Guide for Reviewers

Thank you for agreeing to review for JXB.  This guide should help you to complete your reviewer report, but if you have any further questions please don’t hesitate to contact the JXB office by e-mail ([email protected]).

Confidentiality

The manuscript you are reviewing is sent to you in confidence and should not be shared with anyone without the editor’s permission. However, we want to give early-career researchers experience of peer review, so we encourage senior scientists to co-review with junior colleagues. If you wish to co-review, please contact the editorial office.

Should for any reason you wish to communicate with the authors directly, please first discuss your intentions with the editor.  JXB’s policy is to conduct ‘single-blind’ peer review: the anonymity of the referees is preserved in all cases unless otherwise directed. 

Please be aware that your report (as well as the reports of the other reviewers) is also confidential and should not be shared.  Information obtained during peer review should not be used to unfairly advantage or disadvantage anyone.  Please read the short JXB Security and Confidentiality Promise in appendix section 1.

Conflict of interest (COI)

Please see the COI guide (also available in appendix section 2) to see what qualifies as a COI when reviewing for JXB.  If you are unsure whether a COI exists, please explain the circumstances to us, and we will advise.

Deadline for report submission

JXB reviewers are given 14 days to return their report.  A reminder will be sent if you haven’t yet submitted your review 2 days before the deadline.  If you feel you may not be able to complete your report or that you will need extra time to complete it, please contact the JXB office.  Timeliness is important to authors, so please try to submit your report by the deadline.

The types of manuscript we publish

Your role as a reviewer

Your role during peer-review is to evaluate the science in the manuscript and advise the handling editor, who will use your comments to inform their decision.  You should also take into consideration the aims and scope of JXB (appendix section 3) and assess whether the manuscript matches it.  Peer review is important in the scientific process, and even if a paper is rejected, constructive feedback can be useful to the author to guide future work.  Please try to be aware of any unintentional prejudices (i.e. unconscious biases) you may have and consider these while reviewing.

The handling editor or JXB staff will inform reviewers if they are being asked to review only a portion or certain aspect of the manuscript.  If you have only reviewed a portion or aspect of the manuscript for any reason, please make this clear in your report.

Your reviewer report

• Allocate sufficient time to read and assess the manuscript.
• When submitting your reviewer report, please answer all questions on the ‘Referee Form’ to assist the handling editor.  If necessary, explain any issues more fully in the ‘Confidential Comments for the Editor’ or ‘Comments for the Author’ sections.
• ‘Confidential Comments for the Editor’: In this section, please include your recommendation on suitability for publication. JXB rejects 80% of submitted manuscripts – only recommend a manuscript for publication if you believe it is of value to the scientific community and if you would be willing to cite it yourself if appropriate.  In some circumstances you may want to include other confidential information that you think the handling editor should be made aware of, but include any information useful to the authors in the ‘Comments for the Author’ section.  Please note that the handling editor may use your comments from the ‘Confidential Comments for the Editor’ section in their decision letter, but the comments will remain anonymous and will not be presented as reviewer comments.
• ‘Comments for the Author’: This should include your reviewer report, but please do not include your recommendation on suitability for publication in this section. Please be polite and provide constructive feedback.  Please say what you liked about the manuscript and what you think can be improved.  The ideal format for providing feedback is as a series of numbered comments, preferably with reference to line numbers within the manuscript.  Please also distinguish between ‘major’ and ‘minor’ comments.  This format enables the authors to easily provide responses to your comments.  Some reviewers find it useful to briefly outline the major themes/outcomes of the manuscript, to convey a full understanding to the authors.
• JXB expects reviewer reports to fully address the questions in the “Referee Form’, as well as the following:

  • Is there a reasonable justification of the work conducted?

  • Are the methods sufficiently described to allow reproduction of the data?

  • Are there sufficient replicates/controls for all experiments?

  • Have any datasets (e.g. transcriptomes) been deposited into open online databases?

