About

Focus and Scope

Food Modelling Journal (FMJ) is an innovative open access journal which facilitates the publication of mathematical models and data sets in the area of food science. The journal is focussed on submissions documenting the following outcomes of the research cycle: data, models, software, data analytics pipelines and visualization methods relevant for modelling in food science. The journal will consider manuscripts for publication related (but not limited) to the following topics: food safety, food quality, food control, food defense, food design.


What Can I Publish?

FMJ will consider the following categories of papers for publication:

  • Models on food safety and defense, food quality and control, food properties, design and production

  • Data analytics methods, workflows / pipelines and standards

  • Model application and validation studies

  • Data papers and databases

  • Software descriptions including software design concepts, description of tools and services


Criteria for Publication

To be accepted for publication in Food Modelling Journal (FMJ), the following criteria must be fulfilled:

  • Papers and associated models, data or software must be novel and contribute to a better understanding of the topic under scrutiny. Studies that have already been published or submissions that are currently under consideration for publication elsewhere will not be accepted for publication.
  • Previously published information should be considered and cited in compliance with the good academic practice. References should be complete and accurate, where possible including DOIs or links to the article. All figures included in manuscripts should be copyright free and duly acknowledge the original source.
  • All software code or data underpinning a paper, including data tables and software code on which graphs are produced, must be published alongside the paper, e.g. as supplementary files, or links to external repositories where data or code are deposited, and contain sufficient metadata to facilitate data discovery.
  • All models, data analytics methods / workflows and software must be executable and create reproducible results.
  • Models, data and data analytics workflows have to comply with the MIRARAM annotation guidelines (currently under development).
  • Manuscripts should be concisely written, in a good academic style, and follow a logical sequence. Results should be clearly and concisely described and supported by the data published with the article, or data published elsewhere but linked to the article.
  • This journal has well-defined policies for English language editing. Involving mandatory outsourced language editing services would considerably increase the Article Processing Charges. 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.

Peer Review

Text and data submitted to Food Modelling Journal (FMJ) will be formally peer-reviewed and evaluated for technical soundness and the correct presentation of appropriate and sufficient metadata. All manuscripts undergo a pre-submission technical evaluation in the ARPHA Writing Tool (AWT) environment. The scientific quality and importance of the paper and data will be further judged by the scientific community, through a novel community-based pre-publication and post-publication peer review.

Reviewers may opt to be anonymous or to disclose their names. The deadlines for the peer review and editorial processes are strict and limited to a maximum of two months after submission.

The peer review process and deadlines described below are articulated on the assumption that the contributions are technically well-prepared and concisely written so that the peer review is easy, straightforward and not requiring much time from the reviewer.

What is "community peer review"?

It is evident that the peer review system is increasingly under strain. Our response to this situation is to decrease the load on each individual reviewer without in any way compromising the quality of the final product. The purpose of community peer review is to distribute effort, increase transparency, engage the broader community of experts, and enhance the quality of the science we publish.

Stepwise description of the peer review and editorial process

1. Upon submission, the manuscript is assigned to the Subject Editor responsible for the topic by the in-house Assistant Editor. The Subject Editor is alerted by email.
2. The Subject Editor reads the manuscript and decides if it complies with the journal's scope and should be processed for peer review.
3. The Subject Editor sends review requests to two or three "nominated" reviewers and several other "panel" reviewers. 

Note-1: How editors invite reviewers? The journal's database will provide a list of potential reviewers and if necessary the editor can add additional names to the list. Review requests will be emailed by a ‘single-click’ option.

Note-2: "Nominated" and "Panel" reviewers. The difference between "Nominated" and "Panel" reviewers is that "Nominated" reviewers are expected to provide a formal review by the deadline; "Panel" reviewers are invited but not required to evaluate the manuscript. Both "Nominated" and "Panel" reviewers can propose changes and corrections, and make comments in the manuscript online and submit a concise reviewer's form.

Note-3: "Community" and "public" peer review. "Community" peer review means that during the peer review process the manuscript is visible only to the editor, the reviewers and the authors. We are planning to introduce soon an entirely public review process where authors may opt to make their manuscript available for comment by all registered journal users. Reviewers may opt to stay anonymous or disclose their names in either case.

