Submission Guidelines

 

INPAGE MENU

Abridged structure
  • Editorials
  • Checklists
  • Short Communications
  • Essays
  • Original Research Articles
  • Review Articles
  • Scientific Letters
  • Cover Letter
Full structure
  • Original Research Article
  • Review Article
  • Checklist

Overview

The author guidelines include information about the types of articles received for publication and preparing a manuscript for submission. Other relevant information about the journal's policies and the reviewing process can be found under the about section. The compulsory cover letter forms part of a submission and must be submitted together with all the required forms. All forms need to be completed in English.

 

 

Editorials


Editorials are by invitation only and are intended to provide expert comment on relevant topics within the focus and scope of the journal.

 

Word limit

800 words

References

10 or less

 

Checklists


Checklists aim to provide a platform for publication of long species lists and other similar data that provide particularly important baseline information for research and monitoring. Checklists should be as completely documented as short communications and should include reference to relevant literature and a description of the data collection and other procedures employed.

 

Word limit

3000 words (excluding the unstructured abstract and references)

Unstructured abstract

300 words [250 words main part (Background, Objectives, Method, Results and Conclusion) and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’]

Abstract requirement

a labelled heading, Conservation implications

References

25 or less

Tables/Figures

no more than 7 Tables/Figure

Ethical statement

should be included in the manuscript

Compulsory supplementary file

ethical clearance letter/certificate

 

Short Communications


A concise but complete description of a limited investigation that will not be included in a later paper.

 

Word limit

3000 words (excluding the references)

Abstract

n/a

References

25 or less

Tables/Figures

no more than 2 Tables/Figure

 

Essays


The essays are short opinion pieces or personal perspectives (not research papers) on any fundamental conservation concept and/or development that highlights recent stimulating research or policy developments. As these are meant to express a personal viewpoint, essays will generally have no more than two authors, or alternatively, multiple authors from a specific research laboratory or consortium. Standard headings are not always appropriate, but the essay should have clear subheadings to provide order to the manuscript.

 

Word limit

2000 words (excluding the structured abstract and references)

Unstructured Abstract

300 words [250 words main part (Background, Objectives, Method, Results and Conclusion) and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’]

Abstract requirement

a labelled heading, Conservation implications

References

20 or less

Tables/Figures

no more than 2 Tables/Figure

Ethical statement

should be included in the manuscript

 

Original Research Articles


An original article provides an overview of innovative research in a particular field within or related to the focus and scope of the journal, presented according to a clear and well-structured format.

 

Word limit

7000 words (excluding the unstructured abstract and references)

Unstructured abstract

300 words [250 words main part (Background, Objectives, Method, Results and Conclusion) and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’]

Abstract requirement

a labelled heading, Conservation implications

References

60 or less

Tables/Figures

no more than 7 Tables/Figure

Ethical statement

should be included in the manuscript

Compulsory supplementary file

ethical clearance letter/certificate

 

Review Articles


Inform a broad readership about fields in which there have been recent important advances of immense, fundamental importance, and highlight unresolved questions and future directions. Standard headings are not always appropriate, but the review should have clear sub-headings to provide order to the manuscript. Reviews are typically invited; thus, authors are encouraged to contact the editors prior to submission to express their interest or ideas for reviews of a particular topic.

 

Word limit

7000 words (excluding the unstructured abstract and references)

Unstructured abstract

300 words [250 words main part (Background, Objectives, Method, Results and Conclusion) and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’]

Abstract requirement

a labelled heading, Conservation implications

References

80 or less

Tables/Figures

no more than 4 Tables/Figure

Ethical statement

should be included in the manuscript

 

Scientific Letters


A discussion on a particular topic, whereby the authors raise their opinion on a particular aspect of conservation or their reaction to a previously published article in Koedoe. This section encourages debate amongst authors and readers on topical issues of national and global importance to the field of conservation science. Letters will be published at the editors’ discretion. In the case of critical letters, the original author will be given an opportunity to provide a short rebuttal which will be published along with the critical letter.

 

Word limit

2000 words (excluding the unstructured abstract and references)

Abstract

n/a

References

10 or less

Tables/Figures

no more than 1 Tables/Figure

 

Cover Letter


The authorship, disclosure statements, copyright, and license agreement form is our compulsory cover letter which needs to form part of your submission. Kindly download and complete, in English, the provided form.

 

Anyone that has made a significant contribution to the research and the paper must be listed as an author in your cover letter. Contributions that fall short of meeting the criteria as stipulated in our policy should rather be mentioned in the ‘Acknowledgements’ section of the manuscript. Read our authorship guidelines and author contribution statement policies.

