- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
Our goal is to draw the attention of agricultural professionals and all stakeholders to the most pressing challenges of plant health.
The journal covers the main trends in plant science, best practices in plant health and protection, modern plant protection methods and products used in Russia and overseas, as well as phytosanitary condition of the territory of the Russian Federation.
To bring objective and analytical information on science education to a great diversity of readers: opinions of leading specialists on the most fundamental plant health issues, data on significant novel domestic and foreign research, materials on thematic conferences.
Plant Health and Quarantine welcomes both distinguished and young scientists, specialists-practitioners, involved in plant health, to collaborate, share experiences in order to ensure sustainable phytosanitary safety and promote new scholarly discussions.
The journal aims to:
- Study major trends in plant health science
- Explore a wide range of novel technologies for monitoring and laboratory research in plant health
- Discuss emerging issues related to plant health
Section Policies
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
4 issues per year
Open Access Policy
"Plant Health and Quarantine" is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
All submitted manuscripts are screened for similarity to published material using plagiarism-detection software “Antiplagiat” and undergo through a two-stage review process (external review through the Editorial Board and internal review through the Editorial staff of Plant Health and Quarantine).
Manuscript is reviewed by members of the Editorial Board in a confidential manner (“blind review”) by keeping reviewers’ identities anonymous to authors.
Only articles with favorable review will be accepted for publication.
Rejected manuscripts, articles that are outside the scope of the journal, and articles recommended for revision, will not be returned to authors. Authors will only be provided with the review report.
Resubmitted after correction manuscripts will be reviewed by the editorial staff and accepted for publication if they conform to the editorial staff guidelines.
Editorial Office reserves the right to edit, reduce the word count or correct a manuscript.
REVIEW POLICY ESTABLISHED FOR SCIENTIFIC ARTICLES SUBMITTED TO THE EDITORIAL OFFICE OF PLANT HEALTH AND QUARANTINE
- This procedure was established pursuant to the Order of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation (Minobrnauki of Russia) as of July 25, 2014, N 793 in Moscow "On the approval of guidelines for establishing a list of peer reviewed scientific journals on a notification basis, which must publish the major results from scientific dissertations for candidate of sciences and doctorate degrees, and the requirements the scientific journals must comply with to be included in the list of peer reviewed scientific journals” (as amended on February 17, 2016).
- The Executive Editor shall make records of manuscripts upon their submission to Plant Health and Quarantine (via mail, email or personally handed over by author(s)) in the Log book for publication materials.
- The Executive Editor shall send an email notification to authors upon the manuscript receipt within 7 business days (in case of submissions in person or by mail (email).
- In order to improve quality of published papers all submitted manuscripts are screened for similarity to published material using plagiarism-detection software “Antiplagiat”, and undergo through a two-stage review process (external review through the Editorial Board and internal review through the Editorial staff of Plant Health and Quarantine).
- Manuscripts that do not meet the journal’s standards will not be recorded in the Log and accepted for further consideration. Authors will be provided with rejection notices.
- The Executive Editor will assign submitted manuscripts to a certain reviewer (reviewers) with a doctorate degree and candidate of sciences degree depending on his/her qualification.
- The Managing Editor of Plant Health and Quarantine select reviewers from the Editorial Board (in consultation with the Principal Editor).
- The Editorial Board is appointed by the Principal Editor and is composed of external referees recruited on a voluntary basis (who are leading experts with the proper expertise).
- If matters of dispute arise (when an author(s) disagrees with comments of a reviewer), additional reviewers may be selected (both external and internal) by the Executive Editor who will assign another reviewer (in consultation with the Principal Editor).
- Members of the Editorial Board should conduct the manuscript review in a confidential manner by keeping reviewer identities anonymous to the authors.
- The review report should be certified (signature of reviewer and seal of institution must be affixed to the review report) in accordance with the institution’s procedure in which the reviewer is employed.
- Manuscripts will be additionally reviewed by the editorial staff before publication. The review report should convey all characteristics of peer-reviewed work.
- Guidelines for external reviews:
13.1. Article general information (title, authors’ names, length)
13.2. Article general scope (topic, focus)
13.3. Article fits within aim and scope of the journal section
13.4. Significance of article
13.5. Content characteristics and assessment of article:
- article content clearly state the title;
- novelty of work;
- it is advisable to publish an article even if there are other sources that have been previously published on the same topic and the topic is of interest to the journal’s readers;
- explicit advantages and disadvantages of the article, corrections and additions to be made by author (if any).
