Aim and Scope

There are published research results in various fields of fundamental botany: systematics, phylogeny, floristics, geobotany, morphology, structural botany, plant physiology; articles devoted to the protection of flora; reviews of major domestic and foreign works on botany; chronicle materials on scientific events (symposia, conferences, etc.); personalities, the most important botanical news, botanical travel; articles on the history of botany.

Journal Purpose is:

to contribute to the development of botanical science, reflecting the main directions, trends and results of scientific research of the plant world in Kazakhstan and abroad.

Tasks:

1. Studying the floristic diversity of Kazakhstan and foreign countries.
2. Dissemination of botanical knowledge.
3. Ensuring the exchange of views between researchers from different regions and states and, as a result, expanding the communication space between Kazakhstan and foreign scientists.
4. Promoting the biodiversity conservation by increasing knowledge about it.
5. Promoting the development of scientific personnel.

Section Policies

СЕКЦИЯ 1 – ФЛОРА, СИСТЕМАТИКА И ФИЛОГЕНИЯ ОТДЕЛЬНЫХ ТАКСОНОВ ВЫСШИХ СОСУДИСТЫХ РАСТЕНИЙ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

СЕКЦИЯ 2 – БИОТА, СИСТЕМАТИКА И ФИЛОГЕНИЯ ВОДОРОСЛЕЙ, МХОВ, ГРИБОВ, ЛИШАЙНИКОВ

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

СЕКЦИЯ 3 – РАСТИТЕЛЬНЫЕ РЕСУРСЫ И ОХРАНА РАСТИТЕЛЬНОГО МИРА

Open Submissions

Indexed

Peer Reviewed

Publication Frequency

4 times a year

Open Access Policy

“Spiraeanthus" 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

Reviewing the manuscripts of articles for publication in the scientific journal “Spiraeanthus” is carried out to maintain its high scientific and theoretical level and select the most relevant scientific works.

1. General provisions

1.1. These rules regulate the procedure for reviewing manuscripts of articles submitted to the website of the “Spiraeanthus” Journal (hereinafter referred to as the journal), issued on the basis of the Republican State Enterprise under the right of economic management “Institute of Botany and Phytointroduction” of the Forestry and Wildlife Committee of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan.

1.2. The purpose of peer review is to ensure the quality of articles published in the journal and the required level of their scientific content.

2. RULES FOR SUBMITTING MATERIALS FOR REVIEW

2.1. All scientific articles received on the website of the journal are subject to mandatory review.

2.2. Initial review (expert evaluation) is carried out at the direction of the editor-in-chief, deputy editor-in-chief or executive secretary. At the same time, they determine the compliance of the article with the profile of the journal, the requirements for registration and send it for review to a specialist with deep professional knowledge and experience in a particular scientific area, having publications on the subject of the peer-reviewed article over the past 3 years, as a rule, to a Doctor, Candidate of sciences or PhD.

2.3. Specialists working in the same department of the institution where the work was performed are not involved in the review.

2.4. The manuscript of the scientific article submitted to the editorial office (website) of the journal is considered in terms of compliance with the profile, the requirements of the registration.

2.5. The article is registered on the website of the journal, indicating the date of receipt, title, place of work of the author (s), the author(s).

2.6. Theeditor appoints the editor for each article, and sends the article by selecting the reviewer.

3. ORGANIZATION OF REVIEW

3.1. The executive secretary sends the accepted article for publication for the first consideration to the editor-in-chief, who checks the scientific context of the manuscript and gives an order to transfer the manuscript for review.

3.2. The reviewer is notified that the manuscript which is sent to him is the private property of the author (s) and refers to the information that is not subject to disclosure. The reviewer is not allowed to make copies of the article for his own needs. Information about the identity of the reviewer is confidential information. 

3.3. Review of the article submitted to the editorial board of the journal is done in compliance with confidentiality, and the name of the reviewer (s) is not communicated to the author (s). Violation of confidentiality is possible only in case of a statement by the reviewer about the unreliability or falsification of the materials set forth in the article.

3.4. In case of refusal to publish the article, the editorial board sends the author a reasoned refusal.

3.5. If in the review of the article there is an indication of the need to correct it, it is sent to the author for revision. In this case, the date of receipt in the editorial office is the date of return of the revised article.

3.6. If the article on the recommendation of the reviewer has undergone significant authorial revision, it is sent for the re-review to the same reviewer who made critical remarks.

3.7. In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the article has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the editorial office of the journal. The article can be sent for re-review to another reviewer, or for approval to the editorial board. 

3.8. The editors reserve the right to reject articles in case of inability or unwillingness of the author to take into account the recommendations of the editorial board.

3.9. The actual decision to publish the article is made by the editorial board of the journal.

3.10. The editor will tell the author about the decision on the article.

3.11. The original reviews are stored on the journal's website.

4. REQUIREMENTS FOR THE CONTENT OF THE REVIEW

4.1. The review should contain a qualified analysis of the material of the article, an objective reasoned assessment of it and reasonable recommendations.

