviews at Publons
  • Copy-editing services.
  • Typesetting, copyediting, proofreading and publication in 3 digital formats: semantically enhanced HTML, PDF and machine-readable XML.
  • Rapid publication process, normally within 1-2 weeks time after a manuscript is accepted for publication.
  • Advanced data publishing workflows.
  • Semantic Web enhancements to the article text.
  • Markup and visualization of all taxon names and taxon treatments in your work.
  • Immediate free access for everyone to your work on the day of publication.
  • Active dissemination and promotion through press releases, social and mass media.
  • Automated alert service through email and RSS on the day of publication. 
  • Immediate distribution of your publication to scientific databases, indices and search engines (Web of Science, Scopus, Google Scholar, CAB Abstracts, DOAJ Content and others).
  • Archiving in international repositories (PubMedCentral, CLOCKSS). 
  • Copyright retained by the authors; articles distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 4.0 license.
  • Full-color (no extra-charges for color), high-resolution hardcopy of reprints or whole issues.
  • Possibility to publish  large revisionary works, checklists and catalogues as separate monographs, under separate ISBN and cover
Article sizeArticle processing charges
1 – 40 printed pages€  550
41 – 300 printed pages

€  12 / page 

(for each page above 40)

301 and more printed pagesBy agreement
*Corrigendum€ 100 each

Special Issues

Special issues enable conference organizers or project coordinators to publish a number of articles under a common theme and editorship. Depending on the number of articles to be included, Pensoft offers discounts on APCs as described in the table below.

 

Small

Medium

Large

Number of articles

< 10

10 – 20

21 +

Discount on APCs

5%

10%

15%

PR campaign

By agreement

By agreement

Included

Institutional branding

By agreement

By agreement

Included

We are happy to discuss alternative arrangements if there is a better way to suit your needs for a special issue. Please do not hesitate to contact us!


Discounts and Waivers

  • Discount of 10 % is offered to:
    • Scientists working privately
    • Graduate and PhD students if they are first authors
    • Scientists living and working in lower middle-income countries (http://data.worldbank.org/income-level/lower-middle-income) if they are sole authors of a manuscript.
    • Discounts are also offered to our editors and reviewers, for more information see here
  • Waivers (once per year per (co-) author for manuscripts no larger than 10 printed pages, or for the first 10 pages of a larger manuscript) are offered to:

Discounts and waivers do not accumulate.


Additional Services (Optional)

Optional service

Price

Notes

Linguistic services

€ 15 per 1800 characters

For texts that require additional editing by a native English speaker

Tailored PR campaign

€ 150*

Press release, dedicated media and social networks promotion

Tailored PR campaign + Video interview

€ 450

Video interview organized by the Editorial Office

Paper reprints

At cost

On demand

*This service can be discounted or waived for articles of outstanding importance for the science and society


Institutional and Other Membership Plans

Our plans provide additional flexibility and affordability for institutions, research groups, consortia, conference organizers and other larger research teams and organizations. Affiliated authors can publish in any Pensoft journal by using a streamlined payment interface. Pensoft’s plans are a great way to support open access publishing, while also simplifying budgeting, invoicing, and author reimbursement procedures. We offer three plans to choose from, however, if they do not quite suit your needs, we would be happy to discuss alternative arrangements with you. Please do not hesitate to contact us for a preliminary conversation about our plans!

Key benefits

Annual membership

  • Flat rate - publish all you can
  • Cost based on the size and publishing pattern of your organization
  • Beginning of year budgeting
  • One invoice / no billing during the year

Pre-paid plans

  • Discount on APCs
  • Deposit funds up-front and spend without a time limit
  • Add funds to your account at any time
  • Choose whether to cover full (discounted) cost of publishing or split costs with authors

Direct billing

  • No up-front payments
  • One monthly invoice for all publications by affiliated authors
  • Regular reports to track publication pattern and expenses

Additional services we can provide upon request

  • PR campaigns for specific publications or sets of publications, including press releases and video interviews
  • Institutional branding – including institutional logos on published papers, dedicated webpages, institutional online collections of articles
  • Research output reporting, detailing number and types of publications, expenses, views, and downloads

Please find more details about each individual plan below. If you would like to recommend Pensoft’s plans to your institution you can fill out this simple form or contact us at info@pensoft.net and we will forward your recommendation with some additional information.


Annual Memberships

Annual memberships allow institutions to plan their publishing expenses in the beginning of the fiscal year by providing unlimited publishing in all Pensoft journals in exchange for a flat annual payment. The cost of membership depends on the total publishing output capacity of the institution and its historical publishing pattern in Pensoft journals. We will adjust the cost of your membership annually.


Pre-Paid Plans

Pre-paid plans allow institutions and / or research groups to deposit a certain amount of funds with Pensoft and make them available to affiliated researchers for covering Article Processing Charges (APCs) in any Pensoft journal. Member institutions decide whether to cover APCs in full or share the expenses with the authors. Depending on the amount members are prepared to commit, Pensoft is offering a discount on APCs per the table below. Additional funds can be added to an account at any point in time within the calendar year of purchasing the plan, while leftover funds are preserved until spent.

 

Economy

Standard

Premium

Minimum deposit

€ 1,000 – 3,000

€ 3,000 – 5,000

€ 5,000 +

Discount on APCs

0%

5%

10%


Direct Billing

The direct billing plan allows institutions to reduce the complexity of billing and reimbursements. It consolidates all Pensoft invoices for articles authored by researchers affiliated with an institution into a single monthly bill that is sent directly to the institution.


Guidelines for Editors


How to Access a Manuscript

Manuscripts can be accessed only after login:

  1. Login is possible after registration. Our Editorial Office will register and provide login details to all first-time editors and reviewers. Reviewers receive an email with their login details usually prior to the first invitation to review a paper.