13.6. Comments on material presentation and technical format of article (with regard to reducing the length of article without altering its content and avoiding misunderstanding of scientific results)
13.7. Objective and valid comments of the reviewer aimed to promote the scientific and methodological levels of manuscripts.
The final part of the review report should contain reasonable conclusions about the manuscript itself and provide good reasons and explicit recommendation why the manuscript should be published, and include one of the following: recommendation to accept the manuscript for publication in Plant Health and Quarantine; or return it to author for corrections (two more corrections). In such case, date of initial entry of manuscript into the Log will be annulled, and the receipt date will be the date on which the final version of manuscript is received.
- In case of a favorable review, the manuscript will be handed over to the Principal Editor (or Managing Editor) to be approved for publication in Plant Health and Quarantine. If necessary, after the review process the editorial staff will decide whether or not to publish a manuscript.
- Manuscripts approved for publication will be handed over to the Technical Editor. The Technical Editor may make corrections of minor stylistic, nomenclature errors without mispresenting author’s views and without the consent of an author. When necessary, modified manuscripts will be returned to the author for approval before publication.
- The Editorial Office of Plant Health and Quarantine is required to provide authors with review reports and must also present the review reports upon request of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation and/or the Higher Attestation Commission of the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation.
- Reviewers and editorial staff should not use knowledge of the work before its publication to further their own interests. Manuscripts are the private property of the authors and constitute information that must not be disclosed.
- Accepted for publication or rejected manuscripts will be retained (together with review reports) in the editorial archive for five calendar years. Manuscripts will not be returned to authors.
- If authors are not employed by FGBU “VNIIKR”, the Editorial Office of Plant Health and Quarantine reserves the right to select a suitable reviewer with the proper expertise from the staff of the Institution.
- Review deadlines are determined by the Executive Editor and depend on journal publication date. Manuscripts will be reviewed within three weeks after submission.
- Reviewing manuscripts is carried out on voluntary basis.
21.1. When a submission is rejected, the Executive Editor shall send an author a rejection notice with constructive feedback. Articles are subject to rejection on the following grounds:
- manuscript is outside the scope of the journal, non-compliance with publication requirements;
- failure to submit a revised manuscript as per recommendation of reviewers (or a rebuttal letter explaining why the manuscript should be reevaluated);
- insufficient quality of manuscript (including lack of information according to general structure of a scientific article and statistical analysis of experimental observations; conclusions are not consistent with the experimental and literature data), redundant publication of the same scientific study;
- copyright infringement and violation of generally accepted standards of research ethics.
21.2. In case of unfavorable review, the Executive Editor shall send an author a copy of a review report (without disclosing reviewers’ identities to authors to ensure the manuscript is fully anonymized (blinded) with suggestion for improvement according to the reviewers’ comments or submission of a rebuttal letter.
22. Revisions should be submitted by the author at least within 2 weeks after receiving comments from the reviewer. If an author fails to return the manuscript to the Editorial Office before deadline, the date of initial entry of manuscript into the Log will be annulled, and the receipt date will be the date on which the final version of manuscript is received.
Publishing Ethics
The Editorial Office of Plant Health and Quarantine adheres to the ethical standards adopted by the international scientific community, follows recommendations and guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (Committee on Publication Ethics, СОРЕ, http://publicationethics.org/), and is guided by valuable experience of reputable international scientific journals and publishers.
This contributes to ensuring that intellectual property rights of authors are protected, reaching high quality scientific research publications within the global scientific community and limiting use of copyrighted materials by others.
- EDITORIAL OFFICE RESPONSIBILITIES
1.1. The Editorial Office is responsible for:
- making editorial decisions about publication of materials, guided by the journal policy, in accordance with current copyright legislation, validity of data provided and the scientific merit of the submitted work, subject to their mandatory review by experts, providing the reviewer identities are kept anonymous to the authors (single blind) and not disclosed without their consent. Thus, experts are able to make reasonable critical judgements regarding level and clarity of submitted material, its compliance with scope of the journal, novelty of information and reliable results. A final decision on the publication will be based on reviewers’ recommendations.
- evaluation of manuscripts intellectual content regardless of authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, origin, citizenship, social or political affiliations.
All submissions are screened using plagiarism-detection software “Antiplagiat”. Articles that do not meet ethical standards are not permitted for publication. It is the responsibility of the Editorial Office to make final decisions about all materials to be published in Plant Health and Quarantine.
1.2. Confidentiality
All editorial staff undertakes to comply with requirements of the Russian legislation regarding personal data protection, including protection of personal data of authors and reviewers.