 

 

Original Research Article full structure


Title: The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract: The abstract, written in English, should be no longer than 300 words (250 words main part and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’) and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a succinct account of the objectives, methods, results and significance of the matter. The unstructured abstract for an Original Research article should consist of six paragraphs Background, Objectives, Method, Results, Conclusion and Conservation implications. The latter, is the only labelled heading within the abstract.

  • Background: Why do we care about the problem?  State the context and purpose of the study. (What practical, scientific or theoretical gap is your research filling?)
  • Objectives: What problem are you trying to solve? What is the scope of your work (e.g. is it a generalised approach or for a specific situation)? Be careful not to use too much jargon.
  • Method: How did you go about solving or making progress on the problem? State how the study was performed and which statistical tests were used. (What did you actually do to get the results?) Clearly express the basic design of the study; name or briefly describe the basic methodology used without going into excessive detail. Be sure to indicate the key techniques used.
  • Results: What is the answer? Present the main findings (that is, as a result of completing the procedure or study, state what  you have learnt, invented or created). Identify trends, relative change or differences on answers to questions.
  • Conclusion: What are the implications of your answer? Briefly summarise any potential implications. (What are the larger implications of your findings, especially for the problem or gap identified in your motivation?)
  • Conservation implications: What key insights into the research results and its future function should be revealed? Conservation practitioners should carefully consider the resulting management outcomes by identifying the potential results of the proposed research, the conservation implications of the results and whether these implications call for a change in management practices as well as whether such a change is possible.

Do not cite references and do not use abbreviations excessively in the abstract.

 

Introduction: The introduction must contain your argument for the social and scientific value of the study, as well as the aim and objectives:

  • Social value: The first part of the introduction should make a clear and logical argument for the importance or relevance of the study. Your argument should be supported by use of evidence from the literature.
  • Scientific value: The second part of the introduction should make a clear and logical argument for the originality of the study. This should include a summary of what is already known about the research question or specific topic, and should clarify the knowledge gap that this study will address. Your argument should be supported by use of evidence from the literature.
  • Conceptual framework: In some research articles it will also be important to describe the underlying theoretical basis for the research and how these theories are linked together in a conceptual framework. The theoretical evidence used to construct the conceptual framework should be referenced from the literature.
  • Aim and objectives: The introduction should conclude with a clear summary of the aim and objectives of this study.

Research methods and design: This must address the following:

  • Study design: An outline of the type of study design.
  • Setting: A description of the setting for the study; for example, the type of community from which the participants came or the nature of the health system and services in which the study is conducted.
  • Study population and sampling strategy: Describe the study population and any inclusion or exclusion criteria. Describe the intended sample size and your sample size calculation or justification. Describe the sampling strategy used. Describe in practical terms how this was implemented.
  • Intervention (if appropriate): If there were intervention and comparison groups, describe the intervention in detail and what happened to the comparison groups.
  • Data collection: Define the data collection tools that were used and their validity. Describe in practical terms how data were collected and any key issues involved, e.g. language barriers.
  • Data analysis: Describe how data were captured, checked and cleaned. Describe the analysis process, for example, the statistical tests used orsteps followed in qualitative data analysis.
  • Ethical considerations: Approval must have been obtained for all studies from the author's institution or other relevant ethics committee and the institution’s name and permit numbers should be stated here.

Results: Present the results of your study in a logical sequence that addresses the aim and objectives of your study. Use tables and figures as required to present your findings. Use quotations as required to establish your interpretation of qualitative data. All units should conform to the SI convention and be abbreviated accordingly. Metric units and their international symbols are used throughout, as is the decimal point (not the decimal comma).

 

Discussion: The discussion section should address the following four elements:

  • Key findings: Summarise the key findings without reiterating details of the results.
  • Discussion of key findings: Explain how the key findings relate to previous research or to existing knowledge, practice or policy.
  • Strengths and limitations: Describe the strengths and limitations of your methods and what the reader should take into account when interpreting your results.
  • Implications or recommendations: State the implications of your study or recommendations for future research (questions that remain unanswered), policy or practice. Make sure that the recommendations flow directly from your findings.

Conclusion: Provide a brief conclusion that summarises the results and their meaning or significance in relation to each objective of the study.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

  • Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
  • Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
  • Funding: Provide information on funding if relevant
  • Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
  • Disclaimer: A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

 

Review Article full structure


Title: The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract: The abstract should be no longer than 300 words (250 words main part and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’) and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a concise account of the objectives, methods, results and significance of the matter. The unstructured abstract for an Original Research article should consist of five paragraphs unlabelled Background, Objectives, Method, Results and Conclusion. Then there should follow a labelled paragraph, namely Conservation implications.