    Note: All users use their registration details to login in all three (Book, E-Book and the respective Journal) platforms of www.pensoft.net.

  2. The login credentials consist of:
    a.  Username: <your email address>
    b.  Password: <text string>
    Note: Please remember that you may have registered with two or more different email addresses, that is why you may have more than one valid account at www.pensoft.net. We advise using only one email address, hence one password associated to it, for all yours operations at www.pensoft.net

  3. Login details will be provided in an email after the first registration. Thereafter, the user may at any time change the password and correct personal details using their Pensoft account menu (clicking on his/her name in the upper right corner of the screen).

  4. In case you have forgotten your password, please write to request it from journals@pensoft.net. Alternatively, you may use the function: 
    Forgot your password?.

There are two ways to access a manuscript:

  1. After login, please go to the respective journal’s web page and click on the red-coloured My Tasks button in the upper right corner of the screen. This way, you will be able to see all manuscripts you are responsible for as author or reviewer or editor.

    Note: The manuscripts are grouped in several categories, e.g., In Review (no.), In layout (no.), Published (no.), and Archived (no.) etc. The number in brackets after each category shows the number of manuscripts that were assigned to you.

  2. Click on the active manuscript link provided in the email notification you have received from the online editorial system. The link will lead you direct to the respective manuscript.


General Responsibilities of Editors

The Subject, or Associate, editors in Pensoft’s journals carry the main responsibility for the scientific quality of the published papers. They take the final decision on a manuscript’s acceptance or rejection and their names are listed as Academic Editor in the header of each article.

The editorial process is facilitated through an online editorial system and a set of email notifications. The online editorial system informs the Subject Editor about any change in the status of a manuscript and associated peer review and editorial process, from submission to publication.

The online editorial system is constructed in a way to save time for Subject Editors to check the status of manuscripts. There is no need for editors to visit the journal’s website to keep track on the manuscript they are responsible for. The online system will inform the Subject Editor if a requested reviewer has accepted to do a review or has declined. The email notifications contain stepwise instructions what action is needed at each stage, as well as a link to the respective manuscript (accessible only after login – see How to Access a Manuscript).

The Subject Editors are not expected to provide a thorough linguistic editing or copyediting of a manuscript, but rather focus on its scientific quality and overall style, which should correspond to the good practices in clear and concise academic writing. It is the author’s responsibility to submit the manuscript in linguistically and grammatically correct English. The Subject Editor should not hesitate to recommend either Reject, or Reject, but resubmission encouraged PRIOR to review process, in cases when a manuscript is scientifically poor and/or does not conform to journal’s style, and/or is written in poor English (see Note under point 1 below how to reject a manuscript prior to review). 

It often happens that even carefully written manuscripts may contain small errors in orthography or stylistics. We shall be thankful if editors spot such errors during the reading process and correct them.


Stepwise Description of the Editorial Process

  1. Once a manuscript is submitted, the Editor-in-Chief or the Managing Editor assigns it to the Subject Editor responsible for the respective topic (e.g., science branch or taxon). The Subject Editor receives a notification email on the assignment.
    Note: The link to the respective manuscript is available in the review request email and all consequent reminder emails. The manuscript is accessible after login. Please see How to Access a Manuscript above in case you meet any difficulties.

  2. The Subject Editor has to read the manuscript and decide whether it is potentially suitable for publication and can be processed for review or rejected immediately. Reasons for rejection can be a low scientific quality, non-conformance to the journal’s style/policies, and/or linguistically or grammatically poor English language.
    Note: There are two ways to reject a manuscript prior to review process:
    -  Through an email to the Editorial office explaining the reason for rejection. The manuscript will be then rejected through the online editorial system and the respective notification email will be sent from the Editorial Office.
    -  Through the buttons Reject or Reject, but resubmission encouraged in the Editorial tab. Please note, however, that the buttons will be made active only after any justification for the rejection is provided in the textual field. 

    In case the manuscript is acceptable for peer review, the Subject Editor could invite reviewers by clicking on the Invite reviewers link. A list of reviewers will appear from which the editor can choose the appropriate ones or add new. 

  3. Once reviewers are chosen editor need to click the Invite reviewers green button at the end of the page which will generate emails templates with review invitations. It is highly recommended that the Subject Editor adds some personal words above the standard email text to invite the potential referee to review the manuscript.

  4. In case a reviewer is absent from our user's data base, the editor can add his/her name and email through the Add new reviewer link, which will appear once the search field reveal no results. It is possible that the needed reviewer has already been registered in the Pensoft database either as customer or author/reviewer of another journal. If this is the case, then his/her name, affiliation and other metadata will automatically appear once the e-mail field is populated in the Create user online form.

  5. The Subject Editor receives a notification email if the reviewer has agreed to review a manuscript or declined to do that. The editor takes care to appoint additional reviewers in case some of the invited reviewers have declined.

  6. Once all reviewers submit their reviews, the Subject Editor receives an email notification, inviting him/her to consider reviewer’s opinions, read through the manuscript and take a decision through the Proceed button.
    Note: Editorial comments can be added in the online editorial form; comments and corrections are expected to be added also in the manuscript file (either on the PDF version or in the text file), that should be uploaded during finalization of the editorial decision process. 

  7. At this stage, the editor should take a decision either to (1) accept the manuscript, or (2) reject it, or (3) open a second review round. In case the manuscript is not rejected, but recommended for Minor Revision, Major Revision, or Acceptance, the author is expected to submit a revised version within a certain period of time and the Subject Editor will be notified about that.
    Note 1: Authors must submit revised versions in a text file using Track Changes/Comments tools of Word so that the Subject Editor can see their corrections/additions. Authors are expected to reply to the essential critiques and comments of reviewers separately through the online editorial system.
    Note 2: During the second review round, the Subject Editor may decide to ask reviewers to evaluate the revised version of the manuscript. He/she may also make a decision based on the author’s responses and the revised version of the manuscript without asking reviewers' support.

