- » Aim and Scope
- » Section Policies
- » Publication Frequency
- » Open Access Policy
- » Archiving
- » Peer-Review
- » Indexation
- » Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
- » Founder and Publisher
- » Author fees
- » Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
- » Plagiarism detection
- » Preprint and postprint Policy
Aim and Scope
The main mission is to create, aggregate, support and distribute the scientific content in the field of the food industry, join the efforts of researchers from scientific centers and universities, bridge the gap between publications at the regional, national and federal levels. The journal “Food systems” serves to highlight topical problems in the food and related industries, promote new promising technologies among the wide audience of scientific and practical professionals, lecturers, students, postgraduate students and entrepreneurs. The scientific concept of the journal envisages publication of new knowledge in the field of food systems and scientific foundations of the resource saving technologies for deep processing of agricultural raw materials, breakthrough technical solutions for producing food of general and specialized purpose.
The journal “Food systems” publishes scientific and review papers, reports, communications, critical reviews, short scientific communications (letters to the editorial office), information materials concerned with
- food technology and processes;
- equipment and apparatus for food production;
- nutritional hygiene;
- biotechnology;
- standardization, certification, quality and safety;
- economics;
- automation and informatization of technological processes.
The editors strive to expand the pool of writers and welcome new authors.
The editorial staff of the journal strives to expand the pool of authors independent of a nationality, country of residence and territory where a study was carried out.
Section Policies
 Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
| Open Submissions |
Indexed |
Peer Reviewed |
Publication Frequency
4 issues a 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
- Library of the V.M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems of the Russian Academy of Sciences (print)
- National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)
- Russian Book Chamber ITAR-TASS Branch (print)
- Russian State Library (RSL)
- Scintific electronic library eLibrary.ru
Peer-Review
All scientific articles received by the editorial office of the journal “Food systems” are subject to obligatory double-blind peer review (a reviewer does not know an author of a manuscript, an author of a manuscript does not know reviewers).
A scientific manuscript submitted to the editorial office of the journal “Food systems” is considered by the Production Editor in terms of correspondence to the requirements for preparation and is registered.
The editorial office of the journal “Food systems” checks the originality of the text using the Antiplagiat system and CrossCheck In case of detecting a lot of borrowing, the editorial staff acts according to the COPE rules. Manuscripts that do not correspond to the requirements are rejected without reviewing. The editorial office (Production Editor) sends an acknowledgment to the corresponding author confirming the receipt of a manuscript not later than five days after its receipt.
The Production Editor is the main contact person, corresponds with authors, editors and reviewers, coordinates the process of reviewing and ensures timely, correct, precise and informative communication for all participants of the editorial and publishing process.
A manuscript that corresponds to the formal requirements is sent to the Editor-in-Chief and, in case of his absence, to one of his deputies. The material is evaluated regarding its correspondence to the scope of the journal, significance for the international scientific community, depth of the investigations and objects, on which it is focused. The Editor-in-Chief or one of his deputies gives an opinion within three days about suitability of an article for reviewing and upon positive decision assigns one of the Scientific Editors to an article. The Scientific Editor considers a manuscript and organizes the double-blind review sending it to two independent experts. The reviewers are the members of the editorial board of the journal or recognized scientists having profound professional knowledge, experience in the particular scientific direction and publications on the theme of the article being reviewed over the last three years.
Duration of reviewing is 2-4 weeks; however, this period can be extended by a request of a reviewer. Each reviewer has a right to decline a review request in case of the conflict of interests. By the results of the consideration of a manuscript, a reviewer gives a recommendation about the further fate of the article (each reviewer’s decision is justified):
- an article is recommended for publication in the present form;
- an article is recommended for publication after correction of shortcomings noted by a reviewer;
- an article cannot be published in the journal.
If a review contains recommendations to correct and rework an article, the editorial office sends an author the text of the review with a proposal to take them into account when reworking the article or provide a justified rebuttal to comments an author disagree with. Reworking an article should take not more than two months from the moment of sending a letter to an author about a necessity to make changes. The article reworked by the author is sent again to the same reviewer.
If the author and reviewers have insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the Scientific Editor has the right to send the manuscript for additional review or to bring up the question of publication at the Editor-in-Chief, the Deputy Editors-in-Chief, Scientific Editors meeting.
After the end of the reviewing process, the Scientific Editor prepares a motivated opinion for the Editor-in-Chief or his deputies based on the received reviews with the recommendation to accept a manuscript for publication or reject.
The Editor-in-Chief or one of his deputies, when the Editor-in-Chief is absent, makes a decision about publication and approves the content of an issue.
The message about the refusal to publish an article is sent to the author by e-mail.
The originals of reviews are stored in the editorial office for five years.
The editorial staff sends copies of reviews to the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation upon the corresponding request.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for maintaining high quality of reviewing submitted articles and works together with the Deputy Editors-in-Chief, Scientific Editors and the editorial board members to ensure the thorough and fair review process and the highest standards of scientific publications.
