- General description of the article (title, authors, volume)
- General description of the problems concerned in the article (subject, topics)
- Correspondence of the article’s issues with the journal’s topics
- Topicality of the article’s issues
- Characteristics and evaluation of the content:
– if the text corresponds to the article’s title;
- if the article has a new perspective on the subject;
- if the article needs to be published considering the previously published ones concerning the subject and if it is interesting for certain readers;
- the details of the advantages, as well as disadvantages of the article, which corrections have been done and should be done by the author (if any).
- Comments on the structure of the article and its presentation (including if the volume can be reduced maintaining the same level of comprehension of the conclusions and statements)
- Objective and radical comments of the reviewer aimed at leveling up the academic and methodological aspects
At the end, the review should contain justified conclusions about the article in general and a detailed recommendation on the necessity of the article’s publication, providing on e of the following decisions:
- recommendation to accept the article for the publication in the journal “Plant Quaratine. Science and Practice”.
- recommendation to accept the article for the publication in the journal “Plant Quaratine. Science and Practice” with technical corrections;
- recommendation to accept the article for the publication in the journal “Plant Quaratine. Science and Practice” after the author has altered the text using the reviewer’s comments, giving the article to the reviewer for another review;
- recommendation to refuse the publication of the article because of its not meeting the requirements of the journal (In this case the article not recommended for the publication cannot be reviewed again). In case of the negative review in general, the reviewer should justify his point of view.
- The editor provides review of all the received material corresponding to the journal’s topics for their expert revision. All reviewers are specialists in the area of the reviewed material and have their own publications on the concerned subject within the last three years. The reviews are kept in the publishing house and the editorial during five years.
- The editor sends the authors copies of the reviews or motivated refusal and takes the responsibility to send the copies of the reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon a request.