Any manuscript submitted for evaluation should be considered as a confidential document, meaning it should only be presented to certain individuals involved in the decision-making process. Editor and editorial staff are not authorized to use unpublished data in manuscripts for personal purposes or transfer it to third parties without a written consent of an author. Information and ideas obtained through editing and associated with potential benefits should be kept confidential and not be used for personal gain.
1.3. Conflicts of interest
In case of conflict of interest resulting from competitive, cooperation and/or other relationship or ties to any of authors, companies, or institutions, in order to resolve the issues the manuscript should be submitted for an independent editorial review.
The Editorial Office should request, according to established procedure, that all parties involved in the manuscript review process disclose competing interests. If a conflict of interest has been identified after publication, the Editorial Office should be responsible for publishing relevant corrections.
If ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, the Editorial Office should take reasonably responsive measures guided by the experience of reputable international journals and publishers. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior must be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. If facts have been confirmed, the Editorial Office should publish corresponding corrections, retractions, or apologies.
- RESPONSIBILITIES OF REVIEWERS
2.1. Contribution to Editorial Decision
The peer-reviewing process assists the Editorial Board in making editorial decisions and may also serve the author in improving the paper via constructive cooperation with the Editorial Office.
2.2. Promptness
Any selected reviewer who feels unqualified to review a manuscript or knows its timely review will be impossible, should notify the Editorial Office and withdraw from the review process.
2.3. Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for peer-review must be treated as a confidential document. It must not be disclosed or discussed with other reviewers unless authorized by the Principal Editor.
2.4. Standards of objectivity
Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting documents.
2.5. Acknowledgment of sources
Reviewers should identify cases in which relevant published material referred to in the article has not been cited in the reference section. They should point out whether conclusions or arguments derived from other publications are accompanied by the respective source. Reviewers should also notify the Editorial Office of any partial or substantial similarity between the manuscript under review and any other published article of which they have personal knowledge.
2.6. Disclosure and conflict of interest
Unpublished materials from a submitted manuscript should not be used in the reviewer’s personal research without written consent of an author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer-review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage. Reviewers should avoid reviewing and making decisions on manuscripts that conflict with their own interests.
- AUTHORS RESPONSIBILITIES
3.1. Reporting Standards
Authors of publications should present an accurate account of work performed as well as objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data of research should be accurately presented in the article. An article should contain sufficient information required for verification and to replicate the research by others. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
Authors should avoid from personal invective, making derogatory remarks and accusations against other researchers. Any defamatory statements will not be tolerated.
The Editorial Office asks authors to follow principles of bioethics when conducting animal research.
3.2. Data Access and Retention
Authors could be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the paper for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. If possible, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to others after publication, and in any case be prepared to retain raw data for a reasonable period of time after publication of their work.
3.3. Originality, Plagiarism
Authors should ensure that their submission is original, and where texts or graphs were taken from other sources, they must ensure the source is clearly cited and appropriate written permission is obtained. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
3.4. Multiple, Redundant and Concurrent Publication
Authors should ensure that their work has not been previously published. When authors use some part of their previously published manuscript, they must give reference to the manuscript submitted first, and indicate how their submitted manuscript differs from their previous work. Verbatim copying or paraphrasing of your own work is unacceptable and it can only form basis for future research.
Submitting the exact same manuscript to more than one journal constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.
3.5. Acknowledgements
Authors should recognize contributions of others who have made a substantial impact on their work. Authors should include references to other relevant published work on which the submitted work is based. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source.
3.6. Authorship
Authorship should be limited to those who have made a substantial contribution to the concept, design, execution, or interpretation of data of the research study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Those who contributed to some significant aspects of research project should be listed as project participants.
Author should guarantee that all co-authors and project participants are included in the author or project participants lists, and also verify that all co-authors have approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication.
All authors listed in the article should take public responsibility for the full content of their paper.
3.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
All authors should declare any financial or other substantial conflicts of interest that may influence on the results or interpretation of the study. Authors are required to report all funding sources.
3.8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author detects a significant error or inaccuracy in his/her own published work, it is the author’s responsibility to promptly notify the editor or publisher and to cooperate with the editor or publisher to correct the error. When a third party informs an editor or publisher that published work contains important errors, the author should correct errors or provide the Editorial Office with a rebuttal letter .
Founder
FGBU “VNIIKR”
Author fees
Publication in “Plant Health and Quarantine" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Plagiarism detection
“Plant Health and Quarantine" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in “Plant Health and Quarantine", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in “Plant Health and Quarantine" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