4. The Subject Editor receives a notification email if the nominated reviewer agrees or declines to review the manuscript. In the latter case, the editor can appoint alternative reviewers.
5. Reviews are expected within 10 days and can be extended on demand. The Subject Editor will then decide to accept, reject, or request revision of the manuscripts.

Note-4: Provision of reviews. Reviewers will be prompted to provide an evaluation by an automated email notification sent one day after the deadline. In case of further longer delay, the review request can be canceled automatically or by the Subject editor.

6. The authors must provide a revised version of their manuscript within one week, but can ask for an extension, if there is a demonstratable need.
7. After submission of the revised version, the Subject Editor compares it against the reviews through an easy-to-use online tool and decides to accept or reject the manuscript. The authors may be asked to make additional revisions, OR in case of substantial changes, the reviewing procedure will be started again.
8. The manuscript will be formatted, proof-read, copy-edited and published within two weeks after acceptance.

Guidelines for reviewers and editors

Reviewers and editors of the FMJ are expected to evaluate the completeness and quality of the manuscript text, related resources and their description (metadata), as well as the publication value the models, workflows or data. This may include the appropriateness and validity of the methods used, compliance with applicable standards during collection, management and curation of data or models, and compliance with appropriate metadata standards in the description of underlying information resources.

The following aspects of evaluation will be considered:

  • Quality of the manuscript
    • Do the title, abstract and keywords accurately reflect the contents?
    • Is the manuscript consistent, suitably organised and written in grammatically correct English?
    • Are the relevant non-textual information (models, software code, data sets, supporting files) made available as supplementary files to the manuscript or as links to external open repositories?
    • Have abbreviations and symbols been properly defined?
    • Are conflicts of interest, relevant permissions and other ethical issues addressed in an appropriate manner?
  • Quality of the models, data, data analytics workflows and software
    • Are the resources completely and consistently described within the paper?
    • Are the entities described using applicable standards (e.g. in terms of file formats, file names, file size, units and metadata)?
    • Can the entities be executed by third parties so that they can reproduce the results in the paper?
    • Is the repository to which the data are submitted appropriate for the nature of the described resources?
  • Consistency between manuscript and data
    • Does the manuscript provide an accurate description of the models, data, data analytics workflows and software?
    • Does the manuscript properly describe how to access the data or execute models, data analytics workflows and software?
    • Are the methods used to generate data (including calibration, code and suitable controls) described in sufficient detail?
    • Is the resource sufficiently novel to merit publication?
    • Have possible sources of error been appropriately addressed in annotation of models, data, data analytics workflows and software?
    • Is anything missing in the paper that would prevent replication of the measurements, or reproduction of the figures?
    • Are all claims made in the manuscript substantiated?

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

Unique features

Food Modelling Journal (FMJ) implements several unique features in both technological and social sides of the academic publishing practice:

  1. FMJ aims at developing and promoting the Open Science principles by focusing on non-conventional types of articles, aiming at publication of valuable outputs along the research cycle (models, data, data analytics workflows and software).
  2. FMJ is published on ARPHA-XML, a platform to support the full life cycle of a manuscript, from authoring through submission, peer-review, publication and dissemination, within a single online collaborative environment.
  3. The online, collaborative ARPHA Writing Tool (AWT) provides a large set of pre-defined, but flexible article templates covering most types of research outcomes.
  4. Within the ARPHA Writing Tool, authors may work collaboratively on a manuscript with their co-authors, but can also invite external contributors, such as mentors, pre-submission reviewers, linguistic and copy editors, or just colleagues, who may correct and comment on the manuscript before submission. The external contributors are not listed as co-authors of the manuscript.
  5. A rich set of functionalities of the ARPHA Writing Tool allows for search and import of literature/data references, cross-referencing of in-text citations, import of tables, upload of images and multimedia, building plates of images, and many more.
  6. An automated technical validation step will save time by checking the manuscript for consistency, in addition to human-provided pre-submission technical validation by FMJ's Editorial Office.
  7. Pre-submission external peer-review(s) performed during the authoring process in the ARPHA Writing Tool are to be submitted together with the manuscript to speed up evaluation and publication.
  8. The collaborative peer-review process provides easy communication environment through change tracking, comments and replies, and automated, but customizable email and social network notifications.  
  9. For editor's convenience, peer-reviews in ARPHA are automatically consolidated into a single online file that makes the editorial process straightforward, easy and pleasant.
  10. Published papers can be commented via both the ARPHA commenting tool and hypotes.is plugin and can also be subject of an open post-publication peer review.
  11. Published papers can be converted back by the authors into editing mode in the ARPHA Writing Tool at the click of a button, then revised and published in a new version under different DOI, linked to previous versions via CrossMark.

