- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founders
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
The main objective of the journal is to promote basic and applied knowledge of spatial phenomena, processes and relationships in nature and society, territorial natural and socio-economic systems in connection with the dynamics of environmental conditions and forms of human impacts in the Caspian region.
The objectives of the journal are the following:
- Cover the latest findings of scientific and practical activities in the field of ecology, biology, geography and agricultural sciences.
- Create a common scientific platform for the integration of knowledge and experience of leading academicians and practitioners in the given fields.
- Approbate the works of young scientists and graduate students.
Section Policies
Open SubmissionsPublication Frequency
Publication frequency of the journal is 4 issues per year: №1 is issued on March 25, №2 on June 25, № 3 on September 25, №4 on December 25.
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.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
- A double-blind peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of «South of Russia: ecology and development». Reviewers tasks include novelty and scholary importance test, authentisity of research results test, article’s content and recital style test, verification of paper’s name and abstract relevance to its content, finding out published papers concerning research topic, not mentioned in the manuscript.
- The articles submitted to the editorial board should correspond to the topics of the journal.
- Initial examination is carried out by editors of the editorial department of “South of Russia: ecology and development” journal. Initial examination includes the following: review of the supporting documents; estimation of the relevance of the scientific article to the journal profile, registration requirements and rules set by the editors of the journal, which are available on the journal’s website.
- In case the manuscript of scientific article corresponds to the Journal profile, registration requirements and rules, it is accepted by the editorial board and sent to the reviewer. If the article does not match the required criteria it is rejected without further review.
- All articles submitted to the journal are subject to peer review and editorial approval.
- Reviewers are chosen from among the editorial board of a journal or the leading experts who have publications in the given field for the past three years.
- The review deadline in each case is established in coordination with the reviewer according to the review contract, but should not exceed four weeks.
- Form of article review: peer review by the specialist in a given field;
- The reviewers must bear in mind that the articles sent to them are the intellectual property of their authors and are regarded as confidential information which is not to be disclosed. From this perspective the review will be conducted confidentially.
- All participants who are responsible for preparing the manuscript for publication are obliged to inform the editorial board of a potential cause for conflict of interest. The author may indicate in a cover letter the names of experts who, in his/her opinion, should not review the manuscript if the author feels it may lead to the possible professional conflicts of interest. This information is strictly confidential and is taken into account in the process of review.
Reviewers are required to inform about the possibility of a conflict of interest when conducting the review and the reasons that may affect their judgment on the manuscript. They have the right to refuse to review a particular article, if they consider it justified. The editor appoints no external reviewer in case there is an evident possibility of a conflict of interest. - Reviewers submit a peer-review to the editorial staff in which they point out topicality of the conducted study, completeness and credibility of the submitted material, the scientific novelty of research. Reviewers determine the compliance of the proposed material with the general profile of the journal as well as artistic level of presentation (style, literacy of presentation, linguistic culture, etc.).
- In conclusion, the review must include one of the following recommendations: “recommended” to be published in the Journal (with general remarks of the reviewer and recommendations for improvement if necessary), or “not recommended”.
- In case of a positive review, the paper is presented at a meeting of the Editorial Board in order to decide on the issue of publication in accordance with the general order.
- In case the reviewer recommends corrections in the given paper it shall be sent to the author (or the authors).
- Corrected article is sent for scientific editing. Here science editor provides an opinion and recommendations for its publication.
- In case of negative review the author receives a reasoned refusal to publish the paper, certified by the editor in chief or his deputy.
- Reviews are kept in editorial and publishing house for 5 years.
- The content of each issue of the Journal is approved at a meeting of Chief Editorial Board of "South of Russia: the ecology, development", who decide on the acceptance for publication of each article taking into account the views of the reviewers.
- After the Chief Editorial Board makes a decision on the admission of an article for publication the author is informed about it.
- Review is available upon written request of the author or the expert council of the State Commission for Academic Degrees and Titles of the Ministry of Education and Science of Russia. Review is provided without a signature, first, second or patronymic names, position and place of work of the reviewer.
Indexation
Articles in "South of Russia: ecology, development" are indexed by several systems:
- Web of Sciense (Zoological Record)
- Web of Science (ESCI)
- Сyberleninka
- Google Scholar,
- Bielefeld Academic Search Engine (BASE),
- Research Papers in Economics (RePEc),
- OCLC WorldCat,
- Registry of Open Access Repositories (ROAR),
- EBSCO A-to-Z,
- Соционет,
- Open Access Infrastructure for Research in Europe (OpenAIRE)
Publishing Ethics
Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: "South of Russia: ecology, development"
1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
1.4. Editorial team of the journal endorses the statements of the Sarajevo
Declaration on Integrity and Visibility of Scholarly Publications aimed at
improving the ethical standards, quality and implications of articles (http://www.cmj.hr/2016/57/6/28051276.htm)
2. Duties of Editors
2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned "South of Russia: ecology, development" is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the "South of Russia: ecology, development" journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.
2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of "South of Russia: ecology, development" must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.
2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1.Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2.Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of "South of Russia: ecology, development" and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1.Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
3.6.2.Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1.Reporting standards
4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2.Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3.Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1.The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2.Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1.An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.
4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6.Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1.Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
4.6.2.The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
4.7.1.If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.
4.7.2.If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.
4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1.All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
4.8.2.Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.9.Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor or publisher of "South of Russia: ecology, development" journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.
5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of "South of Russia: ecology, development" in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support "South of Russia: ecology, development" journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.
The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/).
Founders
- Founder:
Limited Liability Company Publishing House "Kamerton",
General director - Lobkovskiy Vasiliy Anatol'evich - Cofounders:
Institute of Applied Ecology,
Dagestan State University
Author fees
The editorial staff provides paid services for scientific editing, technical editing of the “References” section, professional translation of the abstract, keywords, article title, affiliation, criteria for authorship and others. The price for publication is 35 ths. rubles. Payment is accepted after reviewing procedures and approval of an article for publication.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.
Plagiarism detection
"South of Russia: ecology, development" use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in "South of Russia: ecology, development", authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.
As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in "South of Russia: ecology, development" we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.
Glossary (by SHERPA)