  8. After acceptance, the manuscript goes to layout and proofreading. The Subject Editor will be notified by email when the final proof is uploaded on the journal’s website. The Subject Editor is expected to look at the proofs and notify the Editorial Office through email in case the proofs need improvement.

  9. The Subject Editor may always access information on the manuscripts which have been edited by him/her through the menu My Tasks –> Subject Editor on the journal’s web page – In Review (no.), In Edit (no.), Published (no.), and Archived (no.). The number in brackets after each category shows the number of manuscripts that were assigned.


Editorial Decision

In this journal, the final decision on acceptance or rejection of a manuscript lies with the Editor-in-Chief. The Editor-in-Chief’s decision is to be made after the Subject Editor provides a final recommendation on acceptance or rejection of a manuscript. The workflow is explained stepwise below. 

  1. Once submitted by the author, a manuscript is sent to a Subject Editor, who will have the choice to either accept, reject or request further minor/major revision through as many review iterations as needed.
  2. After peer review, the manuscript is returned to the author. After the author revises his/her paper, the Subject Editor is once again presented with the same set of options. The procedure is repeated until the Subject Editor decides to either accept or reject the manuscript.

  3. As soon as the Subject Editor makes a decision to either accept or reject the manuscript, the Editor-in-Chief is informed via email about this recommendation.

  4. In his/her turn, the Editor-in-Chief can either accept, reject or request further minor/major revision, regardless of the Subject Editor’s recommendation.

  5. Should the manuscript be sent back to the author for revision, the revised version will be returned to the Subject Editor and will undergo the same procedure until the paper is either accepted or rejected for publication by the Editor-in-Chief.


Guidelines for Reviewers

Pensoft journals support the open science approach in the peer review and publication process. We encourage our reviewers to open their identity to the authors and consider supporting the peer review oaths, which tend to be short declarations that reviewers make at the start of their written comments, typically dictating the terms by which they will conduct their reviews (see Aleksic et al. 2015, doi: 10.12688/f1000research.5686.2 for more details):

Principles of the open peer-review oath

  • Principle 1: I will sign my name to my review
  • Principle 2: I will review with integrity
  • Principle 3: I will treat the review as a discourse with you; in particular, I will provide constructive criticism
  • Principle 4: I will be an ambassador for the practice of open science

How to Access a Manuscript

Manuscripts can be accessed only after login:

  1. Login is possible after registration. Our Editorial Office will register and provide login details to all first-time editors and reviewers. Reviewers receive an email with their login details usually prior to the first invitation to review a paper.

    Note: All users use their registration details to login in all three (Book, E-Book and the respective Journal) platforms of www.pensoft.net.

  2. The login credentials consist of:
    a.  Username: <your email address>
    b.  Password: <text string>
    Note: Please remember that you may have registered with two or more different email addresses, that is why you may have more than one valid account at www.pensoft.net. We advise using only one email address, hence one password associated to it, for all yours operations at www.pensoft.net

  3. Login details will be provided in an email after the first registration. Thereafter, the user may at any time change the password and correct personal details using their Pensoft account menu (clicking on his/her name in the upper right corner of the screen).

  4. In case you have forgotten your password, please write to request it from journals@pensoft.net. Alternatively, you may use the function: 
    Forgot your password?.

There are two ways to access a manuscript:

  1. After login, please go to the respective journal’s web page and click on the red-coloured My Tasks button in the upper right corner of the screen. This way, you will be able to see all manuscripts you are responsible for as author or reviewer or editor.

    Note: The manuscripts are grouped in several categories, e.g., In Review (no.), In layout (no.), Published (no.), and Archived (no.) etc. The number in brackets after each category shows the number of manuscripts that were assigned to you.

  2. Click on the active manuscript link provided in the email notification you have received from the online editorial system. The link will lead you direct to the respective manuscript.


General Responsibilities of Reviewers

The peer review and editorial process is facilitated through an online editorial system and a set of email notifications. The online editorial system sends the Reviewer a review request, initiated by the Subject Editor or the Editorial Office. The online system will also inform about delays in the reviewing and will confirm a successful review submission. The email notifications contain stepwise instructions about the actions needed at each stage along with the link to the respective manuscript (accessible only after login – see section How to Access a Manuscript).

The Reviewers are not expected to provide a thorough linguistic editing or copyediting of a manuscript, but rather focus on its scientific quality and overall style, which should correspond to the good practices in clear and concise academic writing. If Reviewers recognize that a manuscript requires linguistic edits, we shall be grateful for them to inform both the author and the editor about this in the report. It is the author’s responsibility to submit the manuscript in linguistically and grammatically correct English.

It often happens that even carefully written manuscripts may contain small errors in orthography or stylistics. We shall be thankful if Reviewers spot such errors during the reading process and correct them.

The manuscripts will generally be reviewed by two or three experts with the aim of reaching a first decision as soon as possible. Reviewers do not need to sign their reports, but are welcome to do so. They are also asked to declare any conflicts of interests.

Reviewers are asked whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, how interesting it is and whether the quality of the writing is acceptable. Where possible, the final decision is made on the basis of the peer reviews. In cases of strong disagreement between the reports or between the authors and peer reviewers, the editor can assess these according to his/her expertise or seek advice from a member of the journal's Editorial Board.

The ultimate responsibility for editorial decisions lies with the respective Subject Editor and, in some cases, with the Editor-in-Chief. All appeals should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief, who may decide to seek advice from the Subject Editors.

Reviewers are also asked to indicate which articles they consider to be especially interesting or significant. These articles may be given greater prominence and greater external publicity, including press releases addressed to science journalists and mass media.

During a second review round, reviewers may be asked to evaluate the revised version against their recommendations submitted during the first review round.