How It Works

Authoring a manuscript in the ARPHA Writing Tool 

How can I decide which article type to choose?

How can I cite references, figures and tables?

Pre-submission technical validation 

Pre-submission, author-facilitated, external peer review

Submission  

Authoring a manuscript in the ARPHA Writing Tool 

For manuscripts intended for submission to FMJ, we offer the authors to write in the online collaborative ARPHA Writing Tool. ARPHA provides flexible article templates to be selected in the tool after clicking on the "Start a manuscript" button. ARPHA further provides a rich set of functionalities, which makes the collaborative work of the authors and their peers easy and pleasant. The authoring process in ARPHA is described in fine detail in the Tips and Tricks menu of the writing tool.

Alternatively, manuscripts can be submitted as text (e.g., MS Word, RTF, ODT) files that shall be converted to the ARPHA publishing platform by the FMJ’s Editorial Office. Please note that the conversion comes at a small additional cost, therefore the Article Processing Charges (APC) are higher in case the manuscript is submitted as a text file.

There are NO author guidelines in FMJ with regard to text formatting. The ARPHA Writing Tool will guide you during the authoring and submission process. Please consider Tips and Tricks if you need some assistance or contact helpdesk@pensoft.net. There are only a few simple rules to follow, so please please read carefully the half page of text below before you start your manuscript!

1. How can I decide which article type to choose?

The article templates in ARPHA are created to facilitate the structured publishing of science content and ease discoverability and machine-readability of your work. You can change the article templates, add new sections or subsections or move them within the manuscript. However, we would recommend to use these changes only in case of necessity. There is also free text manuscript template, which may be used for editorials, correspondence, opinion papers, and others.

2. How can I cite references, figures and tables?

  • Please do not insert in-text citations of references, figures or tables manually! The citations will be inserted automatically at the place of your cursor through the "Cite a figure", "Cite a table", "Cite a reference" or "Cite a supplementary material" commands. Once you select the place you want to insert a citation, click on the desired reference, table or figure from the respective list (see next).

  • Before citing a reference, figure, table or supplementary material, you have to upload these, so that they become visible in the respective list of figures, tables or references.

  • Please do not number captions of figures or tables – they will be numbered automatically and can be re-ordered, if needed.

  • All uploaded figures, tables and references must be cited in the text and vice versa.

3. Materials and methods

In line with responsible and reproducible research, as well as FAIR 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.

Pre-submission technical validation 

The ARPHA Writing Tool provides automated technical pre-submission validation steps to save your time by checking your manuscript for consistency.

In addition, a pre-submission technical review is performed for all manuscripts in ARPHA by the Editorial Office against formal checklist criteria such as: technical consistency, language, ethical issues, correspondence to the journal’s criteria for publication, focus, and scope. The FMJ editors can re-iterate the technical evaluation process several times until the manuscript reaches an acceptable level of quality to be submitted to FMJ.

Pre-submission, author-facilitated, external peer review 

To facilitate and speed up the publication process, authors are expected to source at least one or more external review(s) from specialists in their field, prior to submission, via ARPHA (strongly recommended!) or in another document format such as MS Word (not encouraged!).

Pre-submission reviewers are to be invited via the "Invite a reviewer" button in the ARPHA Writing Tool. The "Invite reviewer" button is visualized in the black ribbon on top of the screen only when the manuscript is in status Draft, i.e. prior to its submission for technical review, and it disappears afterward. All pre-submission reviews provided in the ARPHA Writing Tool will be submitted with the manuscript and made public together with the article publication.

Submission 

Manuscripts for FMJ should be prepared for submission in the ARPHA Writing Tool.

During the submission process, the author(s) should:

  1. Submit at least one pre-submission review, together with the manuscript. The number of pre-submission reviews is not limited and they can be prepared by external reviewers either in the ARPHA Writing Tool, or can be submitted as separate files during the submission process.

  2. Suggest a number of additional referees, for the assigned Subject Editor's consideration, as the latter might wish to invite some or all of them to review the manuscript.

