About

Editorial Policies


Focus and Scope

Subterranean Biology is an international journal published by Pensoft on behalf of the International Society for Subterranean Biology [SIBIOS-ISSB] for the publication of original and significant contributions on all aspects of subterranean life.
The Journal will consider original scientific papers dealing with any aspect of subterranean ecosystems and their components focusing on biology, ecology, evolution and conservation.
Reviews and Commentaries: The journal welcomes review articles on aspects of subterranean biology. They should be submitted in the same way as research articles but use a simple layout with no more than three levels of headings. Commentaries on previous matter published in the journal may be also considered. Both reviews and commentaries will be reviewed.
Book Reviews: Reviews of books, symposia volumes and conferences pertinent to the journal are welcome.

The journal publishes electronic versions of the articles when these are ready to publish, without delays that might be caused by completion of an issue. These electronic versions are not "pre-prints" but final and immutable (Version of Record), hence available for the purposes of biological nomenclature. The date indicated on the electronic version is to be considered the actual publication date.


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

An additional fee of 90.00 EURO per article will be charged if data are deposited in the Dryad Data Repository.


Printed Version and Reprints

Subterranean Biology 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


Notice to Authors

Submission of a manuscript to be considered for publication implies that the results reported have not been published elsewhere and it is not being considered elsewhere for publication. The Journal assumes that manuscripts have been submitted with the consent of all authors. Submitted manuscripts may be accepted for publication after peer review but the authors are solely responsible for the accuracy of information in their papers and for any opinions expressed.


Submission of Manuscripts

Manuscripts to be considered for publication in Subterranean Biology should be submitted online to the journal's website at www.pensoft.net/journals/subterbiol. ; Authors need to retain a proper balance between length and substance. The Society may levy page charges on manuscript of exceptional length or on those accepted for publication from non-members of SIBIOS.


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 10 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.


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. The higher taxa within the title should be separated with commas and not with a semicolon, e.g.: (Coleoptera, Elateridae, Elaterini). Please enter the desired running title for the page headings in brackets.

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. The abstract should contain max. 250 words. A maximum of 10 key words may be given, which are not already in the title.

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, and Page Numbering: Single-space all material (text, quotations, figure legends, tables, references, etc.). Separate paragraphs with a blank line. Use a 12-point font (preferably Times New Roman or Arial).

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://wiki.tdwg.org/twiki/bin/view/DarwinCore/GeospatialExtension). 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.


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. Two authors are named and connected by "and"; three or more authors are abbreviated to "et al". Several citations are separated by a comma. 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.

List all authors cited in the References. For multiauthored papers, give all author names in full; the abbreviation "et al." is only allowed in the text. All journal titles should be spelled out completely and should not be italicized. In the case of Chinese authors the first names must also be given in full. Ensure that the References are complete and arranged according to name and year of publication. Personal communications and submitted manuscripts should be listed as unpublished results in the text and not listed in the References section.

The references should conform to the rules shown in the following examples:

Journal Article

Herman LH (2001) Catalog of the Staphylinidae (Insecta, Coleoptera). 1758 to the end of the second Millennium. VI. Staphylininae group (Part 3). Bulletin of the American Museum of Natural History 265: 3021–3839.

McAtee WL, Malloch JR (1923) Notes on American Bactrodinae and Saicinae. (Heteroptera: Reduviidae). Annals of the Entomological Society of America 16 (3): 247–254.

Zhang L, Yang D (2003) Notes on the genus Hercostomus Loew, 1857 from Guangxi, China (Diptera: Empidoidea: Dolichopodidae). Annales Zoologici 53 (4): 657–661.

Staniec B, Pietrykowska-Tudruj E (2007) Developmental stages of Philonthus rubripennis Stephens, 1832 (Coleoptera, Staphylinidae, Staphylininae) with comments on its biology. Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift 54 (1): 95–113.

Book

Bright DE, Skidmore RE (2002) A catalog of Scolytidae and Platypodidae (Coleoptera). Supplement 2 (1995–1999). NRC Research Press, Ottawa.

Hinton HE (1981) Biology of insects eggs. Vol. 2. Pergamon Press, Oxford, 531 pp.

Book Chapter

De Jong R (1998) Halmahera and Seram: different histories, but similar butterfly faunas. In Hall R and Holloway JD (eds). Biogeography and geological evolution of SE Asia. Backhuys Publishers, Leiden: pp. 315–325.

Link/URL:

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

Cite the journal as "Deutsche Entomologische Zeitschrift"

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.

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 subtbiol@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.


Taxonomic Treatments

General guidelines

By publishing in Subterranean Biology 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 Subterranean Biology 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".

International Code for Zoological Nomenclature

Subterranean Biology will publish papers that strictly adhere the rules of the last edition of the International Code of Zoological Nomenclature. To assure this, authors are advised to follow the recommendations below.
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 alterations are proposed the taxonomic act should be indicated by adding its abbreviation, i.e., sp. n., comb. n., stat. n. after the taxon name. Same refer to high taxonomic ranks such as subfamily, family, suborder, etc. Authors names should be specified throughout the text if different from the authors of publication.
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).