Indexation
Articles in “Food systems” are indexed by several systems:
- Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles.
- Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
- DOAJ
- Cyberleninka
- Dimensions
- EBSCO
- WorldCat
- SOCIONET
- VINITI RAS
Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement
The Editorial staff of the journal monitors the compliance with the ethical requirements relying on the manuals prepared by specialized organizations, associations, publishing houses such as the Committee on Publication Ethics (UK), Elsevier (Netherlands), and the Ethical Principles of Scientific Publications (ASEP).
The following statements apply to the editor(s), reviewers, authors, and the Founder and Publisher of the journal.
- Introduction
1.1. The publication in peer-reviewed journals is not only an easy way of scientific communication but also makes a significant contribution to the development of the corresponding field of scientific knowledge. Therefore, it is important to lay down standards of ethical behavior of all parties involved in the act of publishing: Editor(s), Reviewers, Authors, the Founder and Publisher of the journal “Food systems”
1.2. The Founder and Publisher not only support scientific communications and invest in this process, but also bear responsibility for adherence to all modern recommendations in a published article.
1.3. The Founder and Publisher undertake the obligation to strictly control scientific materials. We acknowledge our responsibility for ethical principles that we have adopted herein.
- Ethics and Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication decision
The editorial team bears joint responsibility for the content of the journals, an increase in the quality of published materials and adherence to the international publication and ethical standards.
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 journal “Food systems” and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism.
The Editor-in-Chief or one of his deputies, when the Editor-in-Chief is absent, makes a decision about publication and approves the content of an issue.
The Editor-in-Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published based on the assessment of the article under consideration, its significance for researchers and readers, comments of reviewers and opinions of Scientific Editors.
2.2. Fair play
Editors evaluate submitted manuscripts only on the basis of their academic merits (significance, originality, reliability of the research, clarity) and their correspondence to the scope of the journal irrespective of the race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political opinions or institutional affiliations of the authors. Decisions about editing or publication are not determined by the policies of the government or other agencies outside the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief has the full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of this content.
2.3. Confidentiality
The Editors and the editorial board of the journal “Food systems” are obliged not to disclose information about the content of a manuscript under consideration in the editorial office to someone else before its publication.
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. The Editor should refuse to consider manuscripts in case of conflict of interests due to competitive, collaborative or other relationships or connections with the authors, companies and possibly other institutions connected to the manuscript. In this case, the Editor-in-Chief appoints another editor to work with the manuscript.
2.5. Vigilance over published record
The editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the Editor-in-Chief or Deputy Editors-in-Chief 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
The Editor-in-Chief should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the Founder and Publisher. 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.
- Ethics and 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. Founder and 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 Reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the Scientific editor of “Food systems” 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 authorized by the Editor.
3.4. Standard and objectivity
Reviewer should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Reviewer 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. In this case, the editor appoints another reviewer to work with the manuscript.
- Ethics and 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.
4.2. Originality and Plagiarism
4.2.1. 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.
4.2.2. 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.
4.3. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.3.1. 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.
4.3.2. An author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.3.3. 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. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.4. 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.
4.5.Authorship of the Paper
4.5.1. 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.
4.5.2. 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.
4.6. Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects
4.6.1. 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.
4.6.2. 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.
4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.7.1. 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.
4.7.2. 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.
4.8. Fundamental errors in published works
When the author discovers significant errors or inaccuracies in their published work, the author has to notify the Editor-in-Chief of the journal “Food systems” about this and cooperate with the Editor-in-Chief to retract or correct the article as soon as possible. If the Editor-in-Chief or the Publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains significant errors or statements about ethical problems with regard to the manuscript or published article, the editors act in accordance with the COPE rules when working with cases of presumed misbehavior. If the ethical concerns are justified in the course of the investigation, the journal will publish correction,
refutation, expression of concern or other note that can be relevant to the case.
- Ethics and Duties of the Founder and Publisher
5.1. The Founder and Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of “Food systems” in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The Founder and Publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The Founder and Publisher should support “Food systems” 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 the Editors.
5.3. The Founder and Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. The Founder and Publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.
5.5. The Founder and Publisher ensure preservation and availability of the journal content maintaining the digital archive.
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/).
Founder and Publisher
Author fees
All publication costs for the journal are covered by the V.M. Gorbatov Federal Research Center for Food Systems of the Russian Academy of Sciences (Founder)
The journal “Food systems” does not charge for submission, translation, peer review and 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 editorial and publishing process must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.
The Editors and 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
The editorial office of the journal “Food systems” checks the originality of the text using the Antiplagiat system and CrossCheck If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.
Preprint and postprint Policy
Prior to acceptance and publication in “Food systems”, 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 “Food systems” 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)
Preprint - In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.
Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.
