- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Publishing Ethics
- » Founder
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
- » Revenue Sources
Aim and Scope
Aim
The aim of the New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden is to publish scientific articles that meet modern theoretical and practical standards in botany and related disciplines, to summarize scientific achievements, and to facilitate the exchange of expertise among specialists.
Scope
The journal's primary objective is to publish original research and scientific reviews in the following fields: conservation of natural biodiversity (in situ and ex situ), invasive plant biology, floristics, plant systematics and phylogeny, plant anatomy, morphology, physiology, biochemistry, and protection, plant genetics, breeding (including distant hybridization) and molecular biology, plant biotechnology, landscaping and ornamental horticulture, and botanical research methods. The journal also welcomes information on botanical conferences and meetings, the history of botany, the activities of the Council of Botanical Gardens, as well as anniversaries and memorial dates.
Target Audience
The journal is intended for a broad audience of botanists, staff of botanical gardens, research institutions, nature reserves and national parks, biological stations, as well as researchers, faculty, graduate students, doctoral candidates, and international scientists.
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
4 times per year
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
All scientific articles submitted to the editorial office of the New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden undergo a mandatory single-blind peer review process (the manuscript authors are not aware of the reviewers' identities and receive a letter with comments signed by the editor-in-chief).
- Manuscripts are reviewed by members of the editorial board and/or invited reviewers—leading experts in the relevant field from Russia and other countries. The editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief selects the reviewers. The standard review period is 2–4 weeks but may be extended upon the reviewer's request.
- Each manuscript is sent to two reviewers.
- A reviewer may decline to review a manuscript in case of a clear conflict of interest that could affect their perception and interpretation of the work. Based on the manuscript assessment, the reviewer provides a recommendation on its disposition. Each decision must be justified. The possible recommendations are:
- Accept for publication in the New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden without changes.
- Accept after minor revisions.
- Accept after major revisions.
- Does not require re-review (after revisions).
- Requires re-review (after revisions).
- Requires additional review by another specialist.
- Reject.
- If the review contains recommendations for corrections or revisions, the editorial board sends the review text to the author with a request to address the comments in a revised version or to provide a point-by-point rebuttal. Authors are given up to two months to submit a revised manuscript from the date of notification. The revised version is sent for re-evaluation.
- If the authors decline to revise the manuscript, they must notify the editorial board in writing (or verbally). If the revised version is not returned within three months of the review being sent, and no communication is received from the authors, the manuscript will be withdrawn from consideration. In such cases, the authors are notified of the withdrawal due to the expiration of the revision period.
- In case of unresolved disagreements between the author and the reviewers, the editorial board may send the manuscript for an additional review. The editor-in-chief makes the final decision on conflicting situations, consulting with the editorial board if necessary.
- A decision to reject a manuscript is made by the editorial board based on the reviewers' recommendations. A manuscript rejected by the editorial board will not be reconsidered. A rejection notice is sent to the author via email.
- Once the editorial board decides to accept the article for publication, the author is informed and provided with the expected publication date.
- A positive review is a necessary but not sufficient condition for publication. The final decision on publication is made by the editorial board. The editor-in-chief holds the deciding vote in conflict situations.
- Original reviews are stored in the editorial office for 5 years.
Publishing Ethics
The provisions outlined in this section are based on the recommendations of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE), the Elsevier Publishing Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement, and the principles of transparency and best practices in scholarly publishing.
- Introduction
1.1. Publishing in peer-reviewed journals is a vital form of scientific communication that significantly contributes to the advancement of knowledge. It is therefore essential to establish clear ethical standards for all parties involved in the publication process of the New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden: Authors, Editors, Reviewers, and the Publisher.
1.2. The Publisher not only supports scientific communication and invests in this process but is also responsible for ensuring that best practices and current ethical recommendations are followed in all published works.
1.3. The Publisher is committed to exercising rigorous oversight of all scientific materials it publishes.
- Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication Decision
The Editor of the New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden is responsible for making independent decisions on the publication of manuscripts. The decision to publish should be based solely on the manuscript's validity, importance, and scholarly significance. While guided by the journal's editorial policies, the Editor must also comply with current legal standards concerning libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism.
The Editor may consult with other Editors and Reviewers during the decision-making process.