  • Background: Why do we care about the problem?  State the context and purpose of the study. (What practical, scientific or theoretical gap is your research filling?)
  • Objectives: What problem are you trying to solve? What is the scope of your work (e.g. is it a generalised approach or for a specific situation)? Be careful not to use too much jargon.
  • Method: How did you go about solving or making progress on the problem? State how the study was performed and which statistical tests were used. (What did you actually do to get the results?) Clearly express the basic design of the study; name or briefly describe the basic methodology used without going into excessive detail. Be sure to indicate the key techniques used.
  • Results: What is the answer? Present the main findings (that is, as a result of completing the procedure or study, state what  you have learnt, invented or created). Identify trends, relative change or differences on answers to questions.
  • Conclusion: What are the implications of your answer? Briefly summarise any potential implications. (What are the larger implications of your findings, especially for the problem or gap identified in your motivation?)
  • Conservation implications: Conservation practitioners should carefully consider the resulting management outcomes by identifying the potential results of the proposed research, the conservation implications of the results and whether these implications call for a change in management practices as well as whether such a change is possible. Key insights into the research results and its future function should be revealed.

Introduction: Present an argument for the social and scientific value of your review that is itself supported by the literature. Present the aim and objectives of your literature review.

 

Methods: Although this is not a systematic review (see instructions on original research for this type of article) it is still necessary to outline how you searched for, selected and appraised the literature that you used. Discuss any methodological limitations.

 

Review findings: Present your review of the literature and make use of appropriate sub-headings. Your review should be a critical synthesis of the literature.

 

Implications and recommendations: Discuss the findings of your review in terms of the implications for policy makers and clinicians or recommendations for future research.

 

Conclusion: This should clearly state the main conclusions of the review in terms of addressing the original aim and objectives.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

  • Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
  • Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
  • Funding: Provide information on funding if relevant
  • Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
  • Disclaimer: a statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

 

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

 

Checklist full structure


Title: The article’s full title should contain a maximum of 95 characters (including spaces).

 

Abstract: The abstract should be no longer than 300 words (250 words main part and 50 words ‘Conservation Implications’) and must be written in the past tense. The abstract should give a concise account of the Introduction, Patient presentation, Management and outcome and significance of the matter. The unstructured abstract for an Original Research article should consist of five paragraphs unlabelled Background, Objectives, Method, Results and Conclusion. Then there should follow a labelled paragraph, namely Conservation implications.

  • Background: Why do we care about the problem?  State the context and purpose of the study. (What practical, scientific or theoretical gap is your research filling?)
  • Objectives: What problem are you trying to solve? What is the scope of your work (e.g. is it a generalised approach or for a specific situation)? Be careful not to use too much jargon.
  • Method: How did you go about solving or making progress on the problem? State how the study was performed and which statistical tests were used. (What did you actually do to get the results?) Clearly express the basic design of the study; name or briefly describe the basic methodology used without going into excessive detail. Be sure to indicate the key techniques used.
  • Results: What is the answer? Present the main findings (that is, as a result of completing the procedure or study, state what  you have learnt, invented or created). Identify trends, relative change or differences on answers to questions.
  • Conclusion: What are the implications of your answer? Briefly summarise any potential implications. (What are the larger implications of your findings, especially for the problem or gap identified in your motivation?)
  • Conservation implications: Conservation practitioners should carefully consider the resulting management outcomes by identifying the potential results of the proposed research, the conservation implications of the results and whether these implications call for a change in management practices as well as whether such a change is possible. Key insights into the research results and its future function should be revealed.

Introduction: This section must contain a clear statement of the aims of the work or of the hypotheses being tested. A brief account of the relevant background that supports the rationale of the study  and checklist should also be given. The length of the introduction should not exceed 750 words.


Methods and materials: This section should contain explicit, concise descriptions of all new methods or procedures employed, for example:

  • Describe the type of organisms or materials involved in the study.
  • Describe the site and setting where your field study was conducted.   
  • Describe your experimental design clearly, including a power calculation if appropriate. Note: Additional details can be placed with the online supplementary material.   
  • Describe the protocol for your study in sufficient detail (clear description of all interventions and comparisons) so that other scientists could repeat your work to verify your findings.   
  • Describe how the data were summarised and analysed. Additional details can be placed in the online supplementary information. Do not include lists here, they will be published as supplementary material. To see guidelines on preparing lists, click here.

Results: This section provides a synthesis or integration of the obtained literature grouped or categorised according to some organising or analysis principle. The data are contained in this section, but without consideration of their significance. Results are typically presented in figures or tables, summarising the lists or findings, with no duplication of information presented in the text.


Do not insert long species lists here – these lists should be provided as online supplementary material.


Trustworthiness: This refers to the findings of the study being based on the discovery of human experience as it was experienced and observed by the participants.

