Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope

This is the MCFNS Submission and Peer-Review website.  You submit the manuscripts here but they are published eventually at the official MCFNS website.  See the descriptoin at the official journal website

 

Section Policies

Double-Blind Refereeing of Monograph Manuscripts

Any constructive comments are welcome for Monographs; note that in addition to usual scrutiny for technical content and accuracy, commonly valuable peer review comments regarding volumes reports and seminal works are those that help to improve the work's organization and structure. | Submit | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Article Manuscripts

Any constructive comments are welcome for Articles, which are defined as full-length works in a format of Research Articles, Review Articles, or Discussion Articles.| Submit | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Research Note Manuscripts

The focus of review comments with regards toTechnical Notes should be mostly on technical correctness of the described content. | Submit | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Comment Manuscripts

Peer reviews of such short communications as: Discussions of other articles, Error Reports on any publications in any outlets, Refutations, Technical Disputes, Commentaries, Rejoinders and outstanding reviews of Articles considered for publication in MCFNS, should focus mostly on accuracy and technical correctness and not so much on style and presentation. | Submit | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Errata

The peer-review of brief corrections of factual errors, typos, or print errors, in existing articles by the editors or the article authors, is subject to verification of technical correctness and not style or manner of expression. | Submit | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Letters

These are essentially Letters to Editor, which are published subject to minimum editorial and peer-review scrutiny regarding their relevance to the professional content of this journal and its mission and contents. | Submit | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Reviews

Referees' manuscript reviews that are considered by the editors to be either exemplary or otherwise complementary to the published manuscripts will be published as Reviews named or anonymous depending on the consent of their authors. | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed

Double-Blind Refereeing of Editorial Manuscripts

Peer reviews of Articles, Notes, or Comments expressing the opinions of MCFNS editor(s) on any given subject matter or event relating to MCFNS function, policy or production, and their accounts thereof, need to be open for refutation and scrutiny of technical correctness, but not so much for the scrutiny of the style and manner of expression (the readers are entitled to a clear unobstructed view of the editors' convictions, stands, and expectations as well as their own style and manner of expression). | Single-Blind Refereeing | MCFNS Publications |

Unchecked Open Submissions Unchecked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Peer Review Process

MCFNS PREPRINT Open Public Peer-Review System

In addition to the traditional peer-review process generally accepted by all of the conventional peer-reviewed journals, the International Journal of Mathematical and Computational Forestry & Natural-Resource Sciences (MCFNS) peer-review system includes an Open-Access worldwide PREPRINT scrutiny intended to enable all potential readers to assume the reviewer role for any MCFNS manuscript prior to its publication at the official journal website.  The PREPRINT Public Peer-Review system is one of the distinguishing features that sets the MCFNS journal apart from the conventional hard copy based journals, and puts it into the class of the most progressive contemporary journals, such as those of the Copernicus Publications, which originated the idea of the Public Peer-Review.  The MCFNS journal treats the Public Peer-Review option as a complement to the traditional double blind peer reviews, rather than as a replacement for it; thus MCFNS can benefit from the combined strengths of both of these systems.

Some benefits of the traditional peer review system cannot be denied.  Its double blind aspect removes any bias from assessment of the manuscript content (since the authors are anonymous) and any barriers in expressing critical opinions (since the reviewers are anonymous).  Subsequently opening peer review to the public worldwide provides a greater chance of fresh manuscript ideas enriching the overall peer review process, and going beyond what just three reviewers can provide.  Additional reviewers might also spot typesetting errors that could escape the earlier limited number of the appointed referees and editors.  We believe that this additional peer-review process will increase the overall quality of the journal and its publications, as well as provide a common platform for early refutability and discussion of any potentially controversial issues in the manuscripts. 

In this Public Peer-Review each PREPRINT has its own commenting space, hereafter called a Preprint Forum.  Occasionally the editors may post the PREPRINTS with some comments in the relevant Preprint Forums from the double-blind peer review.  Those would be the elements of the earlier reviews that the editors deemed still relevant to the current PREPRINTS.  Both the reviewers and the authors can post or email comments and reply by posts or emails to comments in each of the Preprint Forums.  However, in order for the comments to be considered as part of the Public Peer-Review, the review comments should be submitted to the Preprint Forums or emailed to the MCFNS Editors no later than one week prior to the publication date for each issue, which is the 28th of each issue month (1-February and 2-August).  If irreconcilable differences exist between the reviewers and the authors, the journal will provide an opportunity for the reviewers to publish their input as "Comments" in the same or following issues of the MCFNS journal.

Providing late comments on any matters requiring extensive changes to a manuscript may preclude the publication of it with the suggested changes or may preclude publication of the manuscript in the upcoming issue.  For this reason the PREPRINTS posted here contain the "Issue No. 0" and no date of publication, which will be updated at the time of publication.

Comments on each PREPRINT can be submitted as named or anonymous, but to submit the comments online the readers have to be logged in and registered with the MCFNS Double-Blind PREPRINT website.  Online comments can be published at PREPRINTS section using the "ADD COMMENT" link below the Abstract of the article (see example), or using the "Add comment" link in the "Reading Tools" of the right hand side banner menu in the PDF view (see example).  The reviews posted on the website can be anonymous to the public but not to the Editors; the identity of the user posting the comment will be recorded by the system and accessible to the Editors for any further actions.  Creating "false identity" accounts in this system is prohibited.  Confidential comments can also be emailed directly to the MCFNS Editors.  The identities of all the commenting authors submitting or sending unnamed comments will be kept confidential unless the authors request otherwise.  The Editors will not entertain any anonymous emails, and they will consider only constructive criticisms and only substantiated claims. 

The manuscripts posted here can be cited as "MCFNS Preprints" with the appropriate listing of this website and the date it was accessed.  Be aware that the Volume, Issue, and Page Numbers of PREPRINTS may change and the manuscripts themselves may change before the final publication.  So, always check the final published version of the manuscripts at the official MCFNS.COM Journal website.  Once published the manuscripts can be cited as the MCFNS publications according to the information published at the MCFNS.COM Journal website.    

 

Publication Frequency

The MCFNS PREPRINTS website serves only the purpose of the Open Public Peer-Review platform, and it contains only manuscripts that are currently under open public peer review.  Individual PREPRINTS under the Double-Blind Review (if any) are posted here for Open Public Peer-Review on this site, by adding them to the MCFNS Current Preprints Table of Contents, as soon as the editors select them for the MCFNS open peer review process.  The PREPRINTS are removed from the MCFNS Current Preprints Table of Contents as soon as they advance to the next stage of the Single-Blind Open Peer Review process.