- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Peer Review Process
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Publication fee
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Publication Frequency
Aim and Scope
The journal "Proceedings of VNIRO" is a multidisciplinary peer-reviewed scientific periodical devoted to the whole range of issues related to fisheries research, commercial resources of marine and fresh waters, fishing, technology and technology of processing aquatic biological resources, the economics of the fisheries industry.
The scientific peer-reviewed journal "TRUDY VNIRO" publishes Russian and foreign original articles articles in all areas of fisheries research: reviews, original research and short reports, as well as reports on expeditions, conferences, anniversaries, losses, etc. information.
All articles submitted to the editorial office are reviewed. The decision on acceptance or rejection of articles is made by the editorial board. Information about the rejection of the article is reported to the author.
Articles sent to several publications are not accepted for consideration, if the fact of sending an article to several publications is revealed, the author's articles will not be accepted for consideration in the future.
The publication of articles in the journal is free of charge.
The journal is intended for scientists, students and lecturers of biological and geographical faculties, zoogeographers, specialists of fishery and environmental organizations, ecologists, specialists in the field of fisheries conservation, employees of fishery department and regional organizations.
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
 Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Peer Review Process
All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the “TRUDY VNIRO” journal undergo obligatory single-blind anonymous reviewing (the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers and receive a letter with comments signed by the editor-in-chief).
Reviewing of articles is carried out by members of the editorial board and editorial council, as well as invited reviewers - leading experts in the relevant industry field in Russia and other countries. The decision on the choice of a particular reviewer for the examination of an article is made by the editor-in-chief, executive editor or scientific editor. The review period is 4-6 weeks, but at the request of the reviewer it can be extended.
Each article is sent to at least 2 reviewers.
Each reviewer has the right to refuse a review in the event of a clear conflict of interest that affects the perception and interpretation of the manuscript materials. Based on the results of consideration of the manuscript, the reviewer gives recommendations on the further fate of the article (each decision of the reviewer is justified):
the article is recommended for publication in its present form;
the article is recommended for publication after correcting the deficiencies noted by the reviewer;
the article needs additional reviewing by another specialist;
the article cannot be published in the journal.
If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the article, the editorial staff of the journal sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a revised version of the article or reasonably (partially or completely) refute them.
If the authors refuse to revise the materials, they must notify the editorial office in writing or orally about their refusal to publish the article. If the authors do not return the revised version after 3 months from the date of sending the review, even in the absence of information from the authors with a refusal to revise the article, the editorial office removes it from the register. In such situations, the authors are sent an appropriate notification of the removal of the manuscript from registration due to the expiration of the time allotted for revision.
If the author and reviewers have insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at a meeting of the editorial board.
The decision to refuse publication of the manuscript is made at a meeting of the editorial board in accordance with the recommendations of the reviewers. An article not recommended for publication by the decision of the editorial board is not accepted for reconsideration. The refusal to publish is sent to the author by e-mail.
After the editorial board of the journal makes a decision on the admission of the article to publication, the editorial board informs the author about it and indicates the terms of publication.
The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of an article. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
The originals of the reviews are kept in the editorial office for 5 years.
Open Access Policy
This is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.
Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.
For more information please read BOAI statement.
Archiving
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
Peer-Review
A single-blind anonymous peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial stuff of “TRUDY VNIRO”. This implies that the authors of the manuscript do not know the reviewers.
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, executive editor or scientific editor choose specialists for peer review. We aim to limit the review process to 2-4 weeks, though in some cases the schedule may be adjusted at the reviewer’s request.
- 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. - 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.
- We politely request that the editor to 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 the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the author accordingly.
- If author and reviewers meet insoluble contradictions regarding revision of the manuscript, the editor-in-chief resolves the conflict by his own authority.
- 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.
- Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publishing, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
- 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.
- Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.
Publishing Ethics
Russian Federal Research Institute of Fisheries and Oceanography (VNIRO) is guided by the principles of publishing ethics, formed on the basis of international standards, declarations and codes (https://publicationethics.org/; http://rasep.ru/images/docs/declaration_anri_2016.pdf), the provisions of Chapter 70 "Copyright" of the Civil Code of the Russian Federation (GK-RF.ru/glava70), and also takes into account the experience of authoritative international and domestic scientific journals and publishing houses.
The present document was adopted at the meeting of the editorial board of "VNIRO" on 28 November 2017 (Protocol № 2).
In order to avoid malpractice, authors, editors, reviewers, publishers, members of the Editorial Board (Editorial Council) of the publishing house and journals should respect the ethical principles and norms presented below concerning publication and dissemination of research results.