Reviewers are kindly asked to be polite and constructive in their reports. Reports that may be insulting or uninformative will be rescinded.

Reviewers are asked to start their report with a very brief summary of the reviewed paper. This will help the editor and the authors see whether the reviewer correctly understood the paper or whether a report might be based on misunderstanding.

Furthermore, reviewers are also asked to comment on originality, structure and previous research:

Originality: Is the paper sufficiently novel and does it contribute to a better understanding of the topic under scrutiny? Is the work rather confirmatory and repetitive?

Structure: Is the introduction clear and concise? Does it place the work into the context that is necessary for a reader to comprehend aims, hypotheses tested, experimental design or methods? Are Material and Methods clearly described and sufficiently explained? Are reasons given when choosing one method over another one from a set of comparable methods? Are the results clearly, but concisely described? Do they relate to the topic outlined in the introduction? Do they follow a logical sequence? Does the discussion place the paper in scientific context and go a step beyond the current scientific knowledge on the basis of the results? Are competing hypotheses or theories reasonably related to each other and properly discussed? Do the conclusions seem reasonable?

Previous research: Is previous research adequately incorporated into the paper? Are references complete, necessary and accurate? Is there any sign that substantial parts of the paper are copies of other works?


Stepwise Description of the Peer Review Process

  1. The Reviewer receives a review request generated by the Subject Editor or the Editorial Office and is expected to either agree to provide a review or decline, through pressing the Will do the review or Unable to do the review link in the online editorial system. In case the Reviewer agrees to review the manuscript, he/she should submit the review within a certain time frame, which may vary in the different Pensoft journals.
    Note: The link to the respective manuscript is available in the review request email and all consequent reminder emails. The manuscript is accessible after login. Please look at the section How to Access a Manuscript above in case you meet any difficulties.

  2. The review should be submitted through the Proceed button. The review may consists of (1) a simple online questionnaire to be answered by ticking either Yes, No, or N/A; (2) comments addressed to the Author and the Editor; (3) associated files (corrected/commented manuscript file, review submitted in a separate text file, etc.).
    Note 1: Reviewers can insert corrections and comments in the manuscript review version (PDF) and/or in the manuscript text file (usually Microsoft WORD, rarely Open Office file). When working in the PDF, please use either the Text Edits or the Sticky Notes tools (available through the menu Tools -> Comments & Markup of the Acrobat Reader). When editing in Microsoft WORD please use the Track Changes / Comments tools.
    Note 2: Associated files should be submitted at the end of the review process by clicking on the Browse button, then selecting the respective file on your computer, and then by pressing the Upload button. A reviewer may upload as many files to support his/her review as needed.

  3. The Reviewer may decide to stay anonymous or open his/her identity by ticking the Disclose my name to author(s) box at the bottom of the reviewer’s form. Please be aware that your identity might be revealed in the comments or in Track Changes corrections of the Microsoft WORD or PDF file you correct. Therefore, please make sure that you delete your name and initials in the options section of your word processor or PDF writer if you want to remain anonymous.

  4. The review process is completed by selecting a recommendation from the set of 5 options: (1) Reject; (2) Reject, but resubmission encouraged; (3) Major Revision; (4) Minor Revision; (5) Accept. The system will ask for one more confirmation of the selected recommendation before submission. The submitted review cannot be changed after submission.
    Note 1: Reasons for rejection can be a low scientific quality, non-conformance to the journal’s style/policies, and/or grammatically poor English language.
    Note 2: It is also possible for review and associated files (e.g., a corrected manuscript file) to be sent as attached files to the email of the Editorial Office (see the comments on privacy above).

  5. Once a Reviewer submits a review of a manuscript, he/she receives a confirmation email from the journal.

  6. The submission of the review is also automatically reported to Publons. Reviewers are asked for confirmation whether they want their reviews to be recorded on Publons.

  7. When all Reviewers have submitted their reviews, the Subject Editor makes a decision to either accept, reject or request further minor/major revision.

  8. In all cases, the manuscript is sent back to the author for comments and further revision. The author needs to submit a revised version in due time.

  9. Reviewers are notified via email when the revised version of a manuscript they have reviewed is submitted by the author. They receive a link to the revised version along with the editorial decision and all reviews of the manuscript. Reviewers are also provided with a feedback form should they have any comments on the revised version. 

  10. When an article is published, all Reviewers who have provided a review for this manuscript receive an email notification. In the email, there is a link to download the published paper.

  11. The Reviewer may always access information on the manuscripts that are being / have been reviewed by him/her through the menu My Tasks –> Reviewer on the journal’s web page – In Review (no.), In Edit (no.), Published (no.), and Archived (no.). The number in brackets after each category shows the number of manuscripts that have been assigned to you.


Writing a Press Release

Pensoft’s experienced PR team puts a lot of effort in the wide dissemination of the works we publish through press releases, news aggregators, blogs, social network communication and the mass media.

It goes without saying that press releases and news stories can have a major effect on the impact and popularity of research findings. Moreover, they are of benefit to all parties involved: the authors, their institutions, funding agencies, publishers and the society in general. Thanks to a well-established dissemination network, Pensoft press releases regularly provide the basis for print, online, radio and TV news stories in reputed international media outlets, including National Geographic, BBC, Sky News, CNN, New York Times, The Guardian, Deutsche Welle, Der Standard, DR, etc.

Here are some examples of Pensoft's press releases, posted on EurekAlert, which have enjoyed high popularity and thousands of views within the first days following their publication:

Our PR team invites you to prepare (or request) a short press release on your accepted paper whenever you find your research of public interest. We have provided a template and instructions to guide you through the specific text format.

While the press release needs to be in English, in case you find it suitable for the promotion of your study, you are welcome to also submit a translation of the press release in the following languages: French, German, Spanish, Portuguese, Japanese and Chinese. Please note that all translations need to be based on the final English version of the press release as approved by our press officers.

