Serial

Purpose and scope

The Central European Journal of Biology (CEJB) is a peer-reviewed journal devoted to the publication of works in all areas of the biological sciences. The journal’s scope covers diverse fields, including:

• Cellular and Molecular Life Sciences
• Biomedical Sciences
• Animal Sciences
• Plant Sciences
• Evolution, Ecology & Environment

The primary mission of CEJB is to assist Central and Eastern European researchers in communicating their achievements to the global scientific community; nevertheless, contributions from other regions of the world are by no means excluded.

Please see our Aims and scope for details.

General Submission Rules

To be considered for publication in CEJB, any given manuscript must satisfy the following criteria:

• contain original work - not published elsewhere in any medium (in the whole or in part) by the authors or anyone else and not under consideration for publication in any other medium;
• focused on the aims and scope of the journal - CEJB is a scientific journal publishing fundamental research results from all fields of biology;
• clearly and correctly written - should contain all essential features of a scientific publication that is easy to understand for a wide audience of biologists;
• written in English - attention to detail of the language will avoid severe misunderstandings which might lead to rejection of the paper.
  Please note that as a step towards overcoming language barriers, we provide the authors of accepted manuscripts with help in rewriting their contributions in correct English;
• delivered in an electronic format

Formats

CEJB considers submissions of manuscripts as the following formats:

• Research Articles
• Communications and Rapid Communications
• Reviews and Mini-Reviews
• Commentaries
• Letters to the Editor and Amendments

Please see Publication formats for details.

The CEJB will not publish the following formats: commercial, patent and product news, perspectives, synopses, tutorial papers, book reviews, meeting notices.

Formatting Requirements

Our contributors are asked to make sure their submissions comply with rules governing the formatting. Although CEJB can provide limited technical support, it is ultimately the responsibility of the author to deliver a properly formatted electronic version of the article.

Please carefully follow the guidelines described in Instructions for Authors.

Overview of the Editorial Process

The whole peer-review workflow is performed in the CEJB Editorial Manager .

Submission

Each manuscript should be accompanied by a cover letter which should explicitly state that the authors have the authority to publish the work and that the manuscript (or one with substantially the same content, by any of the authors) has not been previously published in any language anywhere and that it is not under simultaneous consideration by another journal. All authors of the manuscript are responsible for its content; they must have agreed to its publication and have given the corresponding author the authority to act on their behalf in all matters pertaining to publication. The corresponding author is responsible for informing the coauthors of the manuscript status throughout the submission, review, and production process.

Peer-review process

The Managing Editor initially assesses the appropriateness of each submitted manuscript for publication. Manuscripts which fall outside the journal's scope or are substandard in respects of non-merit reasons (presentation, style, technical aspects) may be declined without a review. The Managing Editor appoints an Editor with expertise in the relevant field, who is fully responsible for further handling the manuscript and an ultimate decision about its acceptance/rejection.

The Editor initially evaluates the quality and potential impact of the work. The primary criteria for judging the acceptability of a manuscript are its originality, scientific importance and interest to a general biological audience. This policy permits declination of a manuscript solely on the Editor's judgment that the studies reported are not sufficiently novel or important to merit publication in the CEJB. Manuscripts deemed unsuitable (work incomplete, inconclusive, merely confirmatory, of insufficient originality or limited interest to a general biological audience, with scientific or methodological flaws) are returned to the author(s) without a detailed review. Manuscripts that meet editorial criteria for content and minimum quality standard are rigorously vetted by external expert reviewers recruited by the Editor.

Research articles and communications are reviewed by a minimum of two reviewers, review papers and communications by at least three. Authors are encouraged to suggest names of potential referees though there is no agreement that the manuscript should necessarily be sent to them; the final selection of reviewers remains a prerogative of the Editors. Editors and reviewers are requested to treat all submitted manuscripts in strict confidence. The authors’ names are revealed to the referees, but not vice versa.