  • Reliability: Reliability is the extent to which an experiment, test, or any measuring procedure yields the same result with repeated trials. Without the agreement of independent observers able to replicate research procedures or the ability to use research tools and procedures that yield consistent measurements, researchers would be unable to satisfactorily draw  conclusions, formulate theories or make claims about the ability to generalise  their research.    
  • Validity: Validity refers to the degree to which a study accurately reflects or assesses the specific concept that the researcher is attempting to measure. While reliability is concerned with the accuracy of the actual measuring instrument or procedure, validity is concerned with the study's success at measuring what the researchers set out to measure. Researchers should be concerned with both external and internal validity. External validity refers to the extent to which the results of a study are generalisable or transferable. Internal validity refers to:
  1. The rigor with which the study was conducted (e.g. the study's design, the care taken to conduct measurements and decisions concerning what was and was not measured).
  2. The extent to which the designers of a study have taken into account alternative explanations for any causal relationships they explore.

In studies that do not explore causal relationships, only the first of these definitions should be considered when assessing internal validity.  


Discussion: This section normally contains the following:

  • Discussion on issues relating to the completeness of the list or how representative it is considered to be of the taxa (that is, the system of classification of organisms, e.g. a phylumorderfamilygenus or species) and area covered, as well as any other relevant uncertainties.
  • Discussion on or comparison of previous lists and/or other similar areas.
  • Discussion on species or records of high importance; key issues.
  • Discussion on threats or concerns (where possible).
  • Discussion on  taxonomic updates or new species since last list of area or survey.
  • Discussion on the potential value or uses of the list and associated information.

Conclusion: This should state clearly the main conclusions of the study and give a clear explanation of their importance and relevance, with a recommendation for future research (implications for practice). Provide a brief conclusion that restates the objectives, the research design and the results with their meaning.

 

Acknowledgements: Those who contributed to the work but do not meet our authorship criteria should be listed in the Acknowledgments with a description of the contribution. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgments agrees to be named. Refer to the acknowledgement structure guide on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own heading:

  • Competing interests: This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect: The authors declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article. Read our policy on competing interests.
  • Author contributions:  All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.
  • Funding: Provide information on funding if relevant
  • Data availability: All research articles are encouraged to have a data availability statement.
  • Disclaimer: a statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

 

References: Authors should provide direct references to original research sources whenever possible. References should not be used by authors, editors, or peer reviewers to promote self-interests. Refer to the journal referencing style downloadable on our Formatting Requirements page.

 

** Guidelines for presenting lists and appendices **

  • Lists may be included in the paper provided they are not too long – that is, when they do not make the paper longer than a generally accepted publication length (about 10 pages).
  • Details will necessarily differ according to different taxonomic groups, but family names should always be provided.
  • Ensure tables are carefully constructed to be clear and unambiguous and always containing:
    • full naming conventions
    • synonyms (or, where multiple synonyms, provide a reference to these)
    • citations for literature sources used for names (if you have more than 25 references that are stipulated for the main manuscript, please place the exceeding references in the online lists as well; e.g. extra references, personal communications, or other sources from which the species lists or data were derived from).
  • Clear indication is needed of who provided the identifications: the author(s), or specialists in an institution such as a herbarium or a museum (include person and institution name).
  • A description of the general localities and more specific features of the study area(s) such as GPS points should be provided. However, in the case of threatened biota, locality details should be excluded (GPS localities, maps etc.), but reference to the relevant authority housing such records may be provided.
  • Information on date of record should be provided (first date of record for the species in the area, as well as most recent record).
  • Maps and figures can be included to provide further details, if appropriate.
  • If herbarium or museum specimens are referred to, please provide relevant details.
  • If data and other information are captured in specific data repositories, please provide details.
  • All symbols and other notations should be well described in the footnote of the checklist as this will ensure the data or lists are still understandable and usable in the future. Use standardised symbols, for example (=) for synonyms.
  • In lists annotated with additional information, such as species conservation status (e.g. red data list status), aspects of their biology will be valuable. If this becomes extensive, more than a single list may be provided: one with the taxonomic details and the other with the ecological details.