We are always happy to promote your research by preparing a press release for you and coordinating our dedicated PR campaigns with the PR offices of our partnering institutions. You are welcome to approach us with your press release drafts or any queries regarding our PR campaign via email at either pressoffice@pensoft.net, or dissemination@pensoft.net.

To keep up with the latest news, subscribe to our blog and follow us on Twitter, Facebook and Google+. Also, keep an eye on EurekAlert! AAAS for our top breaking stories!

For the Tailored PR Campaign’s rates, please see Article Charges (Additional Services).


Data Publishing Guidelines

Pensoft strongly encourages and supports various strategies and methods for data publication, such as downloadable data packages supplementary to a research article, or hosted in and linked to data repositories. For biodiversity and biodiversity-related data the reader may consult the Strategies and guidelines for scholarly publishing of biodiversity data (Penev et al. 2017, Research Ideas and Outcomes 3: e12431. https://doi.org/10.3897/rio.3.e12431). For reader's convenience, we list here the hyperlinked table of contents of these extensive quidelines:

The core of the data publishing project of Pensoft is the concept of "Data Paper" developed in a cooperation with the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF). Data Papers are peer-reviewed scholarly publications that describe the published datasets and provide an opportunity to data authors to receive the academic credit for their efforts. Currently, Pensoft offers the opportunity to publish Data Papers describing occurrence data and checklists, Barcode-of-Life genome data and biodiversity-related software tools, such as interactive keys and others.

Examples of data papers

ZooKeys:
Antarctic, Sub-Antarctic and cold temperate echinoid database
A dataset from bottom trawl survey around Taiwan
Project Description: DNA Barcodes of Bird Species in the National Museum of Natural History, Smithsonian Institution, USA
Literature based species occurrence data of birds of northeast India
MOSCHweb — a matrix-based interactive key to the genera of the Palaearctic Tachinidae (Insecta, Diptera)
Amundsen Sea Mollusca from the BIOPEARL II expedition
Iberian Odonata distribution: data of the BOS Arthropod Collection (University of Oviedo, Spain
FORMIDABEL: The Belgian Ants Database
Circumpolar dataset of sequenced specimens of Promachocrinus kerguelensis (Echinodermata, Crinoidea)

PhytoKeys:
Florabank1: a grid-based database on vascular plant distribution in the northern part of Belgium (Flanders and the Brussels Capital region)
Database of Vascular Plants of Canada (VASCAN): a community contributed taxonomic checklist of all vascular plants of Canada, Saint Pierre and Miquelon, and Greenland
Herbarium of Vascular Plants Collection of the University of Extremadura (Spain)

Nature Conservation:
Antarctic macrobenthic communities: A compilation of circumpolar information

Press releases on data papers
New incentive for biodiversity data publishing
Data publishing policies and guidelines for biodiversity data by Pensoft
First database-derived 'data paper' published in journal
A new type of data papers designed to publish online interactive keys
Data paper describes Antarctic biodiversity data gathered by 90 expeditions since 1956
Unique information on Belgian ants compiled and published through FORMIDABEL data paper
Database simplifies finding Canadian plant names and distribution
A synthesis of the 36451 specimens from the UNEX Herbarium in a new data paper


Data Quality Checklist and Recommendations

INTRODUCTION

An empowering aspect of digital data is that they can be merged, reformatted and reused for new, imaginative uses that are more than the sum of their parts. However, this is only possible if data are well curated. To help authors avoid some common mistakes we have created this document to highlight those aspects of data that should be checked before publication.

By "mistakes" we do not mean errors of fact, although these should also be avoided! It is possible to have entirely correct digital data that are low-quality because they are badly structured or formatted, and, therefore, hard or impossible to move from one digital application to another. The next reader of your digital data is likely to be a computer program, not a human. It is essential that your data are structured and formatted so that they are easily processed by that program, and by other programs in the pipeline between you and the next human user of your data.

The following list of recommendations will help you maximise the re-usability of your digital data. Each represents a test carried out by Pensoft when auditing a digital dataset at the request of an author. Following the list, we provide explanations and examples of each recommendation.

Authors are encouraged to perform these checks themselves prior to data publication. For text data, a good text editor (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_text_editors) can be used to find and correct most problems. Spreadsheets usually have some functions for text checking functions, e.g. the "TRIM" function that removes unneeded whitespace from a data item. The most powerful text-checking tools are on the command line, and the website "A Data Cleaner's Cookbook" (https://www.polydesmida.info/cookbook/) is recommended for authors who can use a BASH shell.

When auditing datasets for authors, Pensoft does not check taxonomic or bibliographic details for correctness, but we will do basic geochecks upon request, e.g. test to see if the stated locality is actually at or near the stated latitude/longitude. We also recommend checking that fields do not show "domain schizophrenia", i.e. fields misused to containing data of more than one type.

Proofreading data takes at least as much time and skill as proofreading text. Just as with text, mistakes easily creep into data files unless the files are carefully checked. To avoid the embarrassment of publishing data with such mistakes, we strongly recommend that you take the time to run these basic tests on your data.


 

CHECKLIST

 

Characters

- The dataset is UTF-8 encoded

- The only characters used that are not numbers, letters or standard punctuation, are tabs and whitespaces

- Each character has only one encoding in the dataset

- No line breaks within data items

- No field-separating character within data items (tab-separated data preferred)

- No "?" or replacement characters in place of valid characters

- No Windows carriage returns

- No leading, trailing, duplicated or unnecessary whitespaces in individual data items

 

Records

- No broken records, i.e. records with too few or too many fields

- No blank records

- No duplicate records (as defined by context)

 

Fields

- No empty fields

- No evident truncation of data items

- No unmatched braces within data items

- No data items with values that are evidently invalid or inappropriate for the given field

- Repeated data items are consistently formatted

- Standard data items such as dates and latitude/longitude are consistently formatted

- No evident disagreement between fields

- No unexpectedly missing data


 

RECOMMENDATIONS

 

Characters 

  • The dataset is UTF-8 encoded

Computer programs do not "read" characters like "A" and "4". Instead, they read strings of 0's and 1's and interpret these strings as characters according to an encoding scheme. The most universal encoding scheme is called UTF-8 and is based on the character set called Unicode. Text data should always be shared with UTF-8 encoding, as errors can be generated when non-UTF-8 encodings (such as Windows-1252) are read by a program expecting UTF-8, and vice-versa. (See also below, on replacement characters). 

