About

Focus and Scope

Evolutionary Systematics (formerly Mitteilungen aus dem Hamburgischen Zoologischen Museum und Institut) edited by the Centrum für Naturkunde at the Universität Hamburg is an international, peer-reviewed, life science journal, devoted to whole-organism biology. It mainly publishes original research and review articles in the field of metazoan taxonomy, biosystematics, evolution, morphology, development and biogeography at all taxonomic levels, ​as well as articles on the history of science, in particular on museum-based or specimen-related aspects. Its scope encompasses primary information from collection-related research, for example taxonomic descriptions and discoveries, revisions, annotated type catalogues, aspects of the history of science, and contributions on new methods and principles of systematics. Articles whose main topic is ecology, functional anatomy, physiology, or ethology are only acceptable when of clear systematic or evolutionary relevance and perspective. Review articles and contributions to a discussion forum are welcome, but authors are asked to contact the editors beforehand.


Open Access Policy

This journal provides open access to its content immediately upon piublication under the conditions of Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.


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.


Peer reviewing

Manuscripts are subject to peer review. All manuscripts submitted will be reviewed by at least two experts. Authors are welcome to make suggestions for competent reviewers.

Proofs

Prior to publication of your manuscript you will receive proofs in PDF format. Please correct and return the proofs within two weeks to the editorial office. We recommend using the standard proofreading marks or – in the case of a few corrections – using page and line numbers. Do not change the contents of your article. Corrections extending beyond production errors will be carried out at the expense of the author. The editorial office reserves the right to publish your article with only the editor’s corrections, if your corrections do not reach us in time. Send us your copyright form and order for offprints (if desired) when you return the corrections.

Printed Version and Reprints

Evolutionary Systematics is published in identical print (high-resolution, full-color) and online (PDF, HTML, XML) 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.

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 PagesPrice in EURONumber of PagesPrice in EURONumber of PagesPrice in EURO
1-43,0057-6022,00261-28078,00
5-83,4061-6423,50281-30081,00
9-124,7065-6825,00301-32084,50
13-166,3069-7226,50321-34088,50
17-207,7073-8030,00341-36094,00
21-249,4081-10036,50361-38098,00
25-2811,00101-12043,00381-400104,00
29-3212,50121-14045,50401-450110,00
33-3613,70141-16052,00451-500117,00
37-4014,60161-18057,50501-550128,00
41-4416,00181-20062,50551-600140,00
45-4816,50201-22067,50601-650155,00
49-5219,00221-24071,50651-700165,00
53-5620,50241-26075,50701-750180,00

Article Charges


Core Charges

The publication of 200 pages a year is generously supported by the Centrum für Naturkunde (CeNak) - Center of Natural History - University of Hamburg. Articles accepted for publication before the expiration of the 200 pages quota will be published for FREE. After the expiration of the yearly quota, authors may opt to either cover a publication fee, or wait with their publication until the beginning of the next year.

Alternatively, authors may opt to cover the Article Processing Charges before the expiration of the yearly quota, especially if these fees are supported by institutions or grants. This will free up publication fee waivers, helping the journal to publish additional valuable research.


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


Author Guidelines

If appropriate, the manuscript should be structured using headlines and sub-headlines, but without numbering, according to the following sections:
            Title page
            Abstract
            Introduction
            Materials and Methods
            Results
            Discussion
            Acknowledgements
            References
            Tables with captions
            Figure captions

The language of publication is English. There is no general limitation on the length of manuscripts, but please contact the editor before submitting papers exceeding 30 printed pages (approximately 60 manuscript pages including figures). Manuscripts should be written in a clear, straightforward style. Avoid footnotes. Divide the text into sections using headlines and sub-headlines. Do not number the headlines. Inline headers should be set in italics and followed by a full stop.


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.

Authors are required to have their manuscripts edited by a native English speaker BEFORE submission. Authors have to confirm by checking a tick box in the submission process that they have followed the above requirement:

The text is checked by a native English speaker, duly acknowledged in the manuscript. I am aware that non-edited manuscripts could be rejected prior to peer-review.