For examples of various checklist types see:

Craig, A.J.F.K. et al., 2011, ‘The avifauna of Kwandwe Private Game Reserve, Eastern Cape, South Africa’, Koedoe 53(1), Art. #1015, 5 pages. doi: 10.4102/koedoe.v53i1.1015

 

Dippenaar-Schoeman, A.S. et al., 2011, ‘Spiders (Arachnida: Araneae) of the vegetation layer of the Mkambati Nature Reserve, Eastern Cape, South Africa’, Koedoe 53(1), Art. #1058, 10 pages. doi: 10.4102/koedoe.v53i1.1058

 

Spear, D. et al., 2011, ‘Alien species in South Africa’s National Parks (SANParks)’, Koedoe 53(1), Art. #1032, 4 pages. doi:10.4102/koedoe.v53i1.1032 

 

 

 

INPAGE MENU

  • Style and format
  • References
  • Permission to use copyright material
Acknowledgements structure
  • Acknowledgements
  • Competing interests
  • Author contributions
  • Funding information
  • Data availability statement
  • Disclaimer

 

Style and format


File format

  • Manuscript files can be in the following formats: DOC, DOCX, or RTF. Microsoft Word documents should not be locked or protected.
  • LaTeX documents (.tex) should be converted into Microsoft Word (.doc) before submission online.
  • Rich Text Format (RTF): Users of other word processing packages should save or convert their files to RTF before uploading. Many free tools are available that will make this process easier.

Length

Manuscripts should adhere to the author guidelines of the journal. There are restrictions on word count, number of figures, or amount of supporting information.

 

Font

Use a standard font size and any standard font family.

 

Special characters

Do not use the font named ‘Symbol’. To add symbols to the manuscript, use the Insert → Symbol function in your word processor or paste in the appropriate Unicode character. Refer to our AOSIS house style guide on mathematical and Unicode font guidelines.

 

Headings

Ensure that formatting for headings is consistent in the manuscript. Limit manuscript sections and sub-sections to four heading levels. To avoid confusion during the review and production process, ensure that the different heading levels used in your work are visually distinct from one another. The simplest way to achieve this is to use different font sizes and/or a combination of bold/italics for different heading levels.

 

Keywords

Identify eight keywords that represent the content of your manuscript and are specific to your field or sub-field, ensure to separate each keyword with a semi-colon. Test your keywords: when you enter your keywords into the various journal and academic databases like Google Scholar, do the results include papers similar to your topic? If not, revise the terms until they do.

 

Layout and spacing

Manuscript text should have a 1.5 line spacing.

 

Page and line numbers

Include page numbers and line numbers in the manuscript file. Use continuous line numbers (do not restart the numbering on each page).

 

Footnotes

Footnotes are not ideal. If your manuscript contains footnotes, move the information into the main text or the reference list, depending on the content.

 

Language

Manuscripts must be written in British English, according to the Oxford English Dictionary (avoid Americanisms [e.g. use ‘s’ and not ‘z’ spellings], and set your version of Microsoft Word default language to UK English). Refer to the AOSIS house style guide for more information.

 

Abbreviations

Define abbreviations upon first appearance in the text. Do not use non-standard abbreviations unless they appear at least three times in the text. Keep abbreviations to a minimum.

 

Illustrations

Illustrations fall into two categories:

  • Figures: Photographs, drawings, diagrams, graphs, flowcharts, maps, etc.
  • Tables and/or Boxes: Text and/or numbers arranged in orderly columns and rows.

Every time a Figure, Table and/or Box is presented in your manuscript, it should be referred to three times:

  • In a legend, which includes a number, a title, and its source. The legend is placed below a Figure and above a Table and/or Box. The source section should consist of the in-text citation, creator or owner and its year of creation, and any other attribution required as stipulated by the permission received (person and place) to reproduce.
  • In the body of your written manuscript. You should include an in-text citation and a sentence or two about the image explaining what it illustrates and why it is there.
  • As a reference entry within your reference list.

 

AOSIS house style

The manuscript must adhere to the AOSIS house style guide.

 

References


Referencing style guide

The manuscript must adhere to the Harvard referencing style.

 

Permission to use copyright material


The following information will assist you in understanding your responsibilities and in requesting permission to reproduce copyrighted material in your work. All permissions granted must be submitted to the journal together with your manuscript, and you must ensure that a clearly written source accompanies the work.

 

Your responsibilities

As the author, you are responsible for obtaining permission and paying any fees to use the third-party copyrighted material that your manuscript contains.

 

Material that will need clearance

Content not in the public domain or freely available to use under a license such as a creative commons license will require clearance. It includes the use of photographs, figures, maps, tables, cartoons, advertisements, epigraphs and quotations that are over the limits referred to under ‘Modification/adaptation of figures and tables’.

 

Web material

Image or text material on the Web may not be the intellectual property of the site hosting it. You must always identify the original copyright source and obtain explicit permission. Take particular care with photographs obtained from websites, blogs, Google image searches, YouTube, Wikimedia, etc.

 

Material previously published by you or your colleague

Check the contract with the other publisher to see whether, and under what conditions, the material can be reused in this AOSIS publication. If in any doubt, permission must be obtained.