1. Introduction
1.1. Publishing materials in peer-reviewed journals is not only an easy way of scientific communication, but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of scientific knowledge. Thus, it is important to establish standards for the future ethical behavior of all parties involved in the publication, namely: Authors, Journal Editors, Reviewers, Publishers and Scientific Society for the TRUDY VNIRO journal.
1.2. The publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process, but is also responsible for adhering to all current guidelines in the published work.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Decision to publish
The editor of the scientific journal "TRUDY VNIRO" is personally and independently responsible for deciding on publication, often in cooperation with the relevant Scientific Society. The credibility of the work in question and its scientific relevance should always underlie the decision to publish. The editor can be guided by the policy of the Editorial Board of “TRUDY VNIRO” journal, being limited by the current legal requirements in relation to defamation, copyright, legality and plagiarism.
The Editor may consult with other Editors and Reviewers (or officials of the Scientific Society) when deciding to publish.
2.2. Decency
The editor must evaluate the intellectual content of the manuscripts regardless of race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, origin, citizenship or political preferences of the Authors.
2.3. Confidentiality
The editor and the Editorial Board of the “TRUDY VNIRO” journal are obliged not to disclose information about the accepted manuscript to all persons, with the exception of Authors, Reviewers, possible Reviewers, other scientific consultants and the Publisher, without necessity.
2.4. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
2.4.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review and associated with possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
2.4.2 Editors should recuse themselves from reviewing manuscripts (namely: request the Co-Editor, Assistant Editor, or cooperate with other members of the Editorial Board when reviewing the work instead of personally reviewing and making a decision) in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, collaborative and other interactions and relationships with Authors, companies and possibly other organizations associated with the manuscript.
2.5. Publication supervision
An editor who has provided convincing evidence that statements or conclusions presented in a publication are erroneous should inform the Publisher (and / or the relevant Scientific Society) about it in order to promptly notify the changes, withdraw the publication, raise concerns and other relevant statements. ...
2.6. Engagement and collaboration in research
The Editor, in conjunction with the Publisher (or the Scientific Society), take appropriate action in the event of ethical claims regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures, in general terms, include interaction with the Authors of the manuscript and the reasoning of the corresponding complaint or request, but can also involve interaction with relevant organizations and research centers.
3. Responsibilities of Reviewers
3.1. Influencing the decisions of the Editorial Board
Peer review assists the Editor in making a publication decision and, through appropriate interaction with the Authors, can also help the Author improve the quality of the work. Peer review is a necessary link in formal scientific communication, which is at the heart of the scientific approach. The publisher shares the view that all scholars who wish to contribute to publication are required to do substantial work of reviewing the manuscript.
3.2. Diligence
Any selected Reviewer who feels insufficiently qualified to review the manuscript or does not have enough time to quickly complete the work should notify the Editor of the TRUDY VNIRO journal and ask him to exclude him from the review process of the corresponding manuscript.
3.3. Confidentiality
Any manuscript received for review should be treated as a confidential document. This work cannot be opened and discussed with anyone not authorized by the Editor.
3.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity3.4. Manuscript requirements and objectivity
The reviewer is obliged to give an objective assessment. Personal criticism of the Author is unacceptable. Reviewers should clearly and reasonably express their opinions.
3.5. Recognition of primary sources
Reviewers should identify significant published works that are relevant to the topic and not included in the bibliography of the manuscript. Any statement (observation, conclusion or argument), published earlier, in the manuscript must have a corresponding bibliographic reference. The Reviewer should also draw the Editor's attention to any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript in question and any other published work within the scope of the Reviewer's scientific competence.
3.6. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
3.6.1 Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author. Information or ideas obtained during the review and associated with possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
3.6.2. Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the submitted work.
4. Obligations of Authors
4.1. Requirements for manuscripts
4.1.1 Authors of original research reports should provide credible results of the work done as well as an objective discussion of the significance of the research. The data underlying the work must be presented accurately. The work must contain sufficient details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction. False or knowingly wrong statements are perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.
4.1.2. Reviews and scientific articles must also be accurate and objective, and the editorial point of view must be clearly indicated.
4.2. Data access and storage
Authors may be requested to provide raw data relevant to the manuscript for review by Editors. Authors should be prepared to provide open access to this kind of information (according to the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if feasible, and in any case be prepared to retain this data for an adequate period of time after publication.
4.3. Originality and plagiarism
4.3.1 Authors should ensure that the complete original work is presented and, in the case of use of works or statements of other Authors, should provide appropriate bibliographic references or extracts.
