About the journal

Since 2024, the journal has been published on the National Platform of Periodical Scientific Publications of the Russian Center for Scientific Research https://journals.rcsi.science/2312-6701/index

ABOUT THE JOURNAL

Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture – theoretical and scientific and practical online journal.
Founder: Russian Research Institute of Fruit Crop Breeding (VNIISPK)
Roskomnadzor registration certificate: Эл №ФС77-77630
ISSN: 2312-6701 (online)
Web: journal-vniispk.ru
Indexing: RSCI, CyberLeninka, GoogleScholar, Agris
Archiving: Russian State Library (RSL), Central Scientific Agricultural Library, CyberLeninka, Scientific-Technical Center «INFORMREGISTER»
Licence: Creative Commons «Attribution» 4.0 International (CC-BY 4.0)
Author fees: free of charge for all the authors
We accept for publication original articles reflecting the problems and results of fundamental and applied scientific research in the field of genetics, breeding, variety study, introduction, biotechnology, physiology, biochemistry, immunity, agrochemistry, nursery, storage technologies, processing and cultivation of fruit, berry and ornamental plants.
Editorial office address: VNIISPK, Zhilina, Orel district, Orel Region, Russia, 302530
Contact: journal@vniispk.ru; tel.: 8(4862)45-00-71

AIM AND SCOPE

SECTION POLICIES

PUBLICATION FREQUENCY

DISCLOSURE AND CONFLICT OF INTEREST

PLAGIARISM DETECTION

PREPRINT AND POSTPRINT POLICY

Aim and Scope
The aim is to publish and disseminate the results of fundamental and applied research that are of scientific and practical importance for the development of breeding and variety study of fruit, berry and ornamental plants, nursery and gardening.
Tasks:
- attraction of leading scientists in the field of selection and variety study of fruit and berry crops, horticulture and viticulture as authors of the journal;
- attraction of well-known Russian and foreign scientists and specialists to work in the editorial board;
- ensuring high standards of scientific publications, involving leading scientists and specialists in peer review;
- increasing the accessibility and openness of the journal in Russia and abroad in accordance with the «open access» standards, as well as by publishing an expanded version of the annotation in English (abstract), keywords and duplicating the list of references in English using one of the most common standards;
- promotion of the journal on the international and Russian market and its inclusion in international databases.

Section Policies
GENETICS, BREEDING, STUDY OF VARIETIES
NURSERY AND HORTICULTURE
STORAGE AND PROCESSING
ORNAMENTAL HORTICULTURE

Publication Frequency
Quarterly a year

Open Access Policy
«Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture» 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
Central Scientific Agricultural Library
CyberLeninka
Scientific-Technical Center «INFORMREGISTER»

Peer-Review
The editorial board of the journal reviews all materials received by the editorial board that correspond to its subject matter, with the aim of their expert assessment. All reviewers are experts on the subject of the peer-reviewed materials and have publications on the subject of the peer-reviewed article within the last 3 years.
A bilateral anonymous (blind) peer review method is mandatory for processing of all scientific manuscripts submitted to the editorial staff of Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture. This implies that neither the reviewer is aware of the authorship of the manuscript, nor the author maintains any contact with the reviewer.
For reviewing manuscripts of articles, members of the editorial board of the journal, employees of VNIISPK and invited reviewers of the Russian Federation and other countries who have professional knowledge and experience in a specific scientific area are involved. The decision on choosing one or another reviewer for the examination of an article is made by the editor-in-chief or deputy editor-in-chief.
If the publication of the paper entailed a violation of someone´s copyright or generally accepted norms of scientific ethics, then the editorial board of the journal has the right to withdraw the published paper.
The term for writing a review is established by agreement with the reviewer, but should not exceed 30 days.
At the request of the reviewer, it can be extended.
If the review contains recommendations for correcting and revising the manuscript, the executive secretary of the journal sends the text of the review to the author with a proposal to take them into account when preparing a new version of the manuscript or reasonably (partially or completely) refute them. The manuscript revised (revised) by the author is resent for review. An manuscript sent to the author for revision should be returned in a corrected form as soon as possible. The revised manuscript must be accompanied by a letter with the authors responses to all comments of the reviewer.

The editors reserve the right to reject paper if the author is unable or unwilling to take into account the wishes of the editors.
If there are two negative reviews of the manuscript from two different reviewers or one review of its revised version, the article is rejected without consideration by the editorial board.
In case of disagreement with the opinion of the reviewer, the author of the manuscript has the right to provide a reasoned answer to the editorial office of the journal. In this case, the article can be sent for re-review or for consideration by members of the editorial board.
Reports, reviews, information and promotional materials are not peer reviewed. The decision on their publication is taken by the editorial board. At the same time, the volume of materials that are not scientific publications should not exceed three pages, drawn up in accordance with the requirements for publication.
The editors of the publication send copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal to the authors of the manuscript, and also undertakes to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of Education and Science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of a request to the editors.
Original reviews of submitted manuscripts remain deposited for 5 years.
The presence of a positive peer review is not a sufficient reason for the publication of an article. The final decision on the expediency and timing of publication after peer reviewing is made by the editor-in-chief or his deputy, and, if necessary, by the editorial board of the journal.
After the editorial board of the journal makes a decision on the admission of the article to publication, the executive secretary of the journal informs the author about this and indicates the terms of publication.

Indexing
Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI). The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by Electronic Scientific Library foundation (elibrary.ru).
Google Scholar

Cyberleninka
Agris

Publishing Ethics
The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org, and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the Elsevier Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)
1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture.
1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.
1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programs record “the minutes of science” and we recognize our responsibilities as the keeper of those “minutes” in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.
2. Duties of Editors
2.1. Publication decision – The Editor of a learned Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2. Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.
2.3. Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.
2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest
2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’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.
2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.
2.5. Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.
3. Duties of Reviewers
3.1. Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.
3.2. Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of «Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture» and excuse himself from the review process.
3.3. Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.
3.4. Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.
3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.
3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest
3.6.1. 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.
3.6.2. 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.
4. Duties of Authors
4.1. Reporting standards
4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.
4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial opinion works should be clearly identified as such.
4.2. Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.
4.3. Originality and Plagiarism
4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.
4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4. Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication
4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.
4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.
4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.
4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.
4.6. Authorship of the Paper
4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.
4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.
4.7. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest
4.7.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.
4.7.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.
4.8. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher
5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.
5.2. The publisher should support Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.
5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.
5.4. Publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.

Founder
Russian Research Institute of Fruit Crop Breeding (VNIISPK)

Author fees
Publication in Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture is free of charge for all the authors.
The journal doesn’t have any Arcticle 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
«Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture» 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 Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture, 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 Sovremennoe sadovodstvo – Contemporary horticulture 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)
Preprint – In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.
Postprint – The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author’s final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.

ISSN 2312-6701 (Online)

СОВРЕМЕННОЕ САДОВОДСТВО - CONTEMPORARY HORTICULTURE

ABOUT THE JOURNAL