The submission process includes an option to request a professional linguistic and copy editing at a price of EURO 15 per 1800 characters:

The text has not been checked by a native speaker and I request thorough editing prior to peer review at a price. I agree to cover the costs even if my manuscript is not accepted for publication.

The authors are NOT obliged to use our linguistic services, but they must ensure that their manuscripts have been checked by a native speaker.


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:
Polaszek A, Alonso-Zarazaga M, Bouchet P, Brothers DJ, Evenhuis NL, Krell FT, Lyal CHC, Minelli A, Pyle RL, Robinson N, Thompson FC, van Tol J (2005) ZooBank: the open-access register for zoological taxonomy: Technical Discussion Paper. Bulletin of Zoological Nomenclature 62: 210-220.

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

Electronic Journal Articles:
Mallet J, Willmott K (2002) Taxonomy: renaissance or Tower of Babel? Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18 (2): 57-59. doi: 10.1016/S0169-5347(02)00061-7.

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) Forest and Dragonflies. Fourth WDA International Symposium of Odonatology, Pontevedra (Spain), July 2005. Pensoft Publishers, Sofia-Moscow, 51-78.

Book chapters:
Mayr E (2000) The biological species concept. In: Wheeler QD, Meier R (Eds) Species Concepts and Phylogenetic Theory: A Debate. Columbia University Press, New York, 17-29.

Books:
Goix N, Klimaszewski J (2007) Catalogue of Aleocharine Rove Beetles of Canada and Alaska. Pensoft Publishers, Sofia-Moscow, 166 pp.

Book with institutional author:
International Commission on Zoological Nomenclature (1999) International code of zoological nomenclature. Fourth Edition. London: The International Trust for Zoological Nomenclature.

PhD thesis:
Dalebout ML (2002) Species identity, genetic diversity and molecular systematic relationships among the Ziphiidae (beaked whales). PhD thesis, Auckland, New Zealand: University of Auckland.

Link/URL:
BBC News: Island leopard deemed new species http://news.bbc.co.uk/

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.

Authors are encouraged to cite in the References list the publications of the original descriptions of the taxa treated in their manuscript.


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 journals@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.

Illustrations of measurable morphological traits should bear mute scale bars, whose real size is to be given in the figure captions.

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.


Taxonomic Treatments

General guidelines

By publishing in this journal you are already creating a modern taxonomic product that is more accessible than previous print only works. The following guidelines are provided to ensure that other elements of the work follow modern standards and enable the full advantage of the ARPHA platform.

  • Include unique specimen identifiers for type material. Unique identifiers are for example museum collections specimen IDs. Unique identifiers can be provided also by international taxon-based databases that do not indicate ownership, such as AntWeb.org for ants, for example.
  • Holotype should not deposited in private collections.
  • Include images of type material or representative species. Imaging is not a technical problem anymore and is provided by many institutional collections or international taxon-based services (again,AntWeb.org is a good example as they will provide free imaging of ant type material if necessary).
  • Specimen data of material examined provided as auxiliary file as a .txt or .cvs file or table at end of document, based on the Darwin Core standard. Specimen file should include unique specimen identifiers when possible.
  • Include latitude, longitude, elevation, habitat, microhabitat information of primary type material. For format of geographical coordinates see section "Main text" above.
  • Provide dichotomous key of taxa or related taxa (i.e. species group) or links to online-based keys.
  • Single species descriptions should be clearly justified with regard as to why a more detailed larger scale, comparative revision was not conducted. For descriptions of single species see also section "Focus and Scope".

Sequence data

Manuscripts containing novel amino acid sequences (e.g. primer sequences) will only be accepted if they carry an International Nucleotide Sequence Databases (INSD) accession number from the European Biology Laboratory (EMBL), GenBank Data Libraries (GenBank) or DNA Data Bank of Japan (DDBJ). We strongly recommend that authors include institutional catalog numbers for specimens preserved in collections, and information identifying sequences that are derived from type specimens (see below) when they deposit data in genetic databanks. A summary table with the INSD accession [catalog] numbers should be included in either Materials and Methods or Data Resources section of the paper. If specimens were not vouchered (tissued specimens should be vouchered whenever possible!), collection locality data and possibly photographs of tissued specimens must be provided. A nomenclature for genetic sequences for types and confidently identified nontype specimens has been proposed by Chakrabarty et al. (2013); a sequence from a holotype is identified as genseq-1, one from a paratype is identified as genseq-2, one from a topotype is genseq-3, etc. The genetic marker(s) used should also be incorporated into the nomenclature (e.g. genseq-2 COI).