  3. Answer a couple of other questions about copyright, authorship, ethical issues, and publication fees.


Policies

General statement

Open Access Policy

License and Copyright Agreement

Copyright

Licensing for Data Publication

Open Data and Software Publishing and Sharing

Privacy Statement

Author Policies

Commenting Policies

Conflicts of Interest

Funding Disclosure

General Statement

The journal policies and guidelines are mandatory. Exceptions to elements of the policies may be granted in specific cases, but will require justification that will be made public together with the article.

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 under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-BY 4.0) or, if requested, of the Creative Commons CC-Zero Waiver (CC-0). Any supplementary materials associated with an article will be made available under the licence selected by the authors. We recommend to choose from the group of CC licences. 

License and Copyright Agreement

In submitting the manuscript to the journal, the authors certify that:

  • They are authorized by their co-authors to enter into these arrangements.
  • The work described has not been formally published before (except in the form of an abstract or as part of a published lecture, review, thesis, or overlay journal), 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

Licensing for Data Publication

Pensoft’s  journals use a variety of waivers and licenses, that are specifically designed for and appropriate for the treatment of data:

Other publishing licenses may be allowed as exceptions (subject to approval by the editor on a case-by-case basis) and should be justified with a written statement from the author, which will be published with the article.

Open Data and Software Publishing and Sharing

The journal strives to maximize the replicability of the research published in it. Authors are thus required to share all data, code or protocols underlying the research reported in their articles. Exceptions are permitted, but have to be justified in a written public statement accompanying the article.

Datasets and software should be deposited and permanently archived in appropriate, trusted, general, or domain-specific repositories (please consult http://service.re3data.org and/or software repositories such as GitHubGitLabBioinformatics.org, or equivalent). The associated persistent identifiers (e.g. DOI, or others) of the dataset(s) must be included in the data or software resources section of the article. Reference(s) to datasets and software should also be included in the reference list of the article with DOIs (where available). Where no domain-specific data repository exists, authors should deposit their datasets in a general repository such as ZENODO, DryadDataverse, or others.

Small data may also be published as data files or packages supplementary to a research article, however, the authors should prefer in all cases a deposition in data repositories.

Privacy Statement

The names and email addresses present on the journal’s website will be used exclusively for the purposes of the journal.

Author Policies

It is a responsibility of the corresponding author that all named authors have agreed to its submission.

The Corresponding Author’s Role and Responsibilities are to:

  1. Inform all co-authors of the submission of the manuscript to the journal (note: each co-author will receive a confirmation email upon submission and will need to confirm their authorship).
  2. Manage all correspondence between the journal and all co-authors, keeping the full co-author group apprised of the manuscript progress.
  3. Designate a substitute correspondent for times of unavailability.
  4. Ensure payment of the publication charges at the point of Editorial Acceptance, or before that in case some specific services have been purchased (e.g., conversion to ARPHA or linguistic editing).
  5. Ensure that the manuscript is in full adherence with all the journal policies (including such items as publication ethics, data deposition, materials deposition, etc).
  6. Post Publication: Respond to all queries pertaining to the published manuscript, provide data and materials as requested.
  7. The submission must be created (and completed) by one of the co-authors, not by an agency, or by some other individual who is not one of the co-authors.

Commenting Policies

All public comments follow the normal standards of professional discourse. All commenters are named, and their comments are associated with the journal profile. The journal does not allow anonymous or pseudonymous commenting or user profiles.

The journal does not tolerate language that is insulting, inflammatory, obscene or libelous. The journal reserves the right to remove all or parts of Comments to bring them in line with these policies. The journal is the final arbiter as to the suitability of any comments.

Conflicts of Interest

The journal requires that all parties involved in a publication (i.e. the authors, reviewers and academic editors) should transparently declare any potential Conflicts of Interest (also known as Competing Interests). The disclosure of a Conflict of Interest does not necessarily mean that there is an issue to be addressed; it simply ensures that all parties are appropriately informed of any relevant considerations while they work on the submission.

Potential Conflicts of Interest should be declared even if the individual in question feels that these interests do not represent an actual conflict. Examples of Conflicts of Interest include, but are not limited to: possible financial benefits if the manuscript is published; patent activity on the results; consultancy activity around the results; personal material or financial gain (such as free travel, gifts, etc.) relating to the work, and so on.

