BEC editors

Bioenergetics Communications is the Open Science journal on bioenergetics and mitochondrial physiology with Living Communications

- ISSN 2791-4690

BEC editors

Visit the the Bioenergetics Communications website for » BEC editorial team

Executive editor meeting minutes

2022-11-22, 16:00 (CET)
Cardoso Luiza HD, Chinopoulos Christos, Cocco Paolo, Garcia-Roves Pablo Miguel, Gnaiger Erich, Kowaltowski Alicia J, Tindle-Solomon Lisa

Meeting Agenda:

https://www.bioblast.at/index.php/Editorial_board_participation

https://wiki.oroboros.at/index.php/Peer_review

https://wiki.oroboros.at/index.php/Conflict_of_interest

Meeting Minutes:

Editorial board participation guidelines - https://www.bioblast.at/index.php/Editorial_board_participation

- Rejected multiple editor positions as a conflict of interest

Agreed:

- Number of reviews expected: No more than 3 declined or unanswered requests/year.

- Appointment length: 3 years, renew if meets the above criteria. Appointment can be ended earlier if non-responsive/decline to act as editor twice without explanation.

- Executive editors may invite associate editors without discussion and inform the other members. Once journal more established executives can look at the board member composition and create a strategy to target areas where there is not an editor.

Conflict of interest policy for editors and reviewers - https://wiki.oroboros.at/index.php/Conflict_of_interest

Agreed:

- For editors and reviewers, conflicts should be taken into account before accepting an assignment. Conflicts of interest include joint publications or collaborations within the past 5 years. Publications with a consortium are an exception.

Peer review process and quality of reviews - https://wiki.oroboros.at/index.php/Peer_review

- Post acceptance “reviews” can be viewed as a conflict of interest and be frustrating for authors. Additionally not a sustainable workload.

- Pre-review edits for SI Units, IUPAC and MitoEAGLE terminology done by BEC editorial staff and sent to authors for acceptance.

· Language should not be edited

- High quality editors should in turn pick high quality reviewers that will catch scientific errors

- Unrealistic to expect every error or ambiguous terminology to be caught

- Stronger signposting to author checklist on what the journal requirements are

- Editors should desk reject manuscripts that do not talk about bioenergetics

Published open peer reviews - Based on below feedback (figure), we will now provide 3 options (to be selected by reviewer in the reviewer form)

(1) Published open peer review with name (2) Published open peer review without name (3) No published open peer review.

Agreed on above.

Next meeting – frequency and date?

Agreed:

- Every 6 months or upon need.

Anything else?

- Look into tracking citations

MitoPedia topics: BEC