Examples

Table 1. Ranking Sequence Reliability. Ranking of source materials of genetic sequences based on reliability of taxonomic identification. Examples of the source material are listed in the third column with the last column providing the corresponding GenSeq nomenclature (after Chakrabarty et al. (2013)).

Reliability Ranking

Source Materials

Examples

Corresponding GenSeq Nomenclature

Highest
1st

Primary Types

Holotype, Lectotype, Syntype, Isosyntype, Neotype, Isotype

genseq-1

2nd

Secondary Types

Paratype, Paralectotypes, etc.

genseq-2

3rd

Topotypes (vouchered), or non-type specimens listed in original description or redescription

Topotype, Non-type specimen listed in original description or redescription

genseq-3

4th

Collections-vouchered non-types (not from original description or redescription)

Vouchered specimen

genseq-4

5th

Photo voucher only

No specimen voucher but photo voucher available

genseq-5

Lowest

No voucher

Non-vouchered

No classification

 

Table 2. Example Reporting Table. Examples of how links between genetic sequences and vouchers in institutional collections could be displayed as a table in publications reporting new sequences.

Species

Specimen Catalog #

GenBank #

GenSeq Nomenclature

COI

ND1

Typhleotris mararybe

LSUMZ 13636 (holotype)

HM590594

HM590606

genseq-1 COI, ND1

Paretroplus tsimoly

AMNH 229558 (paratype)

JZ590596

NA

genseq-2 COI

Nandopsis haitiensis

UMMZ 236321 (topotype)

BK590595

BK590607

genseq-3 COI, ND1

Halieutichthys intermedius

FMNH 96353 (non-type specimen voucher)

AY722169

AY722306

genseq-4 COI, ND1

Equulites absconditus

NMNH 12345PV2 (photo voucher)

NA

BG34621

genseq-5 ND1

 

International Code of Zoological Nomenclature

This journal will publish papers that strictly adhere to the rules of the last edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature and its amendment. Authors are also advised to follow all recommendations of the Code and to consult the guidelines below, as well as ICZN's manual Best practice in the use of the scientific names of animals prior to submitting the manuscript.

General: Each first mentioning of an animal species name within the text must be provided with author(s)' name(s). Year of publication of an animal species should be given in taxonomic revisions with quotation of the work providing the original species’ description in the list of references.

New names: When new taxonomic acts are proposed, they should be explicitly indicated as being new by adding the respective abbreviation after the taxon name i.e., sp. n., comb. n., nomen n. Authors of newly described taxa should be given any time the taxon is mentioned, if different from the publication authors.

Examples:

  • Genus X-us Smith, new genus (author(s) of the publication and authority (-ies) of the taxon is/are identical);

  • X-us albus Jones & Peters, new species (the publication is authored by persons different in composition or combination from the authority (-ies) of the taxon itself, e.g. Smith, Jones & Peters or Peters & Jones).

We highly recommend that authors of new species are also included as co-authors of the work where the taxa are described. If the authors of the work do not want to include the authors of the taxonomic name then to be absolutely certain that the authority for the name is unequivocal there should be a statement in the work saying that these authors (of the name) are responsible for making the name available under the code (Article 50.1.2, etc.) i.e. they are responsible for coining the name and for satisfying all other criteria for availability.

New family-group names: Although all family group names are derived/based on their type genus, the type genus is to be compulsorily designated in any description of a family-group name published after 31st December 1999 (Article 16.2). It is not sufficient that the type genus is mentioned as belonging to the new family-group name; it must be stated that this is the type genus. We recommend a single type line as: Type-genus: Musca Linnaeus, 1758.