The reviewers make an objective, impartial evaluation of scientific merits of the manuscript. Reviewers operate under guidelines set forth in Guidelines for reviewers and are asked to comment on the following aspects of submitted manuscripts:

• novelty and originality of the work;
• broad interest to the community of researchers;
• significance to the field, potential impact of the work, conceptual or methodological advances described;
• study design and clarity;
• substantial evidence supporting claims and conclusions;
• rigorous methodology

If a manuscript is believed to not meet the standards of the journal or is otherwise lacking in scientific rigor or contains major deficiencies, the reviewers will attempt to provide constructive criticism to assist the authors in ultimately improving their work. If a manuscript is believed to be potentially acceptable for publication but needs to be improved, it is invited for reconsideration with the expectation that the authors will fully address the reviewer’s suggestions.

Once all reviews have been received and considered by the Editor, a decision letter to the author is drafted. There are several types of decisions possible:

• Accept without revision
• Minor revision
• Major revision
• Reject

Resubmission

Manuscripts not invited for resubmission will not be reconsidered. When revision of a manuscript is requested, authors must deliver the modified version within 60 days; additional time for resubmission must be requested in advance. When needed, further 14 days are given to authors. If these deadlines are not met, the manuscript will be treated as a new submission. Resubmitted manuscripts with major revisions may be sent for re-review before making a final decision. Authors who are asked to submit a revised version of their manuscript, should also provide a cover letter describing in detail how they have followed all suggestions for its improvement and addressing all points of concern raised by the referees.

Final decision is made by the Editor, and in any cases of conflict, by the Editor-in-Chief.

Use of experimental animals and human subjects

Submission of a manuscript to CEJB implies that any experimental research that is reported in the manuscript has been performed with the approval of an appropriate ethics committee. Manuscripts may be rejected if the Editor considers that the research has not been carried out within an ethical framework. Research involving human participants must be in compliance with the Helsinki Declaration, and any experimental research on animals must follow internationally recognized guidelines. A statement to this effect must appear in the Experimental Procedures section of the manuscript, including the name of the body which gave approval, with a reference number where appropriate. No identifying information should be published for human subjects unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient gives written Informed Consent for publication. Information about Informed Consent obtained from participants should be indicated in the published article. We encourage authors to submit a sample of a patient consent form, and may require submission on particular occasions.

See Instructions for Authors for further details.

Distribution of materials and data

A condition of publication in the CEJB is that authors are requested to make materials, data and associated protocols available to readers on request. Newly reported data should be deposited in the appropriate freely accessible database and should be accessible without restriction from the date of publication. Any supporting data sets for which there is no public repository must be made available on and after the publication date from the authors directly, the author providing a URL to be used in the paper on publication.

See Instructions for Authors for further details.

Transfer of Copyright Agreement

Once the paper is accepted, authors are assumed to have transferred the copyright of the paper to the publisher, Versita. A properly completed Transfer of Copyright Agreement, signed by the Corresponding Author on behalf of all the authors, must be provided for each submitted manuscript as a condition of publication.

See Instructions for Authors for further details.

Conflicts of Interest

In order to encourage transparency without impeding publication, all authors, referees and editors must declare any association that poses a conflict of interest in connection with the manuscript. There should be no contractual relations or proprietary considerations that would affect the publication of information contained in a submitted manuscript. A competing interest for a scholarly journal is anything that interferes with, or could reasonably be perceived as interfering with, the full and objective presentation, review, or publication of research findings, or of articles that comment on or review research findings. Potential conflicts of interest exist when an author, editor or reviewer has financial, personal or professional interests in a publication that might influence their scientific judgment.