  • The only characters used that are not numbers, letters or standard punctuation are tabs and whitespaces

Unusual characters sometimes appear in datasets, especially when databases have been merged. These "control" or "gremlin" characters are sometimes invisible when data are viewed within a particular application (such as a spreadsheet or a database browser) but can usually be revealed when the data are displayed in a text editor. Examples include vertical tab, soft hyphen, non-breaking space and various ASCII control characters (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Control_character).

  • Each character has only one encoding in the dataset

We have seen individual datasets in which the degree symbol (°) is represented in three different ways, and in which a single quotation mark (') is also represented as a prime symbol, a right single quotation mark and a grave accent. Always use one form of each character, and preferably the simplest form, e.g. plain quotes rather than curly quotes.

  • No line breaks within data items

Spreadsheet and database programs often allow users to have more than one line of text within a data item, separated by linebreaks or carriage returns. When these records are processed, many computer programs understand the embedded linebreak as the end of a record, so that the record is processed as several incomplete records:

item A  itemB1          itemC

               itemB2

becomes:

itemA           itemB1

itemB2          itemC

  • No field-separating character within data items (tab-separated data preferred)

Data are most often compiled in table form, with a particular character used to separate one field ("column") from the next. Depending on the computer program used, the field-separating character might be a comma (CSV files), a tab (TSV files), a semicolon, a pipe (|) etc.

Well-structured data keeps the field-separating character out of data items, to avoid confusion in processing. Because commas are commonly present within data items, and because not all programs understand how to process CSVs, we recommend using tabs as field-separating characters (and avoiding tabs within data items!): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tab-separated_values.

  • No "?" or replacement characters in place of valid characters

When text data are moved between different character encodings, certain characters can be lost because the receiving program does not understand what the sending program is referring to. In most cases, the lost character is then represented by a question mark, as in "Duméril" becoming "Dum?ril", or by a replacement character, usually a dark polygon with a white question mark inside.

It is important to check for these replacements before publishing data, especially if you converted your data to UTF-8 encoding from another encoding.

  • No Windows carriage returns

On UNIX, Linux and Mac computers, a linebreak is built with just one character, the UNIX linefeed '\n' ('LF'). On Windows computers, a linebreak is created using two characters, one after the other: '\r\n' ('CRLF'), where '\r' is called a 'carriage return' ('CR'). Carriage returns are not necessary in digital data and can cause problems in data processing on non-Windows computers. Check the documentation of the program in which you are compiling data to learn how to remove Windows carriage returns.

  • No leading, trailing, duplicated or unnecessary whitespaces in individual data items

Like "control" and "gremlin" characters, whitespaces are invisible and we pay little attention to them when reading a line of text. Computer programs, however, see whitespaces as characters with the same importance as "A" and "4". For this reason, the following four lines are different and should be edited to make them the same:

Aus bus (Smith, 1900)

   Aus bus (Smith, 1900)

Aus bus (Smith,   1900)

Aus  bus   (Smith, 1900  )

 

Records

  • No broken records, i.e. records with too few or too many fields

If a data table contains records with, for example, 25 fields, then every record in the table should have exactly 25 data items, even if those items are empty. Records with too few fields are often the result of a linebreak or field separator within a data item (see above). Records with too many fields also sometimes appear when part of a record has been moved in a spreadsheet past the end of the table.

  • No blank records

Blank records contribute nothing to a data table because they contain no information, and a tidy data table has no blank lines. Note, however, that a computer program looking for blank lines may not find what looks to a human like a blank line, because the "blank" line actually contains invisible tabs or whitespaces.

  • No duplicate records (as defined by context)

It can be difficult to find duplicate records in some datasets, but our experience is that they are not uncommon. One cause of duplicates is database software assigning a unique ID number to the same line of data more than once. Context will determine whether one record is a duplicate of another, and data compilers are best qualified to look for them.

 

Fields

  • No empty fields

 Fields containing no data items do not add anything to the information content of a dataset and should be omitted.

  •  No evident truncation of data items

The end of a data item is sometimes cut off, for example when a data item with 55 characters is entered into a database field with a 50-character maximum limit. Truncated data items should be repaired when found, e.g.

Smith & Jones in Smith, Jones and Bro

repaired to:

Smith & Jones in Smith, Jones and Brown, 1974

  • No unmatched braces within data items

These are surprisingly common in datasets and are either data entry errors or truncations, e.g.

Smith, A. (1900 A new species of Aus. Zool. Anz. 23: 660-667.

5 km W of Traralgon (Vic

  • No data items with values that are evidently invalid or inappropriate for the given field

For example, a field labelled "Year" and containing years should not contain the data item "3 males".

  •  Repeated data items are consistently formatted

The same data item should not vary in format within a single dataset, e.g.

Smith, A. (1900) A new species of Aus. Zool. Anz. 23: 660-667.

Smith, A. 1900. A new species of Aus. Zoologischer Anzeiger 23: 660-667.

Smith, A. (1900) A new species of Aus. Zool. Anz. 23, 660-667, pl. ix.

  • Standard data items such as dates and latitude/longitude are consistently formatted

Data compilers have a number of choices when formatting standard data items, but whichever format is chosen, it should be used consistently. A single date field should not, for example, have dates represented as 2005-05-17, May 19, 2005 and 23.v.2005.