 

Images of, or information about, identifiable individuals

It is your responsibility to obtain consent from patients and other individuals for the use of information, images, audio files, and video clips from which they may be identified. Bear in mind the following points:

  • Masking a person’s eyes is not an adequate or acceptable means of rendering an image anonymous.
  • People may still be recognizable to individuals or their families, even if head/shoulders are not included.
  • People may recognize themselves from clinical descriptions or case reports.

Modification/adaptation of figures and tables

Use the original figure as first published where appropriate. However:

  • No clearance is required if you create figures or tables using factual data from copyrighted material.
  • No clearance is required if, after you have created a single figure or table using data from two or more figures or tables, no single source comprises more than 75% of the new figure or table.
  • No clearance is required if, after you have created a new figure or table by adding your own data to an existing figure or table, your data comprises more than 25% of the new figure or table.
  • Clearance is required if you create a figure or table using parts from two or more third-party sources, and each part contains more than 75% of the content of the original figure/table part.

Quotations

For prose, permission is required for single quotations of over 400 words or multiple quotations from the same source that cumulatively total more than 800 words. But note that, even if below these limits, permissions must be cleared for quotations that represent the ‘heart of the work’ or a substantial portion of the overall original source material.

 

Clear before you submit your final manuscript

Permissions must be cleared before the final version of your manuscript is submitted for publication. If permission cannot be obtained, you should find an alternative or remove the material. Provide electronic copies of all consent forms obtained when you submit your final manuscript, numbered and named accordingly.

 

Acknowledgements structure


Acknowledgements

The acknowledgement section follows the conclusions section and addresses formal, required statements of gratitude and required disclosures. It includes listing those who contributed to the work but did not meet authorship criteria, with the corresponding description of the contribution. Acknowledge anyone who provided intellectual assistance, technical help (including with writing and editing), or special equipment and/or materials. Authors are responsible for ensuring that anyone named in the Acknowledgements agrees to be named.

 

Also provide the following, each under their own subheading:

  • Competing interests
  • Author contributions
  • Funding information
  • Data availability statement
  • Disclaimer

Competing interests

This section should list specific competing interests associated with any of the authors. If authors declare that no competing interests exist, the article will include a statement to this effect. Read our policy on competing interests.

 

The following are examples of competing interest statements. If you use one of the examples, you should modify it to fit your specific relationship.

 

Scenario

Suggested competing interest statements

Example 1

The author(s) declare that they have no financial or personal relationship(s) that may have inappropriately influenced them in writing this article.

Example 2

The author reported that they [have a financial and/or business interests in] [are a consultant to] [received funding from] a company that may be affected by the research reported in the enclosed publication. They have disclosed those interests fully and have in place an approved plan for managing any potential conflicts arising from [that involvement].

Example 3

A.B. developed the theoretical formalism, performed the analytic calculations and performed the numerical simulations. Both A.B and B.C. contributed to the final version of the manuscript. B.C. supervised the project.

Example 4

A.B., B.C., C.D., D.E., E.F., F.G., and G.H. conceived and planned the experiments. A.B., B.C., C.D. and D.E. carried out the experiments. A.B., F.G. and E.F. planned and carried out the simulations. J.K., K.L., A.B., B.C., D.E., C.D., F.J., and F.G. contributed to sample preparation. A.B., B.C., C.D., D.E., FJ, E.F., F.G. and G.H. contributed to the interpretation of the results. A.B. took the lead in writing the manuscript. All authors provided critical feedback and helped shape the research, analysis and manuscript.

Example 5

A.B. and B.C. designed the model and the computational framework and analysed the data. A.B. and C.D. carried out the implementation. A.B. performed the calculations. A.B. and B.C. wrote the manuscript with input from all authors. D.E. and E.F. conceived the study and were in charge of overall direction and planning.

Example 6

A.B. designed and performed the experiments, derived the models and analysed the data. B.C. assisted with XYZ measurements and C.D. helped carry out the XYZ simulations. A.B. and D.E. wrote the manuscript in consultation with C.D., B.C. and E.F..

Example 7

A.B. devised the project, the main conceptual ideas and proof outline. B.C. worked out almost all of the technical details, and performed the numerical calculations for the suggested experiment. C.D. worked out the bound for quantum mechanics, with help from D.E.. E.F. verified the numerical results of the XYZ by an independent implementation. F.G. and G.H. proposed the XYZ experiment in discussions with A.B.. B.C., C.D., G.H. and A.B. wrote the manuscript.

Example 8

A.B., B.C. and C.D. designed the study. A.B., D.E. and E.F. performed the XYZ experiments. F.G. and G.H. performed XYZ simulations. I.H. and M.C. expressed and purified all proteins. A.B., H.J., B.C. and C.D. analysed the data. A.B., B.C. and C.D. wrote the paper with input from all authors.

