EDITOR'S LETTER
Dearest,
Horticultura Brasileira 29 (2) reaches you. Following the editorial line chosen for the 2011 covers, which are dedicated to high added value products, we talk on this issue about a vegetable producing sector that does not stop growing: organic production.
Our own workload is also escalating. We are receiving an increasing number of submissions. However, about 90% (90%!) of these submissions return to authors for adjustments before even entering the peer-review process. It is a pity since, in general, this step takes four to six weeks. The main reasons for returning the manuscripts are, in order:
1.Various inadequacies to the Guidelines for Preparation and Submission of Papers (excess of tables and figures; references, citations in the text and authors name and/or address not according to the Guidelines, etc.);
2. No written statement of the relevance of the work (its importance and distinctiveness in relation to existing papers) in the accompanying letter or message;
3. No indication of two people from institutions others than those where authors work, who can act as peer reviewers;
4. Uninformative abstract, without providing a rational to the work (rational and justification are different), experimental design and numerical results;
5. Inappropriate statistical model.
We ask authors to carefully observe the Guidelines for Preparation and Submission of Papers. But, before submitting your paper to Horticultura Brasileira, ask some colleagues to critically read it. In general, this habit shortens the peer-review process, since most of the observations that would have been made later by peer reviewers and editors, are already identified by the fellow next door.
See you in the next volume,
Paulo Melo, editor in chief
Publication Dates
-
Publication in this collection
19 July 2011 -
Date of issue
June 2011