  • No evident disagreement between fields

If there are fields which contain linked information then these fields should be checked to ensure that they do not conflict with each other. For example, the year or an observation cannot be after the year it was published.

Examples:

Year            Citation

1968            Smith, A. (1966) Polychaete anatomy. Academic Press, New York; 396 pp.

 

Genus           Subgenus

Aus             Bus (Aus)

  • No unexpectedly missing data

This is a rare issue in datasets that have been audited, but occasionally occurs. An example is the Darwin Core "verbatimLocality" field for a record containing a full latitude and longitude, but with the "decimalLatitude" and "decimalLongitude" fields blank.

  • Spelling of Darwin Core terms

Darwin Core terms are usually considered case sensitive, therefore you should use their correct spelling (http://rs.tdwg.org/dwc/).

 

We thank Dr. Robert Mesibov for preparing the Data Quality Checklist draft and Dr. Quentin Groom for reviewing it.


Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement

General

The publishing ethics and malpractice policies of Pensoft follow the relevant COPE guidelines (http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines) and in case a malpractice is suspected, journal Editors will act in accordance with them.

Open access

Pensoft journals adheres strictly to gold open access to accelerate the barrier-free dissemination of scientific knowledge. All published articles are made freely available to read, download, and distribute, immediately upon publication, given that the original source and authors are cited (Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY).

For more details on Pensoft’s open access and copyright policy see the Copyright Information page.

Privacy statement

The names and email addresses present on journals’ websites will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of the journals and will not be made available for any other purpose or to any other party.

Open data publishing and sharing

Pensoft encourages open data publication and sharing, in accordance with Panton’s Principles and Pensoft’s Data Publishing Policies and Guidelines for Biodiversity Data.

Data can be published in various ways, such as data files or packages supplementary to a research article, or hosted in and linked to data repositories.

Datasets should be deposited in an appropriate, trusted repository and the associated identifier (URL or DOI) of the dataset(s) must be included in the data resources section of the article. Reference(s) to datasets should also be included in the reference list of the article with DOIs (where available). Where no discipline-specific data repository exists authors should deposit their datasets in a general repository such as Dryad or Pangaea.

In Pensoft’s journals, open access to data is not compulsory, however highly recommended and encouraged. Open data publication is mandatory in the Biodiversity Data Journal, where authors must make available all research materials or data, associated with a manuscript upon its submission.

Submission, peer-review and editorial process

The peer-review and editorial process is facilitated through an online editorial system and a set of email notifications. Pensoft journals’ websites display stepwise description of the editorial process and list all necessary instructions and links. The later are also included in the respective email notification.

General: Publication and authorship

  • All submitted papers are subject to rigorous peer-review process by at least two international Reviewers that are experts in the area of the particular paper.
  • The factors that are taken into account in review are relevance, soundness, significance, originality, readability and language.
  • The journals allow a maximum of two rounds of review of a manuscript. The ultimate responsibility for editorial decisions lies with the respective Subject Editor and in some cases with the Editor-in-Chief. All appeals should be directed to the Editor-in-Chief, who may decide to seek advice among the Subject Editors and Reviewers.
  • The possible decisions include: (1) Accept, (2) Minor revisions, (2) Major revisions, (3) Reject, but re-submission encouraged, (5) Reject.
  • If Authors are encouraged to revise and resubmit a submission, there is no guarantee that the revised submission will be accepted.
  • The paper acceptance is constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
  • No research can be included in more than one publication.

Responsibility of Authors

  • Authors are required to agree that their paper will be published in open access under Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 (CC-BY) license.
  • Authors must certify that their manuscripts are their original work.
  • Authors must certify that the manuscript has not previously been published elsewhere.
  • Authors must certify that the manuscript is not currently being considered for publication elsewhere.
  • Authors should submit the manuscript in linguistically and grammatically correct English and formatted in accordance with journal’s Author Guidelines.
  • Authors must participate in the peer review process.
  • Authors are obliged to provide retractions or corrections of mistakes.
  • All Authors mentioned are expected to have significantly contributed to the research.
  • Authors must notify the Editors of any conflicts of interest.
  • Authors must identify all sources used in the creation of their manuscript.
  • Authors must report any errors they discover in their published paper to the Editors.
  • Authors should acknowledge all significant funders of the research pertaining to their article and list all relevant competing interests.
  • Other sources of support for publications should also be clearly identified in the manuscript, usually in an acknowledgement (e.g., funding of article processing charge for an open access article, or writing, language editing or editorial assistance).
  • The corresponding Author should provide the declaration of any conflicts of interest on behalf of all the Authors. Conflicts of interest may be associated with employment, sources of funding, personal financial interests, and membership of relevant organisations, or others.