While possible financial benefits should appear here, actual funding sources (institutional, corporate, grants, etc.) should be detailed in the funding disclosure statement.

Funding Disclosure

The journal requires that authors declare the funding which made their work possible, including funding programmes, projects, or calls for grant proposals (when applicable).


Terms of Use

This document describes the Terms of Use of the services provided by the Food Modelling Journal journal, hereinafter referred to as FMJ. All Users agree to these Terms of Use when signing up to FMJ. Signed FMJ Users will be hereinafter referred to as "User" or "Users".

FMJ is provided by Pensoft Publishers Ltd., "Geo Milev 13A Str., 1111 Sofia, Bulgaria". We as providers will be hereinafter referred to as "the Provider".

The Provider reserves the right to update the Terms of Use occasionally. Users will be notified via posting on the site and by email. If using the services of FMJ after such notice, the User will be deemed to have accepted the proposed modifications. If the User disagrees with the modifications, they must stop using FMJ services. Users are advised to periodically check the Terms of Use for updates or revisions. Violation of any of the terms will result in the termination of the User's account. The Provider is not responsible for any content posted by the User in FMJ.

Account Terms

After an account is created for the FMJ journal the User is automatically signed in the ARPHA Platform. Read more about the ARPHA Terms of Use and Account Terms here.

Services and Prices

The Provider reserves the right to modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently the services provided by FMJ. Plans and prices are subject to change upon 30 days notice from the Provider. Such notice may be provided at any time by posting the changes to the relevant service website.

Ownership

The User retains full ownership to content uploaded in FMJ. We claim no intellectual property rights over the material provided by the User in FMJ. However, by setting pages to be viewed publicly (Open Access), the User agrees to allow others to view and download the relevant content. In addition, Open Access articles, being publicly available data, might be employed by the Provider (or anyone) for data mining purposes.

The Provider reserves the rights in their sole discretion to refuse or remove any content that is available via the Website.

Copyrighted materials

Unless stated otherwise, the FMJ website may contain some copyrighted material (for example logos and other proprietary information, including, without limitation, text, software, photos, video, graphics, music and sound ("Copyrighted Material"). The User may not copy, modify, alter, publish, transmit, distribute, display, participate in the transfer or sale, create derivative works, or in any way exploit any of the Copyrighted Material, in whole or in part, without written permission from the copyright owner. Users will be solely liable for any damage resulting from any infringement of copyrights, proprietary rights, or any other harm resulting from such a submission.

Exceptions from this rule are e-chapters or e-articles published under Open Access (see below), which are normally published under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (CC-BY) or Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license (CC-BY)

Open access materials

FMJ is a supporter of Open Science. Open access to content is clearly marked, with text and/or the open access logo, on all materials published under this model. Unless otherwise stated, open access content is published in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license (CC-BY). This particular license allows to copy, display and distribute the content at no charge, provided that the author and source are credited.

Privacy Statement

FMJ (and the ARPHA Platform of which the journal is part) collects personal information from Users (i.e. Name, postal and email addresses) only to improve and for the purpose of its services. All personal data will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of the website and will not be made available for any other purpose or to third parties.

Disclaimer of Warranty and Limitation of Liability

Neither Pensoft and its affiliates nor any of their respective employees, agents, third party content providers or licensors warrant that the FMJ service will be uninterrupted or error-free; nor do they give any warranty as to the results that may be obtained from use of the journal, or as to the accuracy or reliability of any information, service or merchandise provided through FMJ.

Legal, medical, and health-related information located, identified or obtained through the use of the Service, is provided for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for qualified advice from a professional.

In no event will the Provider, or any person or entity involved in creating, producing or distributing FMJ or the contents included therein, be liable in contract, in tort (including for its own negligence) or under any other legal theory (including strict liability) for any damages, including, but without limitation to, direct, indirect, incidental, special, punitive, consequential or similar damages, including, but without limitation to, lost profits or revenues, loss of use or similar economic loss, arising from the use of or inability to use the journal platform. The User hereby acknowledges that the provisions of this section will apply to all use of the content on FMJ. Applicable law may not allow the limitation or exclusion of liability or incidental or consequential damages, so the above limitation or exclusion may not apply to the User. In no event will Pensoft’s total liability to the User for all damages, losses or causes of action, whether in contract, tort (including own negligence) or under any other legal theory (including strict liability), exceed the amount paid by the User, if any, for accessing FMJ.