4.2. The review covers the following issues:

• whether the content of the article corresponds to the topic stated in the title, how the article corresponds to the modern achievements of scientific and theoretical thought;
• whether the article is available to the readers for whom it is intended, in terms of language, style, location of the material, visibility of tables, diagrams, figures and formulas;
• whether it is advisable to publish an article taking into account the literature previously published on this issue;
• what exactly are the positive aspects, as well as the shortcomings of the article, what corrections and additions should be made by the author;

4.3. The final part of the review should contain conclusions about the article as a whole and a clear recommendation on the advisability of its publication in the "Spiraeanthus" Journal (recommended, recommended taking into account the correction of shortcomings noted by the reviewer or not recommended for publication in the Journal) for a specific scientific area corresponding to the nomenclature of scientific specialties.

Publishing Ethics

Editor-in-chief and editorial board of the scientific journal “Spiraeanthus” (hereinafter referred to as the Journal) rely on the principles adopted by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). In case of suspicion that any principles have been violated, the editor-in-chief and editorial board of the Journal will follow the Guidelines on Good Publication Practice: http://publicationethics.org/resources/guidelines COPE, Article 971-984 of the Civil Code of the Republic of Kazakhstan of the Constitution of the Republic of Kazakhstan, the Law of the Republic of Kazakhstan "On Copyright and Related Rights," Chapter 2 of the Law "On Mass Media" "of the Republic of Kazakhstan, as well as take into account the experience of authoritative International journals and publishers.

In order to avoid unfair practice in publishing activities (plagiarism, presentation of false information, etc.), each member of the editorial board, author and reviewer, must comply with ethical norms and rules, as well as take measures to prevent their violations. If, in the course of reviewing works, unreliable information, plagiarism, repetitions of previously published works, their translations, etc. are found, the article is removed from publication. Compliance with the rules of ethics of scientific publications helps to ensure the rights of authors to intellectual property, improve the quality of publication and exclude the unlawful use of copyright materials in the interests of individuals.

1. Basic terms used in this provision:

The ethics of scientific publications is a system of norms of professional behavior in the relationship between the authors, reviewers, editors, publishers and readers in the process of creating, distributing and using scientific publications.

The editor-in-chief is the person who heads the editorial office and makes the final decisions regarding the production and release of the magazine.

The editorial board is an advisory body including a group of authoritative persons, which assists the editor-in-chief in the selection, preparation and evaluation of works for publication.

The author is a person or a group of persons (a group of authors) participating in the creation of the publication of the results of a scientific research.

Reviewer – an expert acting on behalf of a scientific journal or publishing house and conducting a scientific examination of copyrighted materials in order to determine the possibility of their publication.

A manuscript is an author's work submitted for publication to the editor, but not published.

A scientific article is a completed and published author's work.

Plagiarism is the deliberate misappropriation of the authorship of someone else's work of science or art, someone else's ideas or inventions. Plagiarism may be a violation of copyright and patent laws and, as such, may result in legal liability.

2. Principles of professional ethics in the activities of the editor-in-chief and editorial board

The editor-in-chief has the right to be guided by the policy of the editorial board, but may be limited by the current legislation.

In their activities, members of the editorial board of the journal are responsible for the publication of the works of authorship, which results in the need to observe the following fundamental principles:

2.1. The editor-in-chief evaluates the intellectual content of the manuscripts and decides which of the articles which are sent to the editorial office, should be published and is responsible for everything that is published in the journal.

2.2. When taking decision on the publication, the editor-in-chief of the journal is guided by the reliability of the data presented and the scientific significance of the considered work.

2.3. The editor-in-chief of the journal, when making a decision, may consult with members of the editorial board and reviewers.

2.4. The editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board have no right to disclose information about the submitted manuscript to anyone other than the author and reviewers.

2.5. The editor-in-chief should not have any conflict of interest in relation to the articles that he rejects or accepts.

2.6. The editor-in-chief should not allow information to be published if there are sufficient grounds to believe that it is plagiarism.

2.7. The editor-in-chief does not have the right to transfer the manuscripts of articles to other journals and third parties without the consent of the authors.

3. Ethical principles in the activity of the reviewer

The reviewer should agree to review only those articles for which they have sufficient knowledge to evaluate, and which they can review in a timely manner.

The reviewer carries out a scientific examination of copyright materials and his actions must be impartial, which means the observation of the following principles:

3.1. The reviewer cannot be a member of the editorial board of the journal "Soil Science and Agrichemistry".

3.2. Any manuscript received for review is a confidential document.

3.3. The evaluation of the article should be done objectively; the conclusions should be clearly formulated and reasoned, so that the authors can use them to improve the work.