Responsibility of Reviewers

  • The manuscripts will generally be reviewed by two or three experts with the aim of reaching a first decision as soon as possible. Reviewers do not need to sign their reports but are welcome to do so. They are also asked to declare any conflicts of interests.
  • The Reviewers are not expected to provide a thorough linguistic editing or copyediting of a manuscript, but to focus on its scientific quality, as well as for the overall style, which should correspond to the good practices in clear and concise academic writing. If Reviewers recognize that a manuscript requires linguistic edits, they should inform both Authors and Editor in the report.
  • Reviewers are asked to check whether the manuscript is scientifically sound and coherent, how interesting it is and whether the quality of the writing is acceptable.
  • In cases of strong disagreement between the reviews or between the Authors and Reviewers, the Editors can judge these according to his/her expertise or seek advice from a member of the journal's Editorial Board.
  • Reviewers are also asked to indicate which articles they consider to be especially interesting or significant. These articles may be given greater prominence and greater external publicity, including press releases addressed to science journalists and mass media.
  • During a second review round, the Reviewer may be asked by the Subject Editor to evaluate the revised version of the manuscript with regards to Reviewer’s recommendations submitted during the first review round.
  • Reviewers are asked to be polite and constructive in their reports. Reports that may be insulting or uninformative will be rescinded.
  • The Reviewers are asked to start their report with a very brief summary of the reviewed paper. This will help the Editors and Authors see whether the reviewer correctly understood the paper or whether a report might be based on a misunderstanding.
  • Further, the Reviewers are asked to comment on originality, structure and previous research:
  • Is the paper sufficiently novel and contributes to a better understanding of the topic under scrutiny, or is the work rather confirmatory and repetitive?
  • Is the introduction clear and concise? Does it place the work into the context that is necessary for a reader to comprehend aims, hypotheses tested, experimental design or methods? Are Material and Methods clearly described and sufficiently explained? Are reasons given when choosing one method over another one from a set of comparable methods? Are the results clearly but concisely described? Do they relate to the topic outlined in the introduction? Do they follow a logical sequence? Does the discussion place the paper in scientific context and go a step beyond the current scientific knowledge on the basis of the results? Are competing hypotheses or theories reasonably related to each other and properly discussed? Do conclusions seem reasonable?

Previous research: Is previous research adequately incorporated into the paper? Are references complete, necessary and accurate? Is there any sign that substantial parts of the paper were copies of other works?

  • Reviewers should not review 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.
  • Reviewers should keep all information regarding papers confidential and treat them as privileged information.
  • Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
  • Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors.
  • Reviewers should also call to the Editors’ attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

Responsibility of Editors

  • The Editors in Pensoft’s journals carry the main responsibility for the scientific quality of the published papers and base their decisions solely one the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication's scope.
  • Subject Editor takes the final decision on a manuscript’s acceptance or rejection and his/her name is listed as "Academic Editor" in the header of each article.
  • The Subject Editors are not expected to provide a thorough linguistic editing or copyediting of a manuscript, but to focus on its scientific quality, as well as for the overall style, which should correspond to the good practices in clear and concise academic writing.
  • Editors are expected to spot small errors in orthography or stylistic during the editing process and correct them.
  • Editors should always consider the needs of the Authors and the Readers when attempting to improve the publication.
  • Editors should guarantee the quality of the papers and the integrity of the academic record.
  • Editors should preserve the anonymity of Reviewers, unless the later decide to disclose their identities.
  • Editors should ensure that all research material they publish conforms to internationally accepted ethical guidelines.
  • Editors should act if they suspect misconduct, whether a paper is published or unpublished, and make all reasonable attempts to persist in obtaining a resolution to the problem.
  • Editors should not reject papers based on suspicions, they should have proof of misconduct.
  • Editors should not allow any conflicts of interest between Authors, Reviewers and Board Members.

Misconduct

Research misconduct may include: (a) manipulating research materials, equipment, or processes, (b) changing or omitting data or results such that the research is not accurately represented in the article.

A special case of misconduct is the plagiarism, which is the appropriation of another person's ideas, processes, results, or words without giving appropriate credit.

Research misconduct does not include honest error or differences of opinion.

If misconduct is suspected, journal Editors will act in accordance with the relevant COPE guidelines: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines

Should a comment on potential misconduct be submitted by the Reviewers or Editors, an explanation will be sought from the Authors. If this is satisfactory and a mistake or misunderstanding has taken place, the matter can be resolved. If not, the manuscript will be rejected and the the Editors will impose a ban on that individual's publication in the journals for a period of three years.

In cases of published plagiarism or dual publication, an announcement will be made in both journals explaining the situation.

Appeals and open debate

We encourage academic debate and constructive criticism. Authors are always invited to respond to any editorial correspondence before publication. Authors do not have a right to neglect unfavorable comments about their work and to choose not to respond to criticisms.

No Reviewer’s comment or published correspondence may contain a personal attack on any of the Authors. Criticism of the work is encouraged and Editors should edit (or reject) personal or offensive statements.

The Author should submit their appeal on editorial decisions to the Editorial Office, addressed to the Editor-in-Chief or to the Managing Editor. Authors are discouraged from directly contacting Editorial Board Members and Editors with appeals.

Editors will mediate all discussions between Authors and Reviewers during the peer-review process, that is prior to publication. If agreement cannot be reached, Editors may consider inviting additional reviewers, if appropriate.

Editor-in-Chief will mediate all discussions between Authors and a Subject Editor.

The journals encourage publication of open opinions, forum papers, corrigenda, critical comments on a published paper and Author’s response to criticism.


Section Policies

Book Review

Published on agreement

Corrigenda

Published upon editorial decision

Data Paper

Peer-reviewed and indexed

Editorial

Published on agreement

Forum Paper

Published upon editorial decision; indexed

Letter to the Editor

Published upon editorial decision

Research Article

Peer-reviewed and indexed

Review Article

Peer-reviewed and indexed

Short Communication

Peer-reviewed and indexed


Benefits for Editors and Reviewers

Pensoft editors and reviewers are entitled to a set of benefits in appreciation for their contribution to the quality of the works we publish.

  For Editors   For Reviewers
  • 15% unconditional discount on APCs and reprints for the journal in which you are an editor
  • 10% unconditional discount on
    • APCs in all other Pensoft journals
    • All books published by Pensoft
    • Article reprints for all other Pensoft journals
    • Dedicated PR campaigns
  • Special conditions for publication of large works or articles that need customized technical solutions
  • 15% discount on APCs for the journal in which the review was provided
    • Valid for one manuscript per review, submitted within 6 months of the review, where the reviewer is the lead author
  • Automated registration of reviews at Publons after confirmation by the reviewer
  • Open reviews are provided with DOIs and citation details

* When an individual qualifies for multiple discounts Pensoft will use the largest that applies

  Apply to become an editor via Editor Application Form