New genus-group names: The origin ("etymology", or "derivatio nominum") of name and its gender should be indicated. The type-species and the character of the proposed taxonomic act should be specified for new genus-group names. The type species name should be given in its original combination with an author and year. If the type species is now considered a junior synonym there need to be a clear mention of that. The fixation type should derive from the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature (see Articles 68 & 69; original designation, monotypy, absolute tautonymy, Linnaean tautonymy, subsequent monotypy, subsequent designation).

Example:

  • Sympycnus Loew

Type-species: Porphyrops annulipes Meigen, 1824 by subsequent designation of Coquillett (1910: 610) =pulicarius Fallen, 1823.

New species-group names: According to the ICZN Art. 11.9, but also Art. 11.3 the origin "etymology", or "derivatio nominum") new species-group names should be supplemented by information on whether the epithet is an 1) adjective or participle in the nominative singular; 2) noun in the nominative singular; 3) a noun in the genitive case; 4) an adjective used a substative in the genitive case; or 5) an arbitrary combination of letters (ICZN Art. 11.3). For species-group names, there are two separate statements of type information that are needed:

  • the statement of species’ type locality – that is the exact place whence the primary type origins, including exact collecting dataplace with geographical coordinates, geographical or political unit (Area/ District/ State) and country;also, if possible, supplementary locality information should be included – habitat type, method of collecting, date, collector’s names, host name (for parasites), etc.

  • there should be a separate statement about the type specimen, exact quotation of its original label, condition of specimen (dry pinned, in alcohol, slide, fossil, etc.) and repository (organization’s name and city).

Examples:

For a new species:

  • Type-locality: USA, Viriginia: Fairfax County, Kingstowne, 38°46'N, 77°07'W, broad-leaf forest, under bark, 10 July 2000, J. Smith leg.

  • Type-specimen: Holotype male, pinned, with genitalia in a separate microvial. Original label: "USA, VA, Fairfax, Kingstowne, 38°46'N, 77°07'W, 12 Oct 2003, BJ & FC Thompson" "USNM ENT 00033805" [Code 49 barcode], "HOLOTYPE / Xylota / x-us / Thompson [red handwritten label].

For a previously described species:

Lectotype male, pinned … [details] here designated to fix the concept of X-us albus Jones and to ensure the universal and consistent interpretation of the same. Or … [details then] by designation of Smith (1976: 999).

Previously published names: For a previously published name, please provide the year of description. Also use the parentheses convention for subsequent new combinations.

[Etymology]

Authors of new species name should state exactly what the epithet is in terms of the ICZN, as outlined in Article 11.9.1.1 to 11.9.1.4 as well as 11.3. A name may be a word in or derived from Latin, Greek or any other language (even one with no alphabet), or be formed from such a word. In short, a name can be declared as arbitrary combination (the best solution) or must be or be treated as:

I) a word of two or more letters, or a compound word, and, if a Latin or latinized word must be, or be treated as:

  1. an adjective or participle in the nominative singular (as in Echinus esculentus, Felis marmorata, Seioptera vibrans), or
  2. a noun in the nominative singular standing in apposition to the generic name (as in Struthio camelus, Cercopithecus diana), or
  3. a noun in the genitive case (e.g. rosae, sturionis, thermopylarum, galliae, sanctipauli, sanctaehelenae, cuvieri, merianae, smithorum), or
  4. an adjective used as a substantive in the genitive case and derived from the specific name of an organism with which the animal in question is associated (as in Lernaeocera lusci, a copepod parasitic on Trisopterus luscus).

II) An adjectival species-group name proposed in Latin text but written otherwise than in the nominative singular because of the requirements of Latin grammar is available provided that it meets the other requirements of availability, but it is to be corrected to the nominative singular if necessary.

Arranging sections within species treatments (sections in square brackets are requested for new descriptions only!):

[Name]
[Material]
    - [Type material]
    - Other material
[Diagnosis]
[Description]
[Etymology]
Distribution
Ecology (including phenology)
Conservation status (optional, we encourage authors to follow the IUCN categories and criteria, please see http://www.iucnredlist.org/static/categories_criteria_3_1#critical))
Discussion (optional, but very desirable)


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).


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 Your 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 Your 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.


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 Your 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 Your 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.


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


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).