We use cookies to enhance your experience on our website. By continuing to use our website, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. You can change your cookie settings at any time. Find out more Skip to Main Content

Journal Policies


Environmental Entomology is published bimonthly in February, April, June, August, October, and December. The journal publishes reports on the interaction of insects with the biological, chemical, and physical aspects of their environment and is divided into the following sections: population ecology; community and ecosystem ecology; insect-symbiont interactions; biological control - parasitoids and predators; biological control - microbials; biological control - weeds; plant-insect interactions; behavior; chemical ecology; sampling; pest management; physiological ecology; molecular ecology and evolution; and transgenic plants and insects. In addition to research papers, Environmental Entomology publishes Reviews, interpretive articles in a Forum section, and Letters to the Editor, but does not accept life-table studies that present only laboratory data with no data from the field.


The journals published by ESA primarily contain research articles, all of which are peer reviewed before being accepted for publication. Learn more about the manuscript review process. In addition to scientific research articles, the journals publish letters to the editor, invited review articles, interpretive or evaluative articles that appear in a Forum section, and book reviews (published in American Entomologist only). Manuscripts that describe entomological techniques and computer software programs generally are not considered for publication in the journals.

Forum and Review Submissions
Papers that are published in the these sections are authored by acknowledged leaders in the field. Articles review a research area and should include a stimulating, thought-provoking discussion that focuses on an important issue. Forum articles sometimes address controversial issues. Authors should provide an innovative approach to current thought, a critical analysis of available information, and identify needed future research directions. Forum  and Review articles may also be written by invitation of the journal editor-in-chief.

Letter to the Editor Submissions and Policy
Each journal will entertain submissions in the form of a Letter to the Editor in which the author or authors express their viewpoint on scientific issues. Appropriate content can include comments or criticisms in reference to a published paper, whether or not in an ESA journal, or comments and opinions unrelated to a specific published paper. A Letter will be limited to 2,000 words, 10 references, and one table or figure. The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) will judge whether a submitted Letter merits consideration for potential publication based on relevance, inherent interest, and coherence of the submission, but with a view to allowing a range of opinions to be expressed. If the EIC considers the submission to be suitable in principle, he/she will send it to at least one anonymous reviewer for comments, and will edit it for style and appropriate language before returning it to the corresponding author for revisions.

In the case of a Letter which criticizes a published paper, the latter can be from an ESA journal or any peer-reviewed journal, including papers published in final form online before appearing in the hardcopy issue. The paper being addressed in the Letter must be cited in full, including complete volume and page information, or DOI information if in electronic form. The EIC will require resubmission of a Letter to the Editor that is dated or received before the official publication date of the paper in question. A submitted Letter criticizing an unpublished paper can be considered only if written permission has been received from the corresponding author of that paper, regardless of how the authors of the Letter came into possession of the unpublished material. The EIC will arrange with at least one anonymous reviewer to return comments within one to three weeks, depending on reviewer availability. The Letter writer(s) shall have at least one week to make revisions and resubmit.

After revisions by the authors, if necessary, and acceptance by the EIC, the corresponding author of the paper being criticized will be contacted by the EIC, provided with the Letter which has been accepted (and which is therefore no longer eligible for author-initiated changes beyond minor typographical errors in proof stage), and given at least two weeks to submit a Response. The same format and word limitations apply to the Response as described above for the Letter to the Editor. The EIC will arrange for at least one anonymous peer review of the Response within one week, and edit the Response for style and appropriate language. The authors will be given at least one week to make revisions and to resubmit. If the authors of the Response meet these timelines, they will be guaranteed to have their Response published in tandem with the original Letter to the Editor in the earliest possible issue as dictated by the journal production schedule. If the authors of the Response fail to meet these timelines, they may still submit a Response, but forfeit the right to have it published in the same issue as the Letter to the Editor. The authors of the Letter to the Editor will not be allowed to see the Response before publication, unless the authors of the Response request in writing to the EIC that it be shared. For both the Letter to the Editor and the Response, the EIC will edit the submissions to remove discourteous language or personal attacks of any kind. Ad hominem arguments are not allowed in either the Letter or the Response, and are grounds for rejection. Page charges shall be waived for Letters to the Editor and Response letters.