Third Party Content

The Provider is solely a distributor (and not a publisher) of SOME of the content supplied by third parties and Users of FMJ. Any opinions, advice, statements, services, offers, or other information or content expressed or made available by third parties, including information providers and Users, are those of the respective author(s) or distributor(s) and not of the Provider.


Article Processing Charges

The publication in FMJ is free of charge for the next two years thanks to the support of the AGINFRA+ projects, funded by the European Commission. After the expiration of the project, the FMJ community and the editorial office will look for alternative possibilities to keep the journal free of article processing charges.

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 all first-time editors and reviewers. New users receive an automated notification with a request for account confirmation and an option for setting their password prior to the first invitation to review a paper. 

    Note-1: All users use their registration details to login in all three (Book, E-Book and the respective Journal) platforms of www.pensoft.net.

     Note-2: 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 with it, for all yours operations at www.pensoft.net. The user may at any time change the initially set password and correct personal details using their Pensoft account menu (clicking on his/her name in the upper right corner of the screen).
  2. 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 My Tasks button in the upper right corner of the screen. This way, you will be able to see all manuscripts you are responsible for as author or reviewer or editor.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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


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 My Tasks button in the upper right corner of the screen. This way, you will be able to see all manuscripts you are responsible for as author or reviewer or editor.

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

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


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 consist 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.


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 adhere 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 License (CC BY 4.0)). 
For more details on Pensoft’s open access and copyright policy see the Publication Ethics and Malpractice Statement page.

Privacy statement

The personal information used on this website is to be used exclusively for the stated purposes of this journal. It 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 Biodiversity Data Journal, where authors must make available all research materials and data associated with a manuscript upon its submission.

Submission, peer review and editorial process

The peer review and editorial processes are 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. These links are also included in the respective email notification.

General: Publication and authorship

  • All submitted papers are subject to a rigorous peer review process by at least two international reviewers who are experts in the scientific field 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 and (5) Reject. 

  • If Authors are encouraged to revise and re-submit 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 the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY 4.0) 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 the 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 for the article processing charge; language editing or editorial assistance).

  • The Corresponding author should provide the declaration of any conflicts of interest on behalf of all Authors. Conflicts of interest may be associated with employment, sources of funding, personal financial interests, membership of relevant organisations or others.

Responsibility of Reviewers

  • The manuscripts will be reviewed by two or three experts in order to reach 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 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 their 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.

  • 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 misunderstanding.

  • Further, Reviewers are asked to comment on originality, structure and previous research: (1) 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? (2) Is the introduction clear and concise? Does it place the work into the context that is necessary for a reader to comprehend the 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

  • Editors in Pensoft’s journals carry the main responsibility for the scientific quality of the published papers and base their decisions solely on the papers' importance, originality, clarity and relevance to publication's scope.

  • The 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 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 and make all reasonable attempts to obtain 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 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 it is satisfactory and the issue is the result of either a mistake or misunderstanding, the matter can be easily resolved. If not, the manuscript will be rejected and 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 are not allowed to neglect unfavorable comments about their work and 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. Editors should edit (or reject) personal or offensive statements.
Authors 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 prior to publication. If agreement cannot be reached, Editors may consider inviting additional reviewers if appropriate.
The Editor-in-Chief will mediate all discussions between Authors and Subject Editors.
The journals encourage publication of open opinions, forum papers, corrigenda, critical comments on a published paper and Author’s response to criticism.


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).


Terms of Use

This document describes the Terms of Use of the services provided by the Food Modelling Journal journal, hereinafter referred to as "the Journal" or "this Journal". All Users agree to these Terms of Use when signing up to this Journal. Signed Journal Users will be hereinafter referred to as "User" or "Users".

The publication services to the Journal are provided by Pensoft Publishers Ltd., through its publishing platform ARPHA, hereinafter referred to as "the Provider".

The Provider reserves the right to update the Terms of Use occasionally. Users will be notified via posting on the site and/or by email. If using the services of the Journal after such notice, the User will be deemed to have accepted the proposed modifications. If the User disagrees with the modifications, he/she should stop using the Journal services. Users are advised to periodically check the Terms of Use for updates or revisions. Violation of any of the terms will result in the termination of the User's account. The Provider is not responsible for any content posted by the User in the Journal.