Example 9

A.B. and B.C. designed and directed the project; C.D., D.E., A.B. and B.C. performed the experiments; C.D. and B.C. analysed spectra; A.B. and E.F. made the simulations; B.C. developed the theoretical framework; C.D., A.B. and B.C. wrote the article.

Example 10

The author of this publication receives research funding from [Entity], which is developing products related to the research described in this publication. In addition, the author serves as a consultant to [Entity] and receives compensation for these services. The terms of this arrangement have been reviewed and approved by the [University name; Institution name] in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.

Example 11

 

 

The author of this publication receives research support from [name of research sponsor] with an equipment loan from [Entity]. The author also [has an equity interest in, serves as a consultant to, serves on an advisory board or board of directors for] [Entity]. The terms of this arrangement have been reviewed and approved by the [University name; Institution name] in accordance with its policy on objectivity in research.

Author contributions

All authors must meet the criteria for authorship as outlined in the authorship policy and author contribution statement policies.

 

The following are examples of an author contribution statement. If you use one of the examples, you should modify it to fit your specific relationship.

 

Scenario

Suggested author contribution statements

Example 1

A.B. and B.C. conceived of the presented idea. A.B. developed the theory and performed the computations. C.D. and D.E. verified the analytical methods. B.C. encouraged A.B. to investigate [a specific aspect] and supervised the findings of this work. All authors discussed the results and contributed to the final manuscript.

Example 2

A.B. and B.C. carried out the experiment. A.B. wrote the manuscript with support from C.D.. D.E. and E.F. fabricated the XYZ sample. F.G. and G.H. helped supervise the project. G.H. and H.I. conceived the original idea. H.I. supervised the project.

Example 3

A.B. developed the theoretical formalism, performed the analytic calculations and performed the numerical simulations. Both A.B and B.C. authors contributed to the final version of the manuscript. B.C. supervised the project.

Example 4

A.B., B.C., C.D., D.E., E.F., F.G., and G.H. conceived and planned the experiments. A.B., B.C., C.D. and D.E. carried out the experiments. A.B., F.G. and E.F. planned and carried out the simulations. J.K., K.L., A.B., B.C., D.E., C.D., F.J., and F.G. contributed to sample preparation. A.B., B.C., C.D., D.E., FJ, E.F., F.G. and G.H. contributed to the interpretation of the results. A.B. took the lead in writing the manuscript. All authors provided critical feedback and helped shape the research, analysis and manuscript.

Example 5

A.B. and B.C. designed the model and the computational framework and analysed the data. A.B. and C.D. carried out the implementation. A.B. performed the calculations. A.B. and B.C. wrote the manuscript with input from all authors. D.E. and E.F. conceived the study and were in charge of overall direction and planning.

Example 6

A.B. designed and performed the experiments, derived the models and analysed the data. B.C. assisted with XYZ measurements and C.D. helped carry out the XYZ simulations. A.B. and D.E. wrote the manuscript in consultation with C.D., B.C. and E.F..

Example 7

A.B. devised the project, the main conceptual ideas and proof outline. B.C. worked out almost all of the technical details, and performed the numerical calculations for the suggested experiment. C.D. worked out the bound for quantum mechanics, with help from D.E.. E.F. verified the numerical results of the xyz by an independent implementation. F.G. and G.H. proposed the xyz experiment in discussions with A.B.. B.C., C.D., G.H. and A.B. wrote the manuscript.

Example 8

A.B., B.C. and C.D. designed the study. A.B., D.E. and E.F. performed the xyz experiments. F.G. and G.H. performed XYZ simulations. I.H. and M.C. expressed and purified all proteins. A.B., H.J.., B.C. and C.D. analysed the data. A.B., B.C. and C.D. wrote the paper with input from all authors.

Example 9

A.B. and B.C. designed and directed the project; C.D., D.E., A.B. and B.C. performed the experiments; C.D. and B.C. analysed spectra; A.B. and E.F. made the simulations; B.C. developed the theoretical framework; C.D., A.B. and B.C. wrote the article.

Example 10

A.B., B.C. and C.D. performed the measurements, D.E. and E.F. were involved in planning and supervised the work, A.B. and B.C. processed the experimental data, performed the analysis, drafted the manuscript and designed the figures. F.G., and G.H. performed the xyz calculations. H.I., and I.J. manufactured the samples and characterized them with xyz spectroscopy, J.K. performed the xyz characterization. K.L. aided in interpreting the results and worked on the manuscript. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Example 11

A.B., B.C., C.D. and D.E. contributed to the design and implementation of the research, to the analysis of the results and to the writing of the manuscript.

Funding information

All research articles should have a funding acknowledgement statement included in the manuscript in the form of a sentence under a separate heading entitled ‘Funding information’. The funding agency should be written out in full, followed by the grant number in square brackets.