Editors must evaluate manuscripts objectively, without regard to the authors' race, gender, sexual orientation, religious beliefs, ethnicity, citizenship, or political views.
2.2. Confidentiality
The Editor and the Editorial Board must maintain the confidentiality of all submitted manuscripts. Information contained therein must not be disclosed to anyone other than the corresponding Authors, Reviewers, potential Reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the Publisher.
2.3. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
2.3.1. 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.
2.3.2. Editors should recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships/connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper. In such cases, the Editor should assign the manuscript to another member of the Editorial Board.
2.4. Publication Oversight
If an Editor is presented with convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions of a published work are erroneous, they must promptly notify the Publisher to facilitate the publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other relevant notice.
2.5. Involvement in Ethical Issues
The Editor, in collaboration with the Publisher, will take appropriate responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised regarding a submitted manuscript or published paper. This includes contacting the authors of the manuscript and giving due consideration to the respective complaint, but may also involve communication with relevant institutions and research bodies.
- Responsibilities of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions
Peer review assists the Editor in making editorial decisions and, through communication with the author, may help improve the quality of the manuscript. It is a fundamental component of formal scientific communication. The journal expects all scientists who wish to contribute to publications to perform fair and thorough reviews, recognizing that their own work likewise benefits from the conscientious efforts of their peers.
3.2. Competence and Timeliness
Any selected Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that a prompt review will be impossible should notify the Editor and excuse themselves 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 authorized by the Editor.
3.4. Objectivity Standards
Reviews should be conducted objectively, and observations should be formulated clearly with supporting arguments. Personal criticism of the Author is inappropriate. Reviewers must not allow their assessment to be influenced by the origins of the manuscript, or the nationality, religion, political beliefs, or commercial interests of the Authors.
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. Reviewers 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 Conflicts of Interest
3.6.1. 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 with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the paper.
- Authors' Responsibilities
4.1. Reporting Standards
4.1.1. Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data must be represented accurately. The paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review articles should also be accurate, objective, and comprehensive.
4.2. Data Access and Retention
Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review. They should be prepared to provide public access to such data, where 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. Authors must ensure that their work is entirely original. If the work and/or words of others have been used, this must be appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from presenting another's work as the author's own to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's work (without attribution). All forms of plagiarism are unethical and 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. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior.
4.4.2. An author should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has been published previously.
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 (e.g., in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used without explicit written permission from the source.
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.
4.6.2. The corresponding author must ensure that all appropriate co-authors are included on the paper, that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the work and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.7.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation.
4.7.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.8. Fundamental Errors in Published Works
When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal's Editor and cooperate to retract or correct the paper. If the Editor learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, the author must promptly retract or correct the paper.
- Publisher's Responsibilities
5.1. The Publisher is committed to ensuring that editorial decisions on manuscript submissions are based on academic merit and are independent of commercial interests.
5.2. The Publisher will support the journal's Editors in handling ethical complaints concerning submitted manuscripts or published papers and will facilitate appropriate communication with other journals and/or publishers where necessary.
5.3. The Publisher promotes best practices in research and publishing ethics and is committed to implementing industry standards for correcting and retracting articles when required.
5.4. The Publisher is committed to providing specialized legal support and review if necessary.
Founder
- Tsitsin Main Botanical Garden of the Russian Academy of Sciences
Author fees
Publication in “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.
The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.
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
“New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" 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
The editorial board of the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" allows authors to post the manuscript as a preprint before submission for review and to archive independently their articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories.
Preprints
The editorial board of the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" encourages uploading preprints on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as 'a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.'
A preprint publication shall not be considered duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish it in the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden".
The author must notify the editorial board of the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.
It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article.
Do not delete the preprint text.
Manuscripts Accepted for Publication
The editorial board of the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" allows manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication to be archived independently.
This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.
The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.
Example: The ARTICLE TITLE has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021 (3) of the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden".
Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.
Final Versions of Manuscripts
The editorial board of the “New Bulletin of the Main Botanical Garden" allows manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset) to be archived independently.
This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:
- personal website or blog;
- institutional repository;
- disciplinary repository;
- direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.
Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. Do not replace the text of the posted manuscript. Do not delete the text of the posted manuscript.
Revenue Sources
The publication of the journal is financed by the funds of the parent organization, at the expense of the publisher, publication of advertising materials, publication of reprints.