Account Terms

  1. For registration in this Journal or any of the services or tools hosted on it, Users must provide their full legal name, a valid email address, postal address, affiliation (if any),  and any other information requested.
  2. Accounts created via this journal automatically sign in the User to the ARPHA Platform.
  3. Users are responsible for maintaining the security of their account and password. The Journal cannot and will not be liable for any loss or damage from failure to comply with this security obligation.
  4. Users are solely responsible for the content posted via the Journal services (including, but not limited to data, text, files, information, usernames, images, graphics, photos, profiles, audio and video clips, sounds, applications, links and other content) and all activities that occur under their account.
  5. Users may not use the service for any illegal or unauthorised purpose. Users must not, in the use of the service, violate any laws within their jurisdiction (including but not limited to copyright or trademark laws).
  6. Users can change or pseudonomyse their personal data, or deactivate their accounts at any time through the functionality available in the User’s personal profile. Deactivation or pseudonomysation will not affect the appearance of personal data in association with an already published work of which the User is author, co-author, editor, or reviewer.
  7. Users can report to the Journal uses of their personal data, that they might consider not corresponding to the current Terms of Use.
  8. The User’s personal data is processed by the Journal on the legal basis corresponding to Article 6, paragraph 1, letters a, b, c and f. of the General Data Protection Regulation (hereinafter referred to as GDPR) and will be used for the purpose of Journal’s services in accordance with the present Terms and Use, as well as in those cases expressly stated by the legislation.
  9. User’s consent to use the information the Journal has collected about the User corresponds to Article 6(1)(a) of the GDPR.
  10. The ‘legitimate interest’ of the Journal to engage with the User and enable him/her to participate in Journal’s activities and use Journal’s services correspond to Article 6(1)(f) of the GDPR.

Services and Prices

The Provider reserves the right to modify or discontinue, temporarily or permanently, the services provided by the Journal. Plans and prices are subject to change upon 30 days notice from the Provider. Such notice may be provided at any time by posting the changes to the relevant service website.

Ownership

The Authors retain full ownership to their content published in the Journal. We claim no intellectual property rights over the material provided by any User in this Journal. However, by setting pages to be viewed publicly (Open Access), the User agrees to allow others to view and download the relevant content. In addition, Open Access articles might be used by the Provider, or any other third party, for data mining purposes.

The Provider reserves the rights in its sole discretion to refuse or remove any content that is available via the Website.

Copyrighted Materials

Unless stated otherwise, the Journal website may contain some copyrighted material (for example, logos and other proprietary information, including, without limitation, text, software, photos, video, graphics, music and sound - "Copyrighted Material"). The User may not copy, modify, alter, publish, transmit, distribute, display, participate in the transfer or sale, create derivative works or, in any way, exploit any of the Copyrighted Material, in whole or in part, without written permission from the copyright owner. Users will be solely liable for any damage resulting from any infringement of copyrights, proprietary rights or any other harm resulting from such a submission.

Exceptions from this rule are e-chapters or e-articles published under Open Access (see below), which are normally published under Creative Commons Attribution 3.0 license (CC-BY), or Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 license (CC-BY), or Creative Commons Public Domain license (CC0).

Open Access Materials

This Journal is a supporter of open science. Open access to content is clearly marked, with text and/or the open access logo, on all materials published under this model. Unless otherwise stated, open access content is published in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 licence (CC-BY). This particular licence allows the copying, displaying and distribution of the content at no charge, provided that the author and source are credited.