 

The following are examples of a funding statement. If you use one of the examples, you should modify it to fit your specific relationship.

 

Scenario

Suggested funding statements

Example 1

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the Medical Research Council [grant number xxx].

Example 2

This work was supported by the Trust [grant numbers xxxx, yyyy]; the Natural Environment Research Council [grant number zzzz]; and the Economic and Social Research Council [grant number aaaa].

Example 3

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Data availability statement

All research articles should have a data availability statement included in the manuscript in the form of a sentence under a separate heading entitled ‘Data availability statement’.

 

The following are examples of a data availability statement. If you use one of the examples, you should modify it to fit your specific relationship.

 

Availability of data

Suggested data availability statements

Data openly available in a public repository that issues datasets with DOIs

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name e.g ‘figshare’] at http://doi.org/[doi], reference number [reference number].

Data openly available in a public repository that does not issue DOIs

The data that support the findings of this study are openly available in [repository name] at [URL], reference number [reference number].

Data derived from public domain resources

The data that support the findings of this study are available in [repository name] at [URL/DOI], reference number [reference number]. These data were derived from the following resources available in the public domain: [list resources and URLs]

Data available within the article or its supplementary materials

The authors confirm that the data supporting the findings of this study are available within the article [and/or] its supplementary materials.

Data generated at a central, large-scale facility, available upon request

Raw data were generated at [facility name]. Derived data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author [initials] on request.

Embargo on data due to commercial restrictions

The data that support the findings will be available in [repository name] at [URL / DOI link] following a [6 month] embargo from the date of publication to allow for the commercialisation of research findings.

Data available on request due to privacy/ethical restrictions

The data that support the findings of this study are available on request from the corresponding author, [initials]. The data are not publicly available due to [restrictions, e.g. their containing information that could compromise the privacy of research participants].

Data subject to third party restrictions

The data that support the findings of this study are available [from] [third party]. Restrictions apply to the availability of these data, which were used under licence for this study. Data are available [from the authors / at URL] with the permission of [third party].

Data available on request from the authors

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author, [author initials], upon reasonable request.

Data sharing not applicable – no new data generated

Data sharing is not applicable to this article, as no new data were created or analysed in this study.

Disclaimer

A statement that the views expressed in the submitted article are his or her own and not an official position of the institution or funder.

 

 

Blinding your manuscript

Submission checklist

Before you begin the submission process, here are some checks to consider helping you prepare and to ensure you will include everything we will need to process a complete submission.

 

Before you consider this journal, it is essential to acknowledge that:

 

Quick check for your submissions


Check 1: Are you able to cover the cost of publishing
You do not need to pay anything at the time of submission, but an Article Processing Charge (APC) will be applied if your manuscript is accepted for publication. Your institution or funder will usually cover this; however, you should ensure that arrangements have been made before submission. You can find details about the charges via the ‘Publication fees’ link that appears on every journal website.

 

Check 2: Tailor your article for this journal
Make sure your manuscript is the right fit for the journal by reviewing the focus and scope. Determine whether the journal has the best fit for the most relevant aspect of your article. Examine the types of articles considered for publication by this journal, and align your manuscript to these requirements.

 

Check 3: Checking copyright issues
Do not self-plagiarise by ensuring that your manuscript has no relationship to previous research you published. If an article relationship does exist with previously published research, verify whether you require copyright permission for extensive quotations or paraphrasing. It is your responsibility to have gotten written permission for the reproduction of any images/ figures/tables before submitting your manuscript. Please read our policy permission to use copyright material.

 

Check 4: Maintain clear, concise, and accessible writing
Confirm that the entire manuscript is organised and neatly prepared, spell-checked, and adhere to the formatting requirements stipulated in our submission guidelines: 

  • Have you stuck to the article length specified in the journal's instructions for authors?
  • Have you included an abstract and keywords, highlighting your article's key points?
  • Are all references made to the literature included in your references section?
  • Are the references correctly formatted following the style of the journal?
  • Is your article formatted to the style required by the journal?

 

Check 5: Anonymise your manuscript
The journal follows a double-blinded peer-review process, and you need to make your manuscript anonymous. This is to ensure that reviewers would not be able to identify you, your co-authors, or the institution where the research was carried out, ensuring that the review process is as objective as possible. Don’t know how to make your article anonymous, follow these instructions.

 

Check 6: Complete our cover page
The cover letter contains all the information we will need to process your submission upon acceptance, which includes the author account information. The cover letter must be completed in full. We recommend authors to have ORCID iDs, which can only be assigned by the ORCID Registry. Submit the complete cover page in Step 4 of the submission process.

 

Ready to submit your manuscript? Login to proceed with the 5-step submission process.

Compulsory forms