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.
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, but very desirable)
Discussion (optional, but very desirable)


Submission Guidelines


Submission Procedure

Already have a Username/Password for Subterranean Biology?
Go to Login

If you have registered yourself for www.pensoft.net before, you need only to enter your profile after login and check the Subterranean Biology box on the journal registration page. 

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 Subterranean Biology, 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 on the right-hand bar, or under 'USER HOME' -> 'Subterranean Biology'- Author' -> 'Submit a New Manuscript'.

The manuscript submission process is separated into the following steps:

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

  • Step 2: Specifying 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 Author 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 (not 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 version of the manuscript in PDF format, with all figures embedded, total file size not larger than 20 MB

2. Additional files

Original text file and high-resolution figures must be submitted during the same submission process as 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, completed with associated metadata on the online submission form. Supplementary files should have their own legends and will be referenced as appendices under separate DOI numbers.

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 subtbiol@pensoft.net

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


Article Processing Charges

Subterranean Biology does not charge the authors for publication in open access. The article processing charges are covered by theInternational Society for Subterranean Biology [SIBIOS]
The authors submitting manuscripts to Subterranean Biology will benefit from the following services at not cost:

  • Online submission and editorial management system, professional review and editorial assistance
  • Typesetting, proofreading and publication
  • No limit in manuscript length; large revisionary works, checklists, catalogues, etc. are published as separate monographs
  • Rapid publication process, usually within 1-2 weeks time after a manuscript is accepted for publication
  • Advanced publishing technologies, possibilities for data publication and various semantic Web enhancements
  • Immediate free access for everyone to your work
  • Immediate Alert Service through Email and RSS feeds for individuals to be informed about your publication
  • Registration of all new taxa in ZooBank, EOL, Globalnames, Wikispecies and other aggregators
  • Immediate distribution of your publication to scientific databases, indices and search engines (Web of Science, Google Scholar, CAB Abstracts, DOAJ Content and others)
  • Archiving of your publication, electronically and in print, in trusted (e-) archives and copyright libraries
  • Author copyright and distribution under the Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license
  • No extra charges for colour illustrations
  • Full-color, high-resolution print version

Offprints and printed issues of the journal can be purchased additionally (see Printed Version & Reprints).


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

€ 300*

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


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.

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!


Data Publishing

For more information, please visit our detailed Data Publishing Policies and Guidelines for Biodiversity Data.

A substantial feature of the semantic Web is open data publishing, where not only analysed results, but original datasets can be published as citeable items so that the data authors may receive academic dredit for their efforts. Pensoft supports various methods for data publication, such as downloadable data packages supplementary to a research article, or hosted in and linked to data repositories. There are several incentives for authors and instutions to publish data:

  • Data produced and collected using public funds can be published, cited, used and re-used, either as separate datasets or collated with other data;
  • Data can be indexed and made discoverable, browsable and searchable through biodiversity infrastructures (e.g., the Global Biodiversity Information Facility (GBIF), Dryad and others):
  • Data can be integrated with other datasets across space to bring recognition and new opportunities for collaboration to the data authors;
  • Collection managers can trace usage and citations of digitized data from their collections;
  • By publishing data, authors and institutions are credited for their work to create and maintain data through registering of priority and authorship through indexing, discovery and citation;
  • Datasets, metadata and respective data papers are inter-linked to expedite and mutually extend the dissemination, to the benefit of the authors and society at large.

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.

Pensoft reached an agreement for cooperation in data hosting and developing of data publishing workflows with the GBIF, the Dryad Data Repository and the Consortium for Barcode of Life.

Download Data paper poster

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


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: Authors should register themselves at the journal’s website to be able to submit a manuscript to a particular journal. During the registration process authors can also indicate their wish to become reviewers. Authors can 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 the "My Profile" menu.

4. We advise to keep your login active through ticking the "Remember my password" checkbox during logging in.

5. 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? Please send me a new one by email".

This is available in the Register/Login menu top right to obtain a new password. After requesting a new password, a message of the following kind will be sent to your email:

Hello <FirstName> <LastName>,

You received this message, because you wanted to change your forgotten password.

Please click on the following link to change your forgotten password: http://www.pensoft.net/fgu.php?fg=wSYAXV2mTqWCnvp

This link will be valid for 2 hours only since 2011-08-25 17:12:47

Your Verification ID:wSYAXV2mTqWCnvp

After clicking on the link, a form will appear on your screen where you have to enter the same email to which you have requested the new password and also the new password.

There are two ways to access a manuscript:

1. After login (or in case your login is kept active through the "Remember my password" function), please go to the respective journal’s web page and click on the red-coloured Your Tasks link in the upper horizontal menu bar. In 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 Edit (no.), Published (no.), and Archived (no.). The number in brackets after each category shows the number of manuscripts that were assigned to you.

2. After login (or in case your login is kept active through the "Remember my password" function), 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 the 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 inform you also on delays in reviewing and will confirm a successful review submission. The email notifications contain the stepwise instructions as to what action is needed at each stage, as well as 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 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, please inform both author and 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 judge these according to his/her expertise or seek advice from a member of the journal's Editorial Board.