Privacy Statement

  1. Users agree to submit their personal data to this Journal, hosted on the ARPHA Platform provided by Pensoft.
  2. The Journal collects personal information from Users (e.g., name, postal and email addresses, affiliation) only for the purpose of its services.
  3. All personal data will be used exclusively for the stated purposes of the website and will not be made available for any other purpose or to third parties.
  4. In the case of co-authorship of a work published through the Journal services, each of the co-authors states that they agree that their personal data be collected, stored and used by the Journal.
  5. In the case of co-authorship, each of the co-authors agrees that their personal data publicly available in the form of a co-authorship of a published work, can be distributed to external indexing services and aggregators for the purpose of the widest possible distribution of the work they co-author.
  6. When one of the co-authors is not registered in the Journal, it is presumed that the corresponding author who is registered has requested and obtained his/her consent that his/her personal data will be collected, stored and used by the Journal.
  7. The registered co-author undertakes to provide an e-mail address of the unregistered author, to whom the Journal will send a message in order to give the unregistered co-author’s explicit consent for the processing of his/her personal data by the Journal.
  8. The Journal is not responsible if the provided e-mail of the unregistered co-author is inaccurate or invalid. In such cases, it is assumed that the processing of the personal data of the unregistered co-author is done on a legal basis and with a given consent.
  9. The Journal undertakes to collect, store and use the provided personal data of third parties (including but not limited to unregistered co-authors) solely for the purposes of the website, as well as in those cases expressly stated by the legislation.
  10. Users can receive emails from Journal and its hosting platform ARPHA, provided by Pensoft, about activities they have given their consent for. Examples of such activities are:
    • Email notifications to authors, reviewers and editors who are engaged with authoring, reviewing or editing a manuscript submitted to the Journal.
    • Email alerts sent via email subscription service, which can happen only if the User has willingly subscribed for such a service. Unsubscription from the service can happen through a one-click link provided in each email alert notification.
    • Information emails on important changes in the system or in its Terms of Use which are sent via Mailchimp are provided with "Unsubscribe" function.
  11. Registered users can be invited to provide a peer review on manuscripts submitted to the Journal. In such cases, the users can decline the review invitation through a link available on the journal’s website.
  12. Each provided peer review can be registered with external services (such as Publons). The reviewer will be notified if such registration is going to occur and can decline the registration process.
  13. In case the Journal starts using personal data for purposes other than those specified in the Terms of Use, the Journal undertakes to immediately inform the person and request his/her consent.
  14. If the person does not give his/her consent to the processing of his or her personal data pursuant to the preceding paragraph, the Journal shall cease the processing of the personal data for the purposes for which there is no consent, unless there is another legal basis for the processing.
  15. Users can change/correct their personal data anytime via the functionality available in the User’s profile. Users can request the Journal to correct their personal data if the data is inaccurate or outdated and the Journal is obliged to correct the inaccurate or outdated personal data in a timely manner.
  16. Users may request the Journal to restrict the use of their personal data insofar as this limitation is not contrary to the law or the Terms of Use.
  17. Users may request their personal data to be deleted (the right to be forgotten) by the Journal, provided that the deletion does not conflict with the law or the Terms of Use.
  18. The User has the right to be informed:
    • whether his or her personal data have been processed;
    • for which purposes the Journal processes the personal data;
    • the ways in which his/her personal data are processed;
    • the types of personal data that Journal processes.
  19. The user undertakes not to interfere with and impede the Journal’s activities in the exercise of the provided rights.
  20. In case of non-fulfilment under the previous paragraph, the Journal reserves the right to delete the user's profile.

Disclaimer of Warranty and Limitation of Liability

Neither Pensoft and its affiliates nor any of their respective employees, agents, third party content providers or licensors warrant that the Journal service will be uninterrupted or error-free; nor do they give any warranty as to the results that may be obtained from use of the journal, or as to the accuracy or reliability of any information, service or merchandise provided through Journal.

Legal, medical, and health-related information located, identified or obtained through the use of the Service, is provided for informational purposes only and is not a substitute for qualified advice from a professional.

In no event will the Provider, or any person or entity involved in creating, producing or distributing Journal or the contents included therein, be liable in contract, in tort (including for its own negligence) or under any other legal theory (including strict liability) for any damages, including, but without limitation to, direct, indirect, incidental, special, punitive, consequential or similar damages, including, but without limitation to, lost profits or revenues, loss of use or similar economic loss, arising from the use of or inability to use the journal platform. The User hereby acknowledges that the provisions of this section will apply to all use of the content on Journal. Applicable law may not allow the limitation or exclusion of liability or incidental or consequential damages, so the above limitation or exclusion may not apply to the User. In no event will Pensoft’s total liability to the User for all damages, losses or causes of action, whether in contract, tort (including own negligence) or under any other legal theory (including strict liability), exceed the amount paid by the User, if any, for accessing Journal.

Third Party Content

The Provider is solely a distributor (and not a publisher) of SOME of the content supplied by third parties and Users of the Journal. Any opinions, advice, statements, services, offers, or other information or content expressed or made available by third parties, including information providers and Users, are those of the respective author(s) or distributor(s) and not of the Provider.