Examples of such conflicts include, but are not limited to:

• Financial conflicts: stock ownership; patents; paid employment or consultancy; board membership; research grants; travel grants and honoraria for speaking or participation at meetings; gifts
• Personal conflicts: relationship with editors, editorial board members, or with possible reviewers who have had recent or ongoing collaborations with the authors, have commented on drafts of the manuscript, are in direct competition, have a history of dispute with the authors
• Professional conflicts: public associations with institutions or corporations whose products or services are related to the subject matter of the article; membership of a government advisory council/committee; relationship with organizations and funding bodies

Authors should declare whether they have any conflicts of interests that could have influenced the reporting of the experimental data or conclusions in their paper. Such a statement should list all potential interests or, if appropriate, should clearly state that there are none. The editors may decide not to publish papers when we believe the competing interests are such that they may have compromised the work or the analyses or interpretations presented. Upon submission of a manuscript, authors may suggest to exclude any specific editors or reviewers from the peer review of their article. It is the responsibility of authors to disclose in the Acknowledgments section any funding sources for the project or other relationships that are relevant.

Editors should consider whether any of the above competing interests are relevant to them and the manuscript under consideration. Editor who believes that the conflict will preclude an impaired judgment should disclose to the Managing Editor the nature of the conflict and decline to handle the paper.

Reviewers should consider whether any of the above applies to them and declare any such competing interests. If they feel they cannot review a paper because of any competing interest, they should tell us. They should also declare any association with the authors of a paper.

Online publication

Manuscripts ready for publication are promptly posted online. The manuscripts are considered to be ready for publication when the final proofreading has been performed by authors, and all concerns have been resolved. Authors should note that articles published online are complete and final and thus no changes can be made after online publication.

Author’s copy

A PDF offprint of the online published article will be provided free of charge to the corresponding author, and may be viewed, printed, or stored, provided that it is for the author's own use. The file may be distributed subject to the Publisher's terms and conditions.

Publication of color images is free for the electronic version of the journal, but carries a page charge in the print edition. Please note that the journal is published primarily in an electronic format, and only on sufficient demand for printed version journal hard copies may be provided for institutional subscribers.

Errata

No changes can be made to articles after their online publication. If a published manuscript contains a significant error, the journal will publish an amendment or retraction note at the earliest possible date. All amendments should be as concise as possible, containing only material strictly relevant to the contribution being corrected. Readers wishing to draw the journal's attention to a significant published error should submit their comments as a "Letter to the Editor". Such letters will be carefully reviewed by unrelated and neutral referees.

Our policy is to allow the amendment, in the form of Errata, of the errors introduced during the production stage (for which the journal takes responsibility) and the errors introduced by authors (for which they take responsibility). Errata are generally not published for errors that do not significantly compromise the scientific accuracy or reproducibility of the original paper. The addition of new data is not permitted. Appropriateness of corrections will be judged by the Editor. All coauthors will be asked to agree to publication of errata.

Retraction Notes (see below) are reserved for major errors in published material. Articles may be retracted by their authors, academic or institutional sponsor, editor or publisher, because of pervasive error or unsubstantiated or irreproducible data. Retractions are judged according to whether the main conclusion of the paper is seriously undermined as a result.

Scientific misconduct and other fraud

Scientific misconduct is defined by the Office of Research Integrity as "fabrication, falsification, plagiarism, or other practices that seriously deviate from those that are commonly accepted within the academic community for proposing, conducting, or reporting research". In cases where there is a suspicion or allegation of scientific misconduct or fraudulent research in manuscripts submitted or published, the Editors reserve the right to impose sanctions on the authors, such as:

• an immediate rejection of the manuscript;
• banning author(s) from submitting manuscripts to the journal for a certain period of time;
• retracting the manuscript;
• alerting editors of other journals and publishers;
• bringing the concerns to the authors' sponsoring or funding institution or other appropriate authority for investigation

CEJB publishes only original manuscripts that are not also published or going to be published elsewhere. Multiple submissions/publications, or redundant publications (re-packaging in different words of data already published by the same authors) will be rejected. If they are detected only after publication, the CEJB reserves the right to publish a Retraction Note.

Retraction Policy

Serious errors in a published manuscript and infringements of professional ethical codes will result in an article being retracted. This will occur where the article is clearly defamatory, or infringes others' legal rights, or where the article is, or there is good reason to expect it will be, the subject of a court order, or where the article, if acted upon, might pose a serious health risk. In any of these cases all coauthors will be informed about a retraction. A Retraction Note detailing the reason for retraction will be linked to the original article.