The journal allows a maximum of two rounds of revisions 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.

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 kindly 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 editor 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:

Originality: Is the paper sufficiently novel and contributes to a better understanding of the topic under scrutiny, or 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 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?

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 period, 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 in the Editorial Decision menu. The review may consists of (1) a simple online questionnaire to be answered by clicking on either "Yes", "No", or "N/A" options, (2) comments addressed to the Author and the Editor, (3) comments addressed to the Editor only, and (3) associated files (corrected/commented manuscript file, review submitted in a separate text file, etc.).

Note1: The Reviewer 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 Sticky Notes tools, available through the menu Tools -> Comments & Markup of the Acrobat Reader. When editing in Microsoft WORD please use the Track Changes tool.

Note2: 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 to open his/her identity through clicking on "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 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 (Reject, Reject & Resubmission Encouraged, Major Revision, Minor Revision, Accept) and then pressing the "Finish" button. The Online System will ask the Reviewer for one more confirmation of the selected recommendation before submission. The submitted review cannot be changed after submission.

Note1: Reasons for rejection can be a low scientific quality, non-conformance to the journal’s style/policies, and/or grammatically poor English language.

Note2: 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 comments on privacy above).

5. The Reviewer will be informed about a publication of the manuscript he/she has reviewed through an automated email acknowledgement sent by the journal on the day of publication of the article. The email contains the link for download of the published paper.

6. The Reviewer may always access information on the manuscripts that are or 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 were assigned.


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: Authors should register themselves at the journal’s website to be able to submit a manuscript to a particular journal. During the registration process authors can also indicate their wish to become reviewers. Authors can 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 the "My Profile" menu.

4. We advise to keep your login active through ticking the "Remember my password" checkbox during logging in.

5. 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? Please send me a new one by email".

This is available in the Register/Login menu top right to obtain a new password. After requesting a new password, a message of the following kind will be sent to your email:

Hello <FirstName> <LastName>,

You received this message, because you wanted to change your forgotten password.

Please click on the following link to change your forgotten password: http://www.pensoft.net/fgu.php?fg=wSYAXV2mTqWCnvp

This link will be valid for 2 hours only since 2011-08-25 17:12:47

Your Verification ID:wSYAXV2mTqWCnvp

After clicking on the link, a form will appear on your screen where you have to enter the same email to which you have requested the new password and also the new password.

There are two ways to access a manuscript:

1. After login (or in case your login is kept active through the "Remember my password" function), please go to the respective journal’s web page and click on the red-coloured Your Tasks link in the upper horizontal menu bar. In 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 Edit (no.), Published (no.), and Archived (no.). The number in brackets after each category shows the number of manuscripts that were assigned to you.

2. After login (or in case your login is kept active through the "Remember my password" function), 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 Editors" 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 section).

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. 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, Resubmission Encouraged" PRIOR to review process, in cases when a manuscript is scientifically poor, and/or does not conform to journal’s style, 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 the section How to access a manuscript above in case you meet any difficulties.

2. Subject Editor has to read the manuscript and decide if it is potentially suitable for publication (i.e., seems to be potentially interesting and novel and does not contain obvious flaws) and should be forwarded 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 button "Proceed" in the menu Editorial Decision. Please note, however, that the button will be made active only after the manuscript passes at least one review. Formally, to satisfy this condition and to provide prior-to-peer-review rejection, the Subject Editor can assign him- or herself as a reviewer, and then "submit" a formal review. After submitting the formal review, the Subject Editor could complete the editorial decision through the "Proceed" button.

Note: After clicking on the "Reject" or "Reject, resubmission encouraged" in the Editorial Decision menu, an email template will appear and the Subject Editor could add some personal words to explain the reasons for rejection and eventually recommend improvements for a resubmission.

3. In case the manuscript is acceptable for peer-review, the subject editor assigns several reviewers by clicking on the "Select reviewer" link in the Peer Review menu, available after clicking on a manuscript’s link. A list of reviewers will appear and various search functions for this list are available. The Subject Editor assigns the appropriate reviewer by clicking the "Assign" link available right of the reviewer’s name.

Note1: After clicking on the "Assign" link, an email template of a review request will appear on screen. 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.

Note2: In case a potential reviewer is absent from our list, the editor can add his/her name and email through the "Create reviewer" link, available top left above the reviewer’s list. 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 filled in by the Subject Editor.

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

5. 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 in the Editorial Decision menu.

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. It is expected that all comments added will be polite and constructive.

6. At this stage the editor should take a decision either to (1) accept the manuscript, or (2) reject it, or (3) open a second and final 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 on that.

Note1: Authors submit revised versions in a text file using the Track Changes tool so that the Subject Editor can see their corrections/additions. Authors are expected to reply to the essential critiques and comments of reviewers and editor through the online editorial system.

Note2: During the second review round, the Subject Editor may decide to ask the previous or additional 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 for a report.

7. 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.

8. The Subject Editor may always access information on the manuscripts that are or have been edited by him/her through the menu "Your Tasks – Subject Editor" on the journal’s web pgfe – 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.


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