Corresponding author
Only one author can be designated as the corresponding author. Authors are welcome to include a footnote designating that multiple authors contributed equally to the work. Authors are encouraged to include a statement of author contribution and are welcome to use the CRediT taxonomy of roles.


Review Process
Before any manuscript is accepted for publication, it is evaluated by two reviewers qualified to assess the significance and quality of the research. Reviewers comment on the content of the manuscript, the methodology of the experiment, and the results. Reviewers recommend revisions to the manuscript and suggest whether a manuscript should be accepted or rejected for publication. Reviewers are selected by the editors. The editor may seek additional reviews of a manuscript or have a resubmitted one reviewed again. However, the decision to accept or reject a manuscript for publication is the responsibility of the editor, not the reviewer.

In addition, the editor may withdraw or recommend transfer of a manuscript to another ESA publication. A manuscript is withdrawn by the editor when the data are sound, but there is a major flaw(s) in the manuscript that can be fixed. If a manuscript has been withdrawn rather than rejected, it can be resubmitted at a later date, but the author must take into account the comments of the editor and reviewers before doing so. When it is resubmitted, it will be treated as a new submission and need additional peer review. In the cover letter, authors must explain that a previous version of the paper was withdrawn and note the previous manuscript number. A withdrawal cannot be appealed by the authors.

A manuscript is rejected by the subject editor when there is a fundamental flaw in the data that cannot be fixed, or for other reasons. A manuscript describing that data set cannot be submitted again to an ESA journal. A rejection can be appealed to the editorial board.

The review process also is handled online using the ScholarOne system.

Appeal of a Rejection
An author can appeal an editor's decision to reject a manuscript for publication through the publication's Editorial Board. To appeal a rejection, the author must send the following items to the ESA Director of Publications:

  • A letter that explains why the author has chosen to appeal the rejection. The letter should address specific reasons provided by the editor for the rejection.
  • The editor’s letter of rejection.
  • The reviewers’ comments.
  • The rejected, unrevised manuscript. If a rejected manuscript has been revised before an appeal, the rejection cannot be appealed.
  • Any additional correspondence.

These items may be sent as e-mail attachments to pubs@entsoc.org. If sending hard copy, send 6 copies of each item by mail to the Entomological Society of America, Director of Publications, 3 Park Place, Suite 307, Annapolis, MD 21401-3722, USA.

The Director of Publications forwards these materials to the Editorial Board members for review. The Editorial Board Chair gathers comments on the materials from other board members and rules on the appeal. In writing, the Chair then informs the author, editor, other board members, and the Director of Publications of the Editorial Board's decision. The decision of the Editorial Board is final. The appeals process takes approximately 1 month from when the Editorial Board receives the appeal materials.


Potential conflicts of interest include any relationships of a financial or personal nature between an author or coauthor and individuals or organizations within three years of submission which, in theory, could affect or bias an author’s scientific judgment, or limit an author’s freedom to publish, analyze, discuss, or interpret relevant data. Sources of financial support originating outside the coauthors’ home institution(s) for any aspect of a study must be indicated in the Acknowledgments section of the paper. Financial support includes not only funding, but gratis provision of materials, services, or equipment. Any additional potential conflicts of interest, not covered in the acknowledgments of financial support, must be revealed to the editor at submission, and disclosed in a statement immediately following the Acknowledgments. If an author or coauthor has entered into an agreement with any entity outside that authors’ home institution, including the home institution of another coauthor, giving that entity veto power over publication of the study or over presentation, analysis, discussion, or interpretation of any results of the study, whether or not such veto power was exercised, this information must be disclosed in a statement immediately following the Acknowledgments. As a suggestion, such a statement could take the following form: “This manuscript is published with the concurrence of [Institution / Company / Individual / etc. X].“ If no potential conflicts of interest exist, this must be stated in the cover letter to the editor at submission.


If you will be publishing your paper under an Open Access licence but it contains material for which you do not have Open Access re-use permissions, please state this clearly by supplying the following credit line alongside the material:

Title of content

Author, Original publication, year of original publication, by permission of [rights holder]

This image/content is not covered by the terms of the Creative Commons licence of this publication. For permission to reuse, please contact the rights holder.

This Feature Is Available To Subscribers Only

Sign In or Create an Account

This PDF is available to Subscribers Only

View Article Abstract & Purchase Options

For full access to this pdf, sign in to an existing account, or purchase an annual subscription.

Subscribe Now