Vestnik of Volga State University of Technology. Series: Forest. Ecology. Nature Management

Focus and Scope

Editorial board of the academic periodical Vestnik of Volga State University of Technology. Series “Forest. Ecology. Nature Management.” («Vestnik PGTU. Ser. «Les. Ekologiya. Prirodopolzovanie») accepts for publication the manuscripts, satisfying the interests of the periodical:

“Forestry” – 06.03.01 Forest Cultures, Selection, Seed Production; 06.03.02 Sylviculture, Forestry,  Forest Management and Forest Surveying; 06.03.03 Forest Amelioration  and Protective Afforestation, Landscaping of Urban Areas, Forest Fires and  Fire Prevention.

“Forestry Machinery & Technologies” – 05.21.01 Technologies and Machines of Timber Harvesting and Forestry; 05.21.05 Technologies and Equipment for Wood Processing, Science of Wood; 05.23.11 Design and Construction of Roads.

“Problems of Ecology and  Rational Nature Management. Biotechnologies” – 03.02.08 “Ecology (engineering sciences: in transport, in energetics, in construction and in  housing and public utilities)”; 03.02.14 Biological Resources (biological and agricultural sciences); 03.01.06 Biotechnology (including  Bionanotechnology).

Peer Review Process

An unilateral anonymous ("blind") peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff. This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.

1. Members of the editorial board and leading Russian and international experts in corresponding areas of life sciences, invited as independent readers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief choose readers for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 2 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
2. Reviewer has an option to abnegate the assessment should any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. Upon the scrutiny, the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
   - to accept the paper in its present state;
   - to invited the author to revise their manuscript to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
   - that final decision be reached following further reviewing by another specialist;
   - to reject the manuscript outright.
3. If the reviewer has recommended any refinements, the editorial staff would suggest the author either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to limit their revision to 2 months and resubmit the adapted manuscript within this period for final evaluation.
4. We politely request that the editor be notified verbally or in writing should the author decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the author fails to do so within 3 months since receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
5. If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
6. The editorial board reaches final decision to reject a manuscript on the hearing according to reviewers’ recommendations, and duly notifies the authors of their decision via e-mail. The board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
7. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
8. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance, as final decision in all cases lies with the editorial board. By his authority, editor-in-chief rules final solution of every conflict.
9. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 3 years.

Open Access Policy

This journal provides immediate open access to its content, based on the following principles: free and open access to research results helps to increase global knowledge sharing.

Publishing Ethics

SCIENTIFIC PUBLICATION ETHICS

Authors

Authors are responsible for the contents of their manuscript.

Those submitting manuscript should carefully check that all those methods and results are accurate.

Authors should carefully check their calculations and offered data.

Citations and references should be accurate. They should be properly prepared.

Authors should not copy the references from other scientific papers in case they did not use them.

Authors are completely responsible for  the correct  definition of their authorship.

EDITORIAL BOARD  CODE OF ETHICS

Editorial board helps the authors to improve the quality of the submitted manuscripts through reviewing and  literary editing of the manuscripts.

Editorial board promises to pass just and impartial decision about the publication of the manuscripts and  to perform  fair reviewing regardless of commercial interest.

Editorial board:

-        complies with confidentiality requirements and  sends the submitted manuscripts to the reviewers only. Correspondence with the author is of confidential nature;

-        assures the reviewers are aware of the  rules of reviewing;

-        adopts an editorial policy, providing maximum clarity and  complete reporting to the author; if the referee process takes much time,  the author is informed about it by e-mail;

-        protects the rights of the third parties  from illegal use of the materials (piracy) – the manuscripts of the persons, caught in piracy, are not accepted for publication in the academic periodical. Editorial board has a right to give publicity the leak out cases of piracy on the pages of its periodical;

-        gives the authors grounds for the decision if the manuscript is not accepted for publication or  if returned for revision;

-        does not accept for publication the  manuscripts with invalid references and citation.

REVIEWER CODE OF ETHICS

Reviewer:

-      agrees (and informs the editor of the periodical about  it) to review those  manuscripts which are in his/her field of competence and those number of manuscripts which he/she will be able to review in proper time;

-      respects confidentiality of the review and does not  inform anybody about any details of the manuscript or the review during or after reviewing of the manuscript, except for the persons who have the permission of the editor;

-      does not use the information obtained during the reviewing for his/her own benefit or benefit of any other persons or organization or to harm  any person or to bring into discredit any person;

-      does not addresses directly to the authors without preliminary permission of the editor;

-      informs the editor about possible conflicts of interest and seeks advise to the editorial board of the periodical if he/she is not sure whether  the  situation is a   conflict of interest or not;

-       does not  take into account the origin of the manuscript, nationality, religious affiliation, political or any other views of the authors, or commercial interest to review the submitted manuscript;

-      Reviews the manuscript  objectively and  constructively, does not make hostile or inciting statements, as well as slanderous  or offensive comments;

CODE OF ETHICS OF EDITOR-IN-CHIEF

Editor-in-chief:

-        makes decision on publication of a manuscript solely on the basis of expert evaluation of a group of independent reviewers and the opinion of the members of the editorial board;

-        sends confidential information about the submitted manuscript to the authors and the reviewers only;

-        excludes the submitted manuscript from consideration in case of the conflict of interest;

-        assumes the appropriate response measures in case of a complaint of ethic nature to the submitted manuscript or the published paper (informs the author, discusses the complaint with the editorial board, publishes the corrections);

-       citation recommendations are based on the scientific importance of the cited papers, and pursue the goal to improve the submitted manuscript.

Based on the materials of the Committee on Publication Ethics, Instructions of the Reviewers of Elsevier publishing company.

See also: Podgotovka i izdanie nauchnogo zhurnala. Mezhdunarodnaya praktika po etike redaktirovaniya, retsenzirovaniya, izdaniya i avtorstva nauchnykh publikatsiy: Sbornik perevod / Sost. O. V. Kirillova. – M.: Finansovyy universitet, 2013. – 140 s.