4.3.2 Plagiarism can exist in many forms, from presenting someone else's work as the author's, to copying or paraphrasing significant parts of someone else's work (without attribution), to claiming one's own rights to the results of someone else's research. Plagiarism in all its forms is unethical and unacceptable.
4.4. Plurality, redundancy and simultaneity of publications
4.4.1 In general, an Author should not publish a manuscript largely devoted to the same research in more than one journal as an original publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal at the same time is perceived as unethical behavior and unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, the Author should not submit a previously published article for consideration to another journal.
4.5. Recognition of primary sources
The contributions of others should always be recognized. Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the performance of the work presented. Data obtained privately, for example, through conversation, correspondence or discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the explicit written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources, such as evaluating manuscripts or granting grants, should not be used without the express written permission of Authors of work related to confidential sources.
4.6. Authorship of the publication
4.6.1 The authors of the publication can only be persons who have made a significant contribution to the formation of the concept of the work, development, execution or interpretation of the presented research. All those who have made significant contributions should be designated as Contributors. In cases where research participants have made a significant contribution in a particular direction in a research project, they should be listed as persons who have made a significant contribution to this research.
4.6.2. The author must make sure that all participants who have made a significant contribution to the research are represented as Co-Authors and are not cited as Co-Authors of those who did not participate in the research, that all Co-Authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and agreed to submit it for publication.
4.7. Risks, as well as people and animals that are the objects of research
4.7.1. If the work involves the use of chemical products, procedures, or equipment that may cause any unusual risk, the Author must clearly indicate this in the manuscript.
4.7.2 If the work involves the participation of animals or humans as objects of research, Authors should make sure that the manuscript indicates that all stages of the research are in accordance with the laws and regulations of the research organizations, as well as approved by the relevant committees. The manuscript must clearly indicate that informed consent has been obtained from all subjects of research. You must always ensure that your privacy rights are respected.
4.8. Disclosure Policy and Conflicts of Interest
4.8.1 All Authors are required to disclose in their manuscripts financial or other existing conflicts of interest that may be perceived to have influenced the results or conclusions presented in the work.
4.8.2 Examples of potential conflicts of interest that must be disclosed include employment, consulting, shareholding, royalties, expert opinions, patent applications or registrations, grants, and other financial support. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed as early as possible.
4.9. Substantial errors in published works
If the Author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in the publication, the Author must inform the Editor of the “TRUDY VNIRO” journal about this and interact with the Editor in order to promptly withdraw the publication or correct errors. If the Editor or Publisher receives information from a third party that the publication contains material errors, the Author is obliged to remove the work or correct errors as soon as possible.
5. Obligations of the Publisher
5.1 The publisher must follow the principles and procedures to facilitate the fulfillment of ethical obligations by Editors, Reviewers and Authors of “TRUDY VNIRO” in accordance with these requirements. The publisher must be confident that potential revenue from advertising or reprints does not influence the Editors' decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support the “TRUDY VNIRO” Editors in considering complaints about the ethical aspects of published materials and help to interact with other journals and / or Publishers, if this contributes to the performance of the Editors' duties.
5.3. The publisher should promote good research practice and implement industry standards to improve ethical guidelines, retirement procedures, and error correction.
5.4 The publisher should provide appropriate specialized legal support (opinion or advice) if necessary.
Founder
FSBSI "VNIRO"
Publication fee
Publication in the journal is free for authors.
The editors do not charge authors for the preparation, placement and printing of materials.
Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
Unpublished data obtained from submitted manuscripts cannot be used in personal research without the written consent of the Author.
Information or ideas obtained during the review and associated with possible benefits must be kept confidential and not used for personal gain.
Reviewers should not participate in the review of manuscripts in the event of conflicts of interest due to competitive, joint and other interactions and relationships with any of the Authors, companies or other organizations associated with the presented work.
Plagiarism detection
When reviewing an article, the editorial board of the “TRUDY VNIRO” can check the material using the Antiplagiat system. In case of detection of numerous borrowings, the editors act in accordance with the rules of COPE.
Preprint and postprint Policy
In the process of submitting an article, the author must confirm that the article has not been published or has not been accepted for publication in another scientific journal. When linking to an article published in the “TRUDY VNIRO”, the publisher asks to post a link (full URL of the material) to the official website of the journal.
For consideration are allowed articles previously posted by authors on personal or public sites that do not belong to other publishers.
Publication Frequency
The journal is published 4 times a year. The review period takes from 4 weeks.