3.4. The peer reviewer should help the editor-in-chief make a decision on publication.

3.5. The reviewer should not use the information and ideas from the article submitted to him for review for personal purposes, respecting the confidentiality of this information and ideas.

3.6. The reviewer should not accept for consideration the manuscript in case of a conflict of interest caused by competition, cooperation or other relations with any authors or organizations associated with the article.

3.7. The reviewer must declare to the editor-in-chief about a possible conflict of interest related to the review of the article or seek advice from him if he is not sure whether the current situation is a conflict of interest.

3.8. The reviewer is obliged to indicate the presence of significant published works corresponding to the topic of the manuscript, but not included into the bibliography and must be accompanied by an appropriate bibliographic reference.

3.9. The reviewer should draw the editor-in-chief's attention to the discovery of significant similarities or coincidences between the manuscript and any other published work within the scientific competence of the reviewer.

4. Ethical principles that should guide the author of a scientific publication

Submission of an article for consideration to the editorial board of the journal implies that it contains new reliable scientific results obtained by the author (a group of authors), which have not been published anywhere before. The work should contain sufficient details and bibliographic references for possible reproduction by other researchers.

Reviews and articles expressing professional opinions must be accurate and objective.

Authors should be aware that they are personally responsible for the provided text of the manuscript and comply with the following principles:

4.1. Provide reliable results of the performed work and an objective discussion of the research.

4.2. Ensure that the research results presented in the manuscript represent an independent and original work. In the case of using fragments of other people's works and / or borrowing statements from other authors, the article must contain bibliographic references with the obligatory indication of the author and the original source. Plagiarism in any form (unformed quotes, paraphrasing or appropriation of rights to the results of someone else's research) is unethical and unacceptable.

4.3. The author is obliged to immediately notify the editor-in-chief of the journal if a material error or inaccuracy is found in his published work and to provide assistance in eliminating or correcting the error.

4.4. All those who have made significant contributions to the writing of the manuscript should be listed as co-authors. The author (first) must familiarize all co-authors with the final version of the article, get their approval and consent to its submission for publication. All authors mentioned in the article should be responsible for the content of the article.

4.5. Submit an article for consideration only to the journal "Soil Science and Agrichemistry". Failure to comply with this principle is regarded as a big violation of publication ethics and is a reason for the removal of the article from peer review.

4.6. The author should not independently provide reviews of his own articles

4.7. The editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board can submit their own research for publication in the journal, the assessment of their articles should be no less impartial than the articles of other authors.

5. Confidentiality

5.1. The editor-in-chief and members of the editorial board are not entitled to disclose information about the submitted manuscript, except for the author and reviewers.

5.2. When working with unpublished materials, all members of the editorial board must comply with the requirements of the fundamental documents in the field of information protection, namely, the personal data of authors and reviewers.

5.3. The manuscript submitted for examination should be considered as a document with the property of confidentiality.

6. Conflicts of interest

6.1. All authors must reveal in their works information about any financial and other significant conflicts of interest that may affect the results of the study or their interpretation. All sources of financial support for the project must be disclosed

6.2. The editor-in-chief or editorial board are obliged to require the disclosure of existing competing interests from authors of manuscripts. If a conflict of interest is identified after publication, the editorial board is responsible to ensure the publication of the relevant amendments.

6.3. In case of a conflict of interests of the members of the editorial board of the journal as a result of competitive relations, cooperation and ties with one of the authors, the manuscript should be submitted for consideration of  an independent expert in order to resolve the conflict.

6.4. Reviewers should not take part in the review and assessment of manuscripts in case of a conflict of interest or personal interest.

6.5. When filing an ethical complaint on a submitted manuscript or published article, the editor-in-chief should take action based on the experience of reputable journals. Any report on unethical behavior should be considered without statute of limitations. If the facts are confirmed, the publication of the corresponding corrections, refutations or apologies follows.

7. Self-plagiarism

If the elements of a scientific article were previously published, including in the journal "Spiraeanthus", the author must refer to the previously published work. Verbatim copying of own works and their paraphrasing is not allowed, they can only be used as a basis for new conclusions.

8. Violations of publication ethics

The editor-in-chief and editorial board of the journal "Spiraeanthus" defends the reputation of the authors and is attentive to all cases of detection of plagiarism in articles. In order to ensure objectivity, each case is carefully examined and the arguments of all interested parties are considered. Before taking further action, the editorial board seeks to obtain the most accurate information from the authors of the controversial publication and studies it. The decision of the editorial board is impartial, objective and does not depend on third parties.

Founder

• Republican state enterprise on the right of economic management “Institute of Botany and Phytointroduction” of the Forestry and Wildlife Committee of the Ministry of Ecology and Natural Resources of the Republic of Kazakhstan

Author fees

Publication in “Spiraeanthus" 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

“Spiraeanthus" 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 “Spiraeanthus", 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 “Spiraeanthus" 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)

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, article processment charges.