  • Is the standard of English sufficient to understand the science in the manuscript?

  • Does the manuscript match the scope of JXB (appendix section 3)?

• For certain types of articles, you may be sent additional criteria for assessing manuscripts.
• Please also review any supplementary material that has been submitted.  Some authors deposit supplementary data or raw data from experiments into online repositories (e.g. Dryad) – this is usually not publicly available, but you will be given access when you accept the invitation to review the manuscript.
• Let the JXB office know immediately if you suspect that an unethical practice has occurred – this includes image & data manipulation, and plagiarism.

After you submit your reviewer report

• After you submit your comments, you will be offered a free personal online subscription to JXB for 6 months.
• Your report will be sent to the handling editor, who will use it along with the reports of the other reviewers to make their decision on the manuscript.
• All reviewer reports are read by JXB staff.  If we suspect that a reviewer has acted through prejudice (i.e. conscious bias), or has failed to declare a COI, we will investigate immediately.
• In some circumstances, JXB staff may perform a light edit of the ‘Comments for the Author’ before sending to the authors.  We may remove offensive comments, or statements of an overly personal nature. We also remove decision recommendations, so please ensure these are submitted only in the ‘Confidential Comments for the Editor’.
• You will be notified when the handling editor has made their decision. You will be able to see the decision conferred, as-well-as the anonymous reports of the other reviewers.
• If the handling editor confers a decision of ‘Reject/Resubmit’ or ‘Revisions’, you may be invited to review a new version of the manuscript, and we very much hope you will accept this since it enables a more efficient reviewing procedure.

Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service

In recognition of the work that reviewers do for the journal, JXB has partnered with the Web of Science Reviewer Recognition Service. Reviewers with a Web of Science Researcher Profile are able to build a verified public profile of their activity as a reviewer. Automatic verification is integrated into BenchPress: reviewers simply tick the box when uploading their review to JXB’s submission site to update their reviewer history on their Web of Science Researcher Profile. The content of the review itself is not disclosed.

Please note that Web of Science Researcher Profiles replace Publons which has been migrated with Web of Science. Those reviewers who had a Publons profile will now find it in Web of Science.

Thank you again for reviewing for JXB

Further reading and guidance

COPE Ethical Guidelines for Peer Reviewers

Sense About Science – Peer Review: The Nuts & Bolts

To find out what data we hold about our reviewers, please see the JXB Privacy Notice detailed in appendix section 4.

Appendices

1. JXB Security and Confidentiality Promise

JXB security and confidentiality promise

Under UK data protection law, individuals have a right to request any information held by organisations that relates to them. However, there are provisions for certain information to remain confidential, provided certain standards are met. JXB would like to continue to ensure that the comments made by editors and referees are kept strictly confidential. To help us do this, we need you to follow the guidelines outlined below when editing or reviewing authors’ work.

Keeping information secure

Follow good practice to help preserve authors and colleagues’ privacy:

• Ensure confidential or sensitive information is protected by a secure password, which is not shared with others
• Ensure that you lock your screen when away from your desk and that paperwork is locked out of sight overnight
• Take extra care when working on the move or away from home, avoiding unsecured Wi-Fi networks, particularly in airports or other travel hubs, and ensuring that login details and passwords are not saved on computers that are not your own
• Refrain from discussing confidential or personal information about your work for JXB except with relevant JXB editors and staff.

Maintaining professional standards

• Ensure that your comments about an article are professional and emotionally detached at all times
• Avoid personal comments about authors, editors, referees and other colleagues
• Be aware that individuals can ask to see the comments you make about their work and that, whilst we normally keep comments and reviews confidential, we may be unable to do so if they breach professional standards.

Tell us if there is a security breach

If you or the institution you work for suffer a data security breach, report it immediately to the JXB Editorial Office. A data security breach could be one of the following events, although this list is not exhaustive:

• Loss of paper records outside your office or work environment
• Theft of paper records
• Hacked computer records
• Loss of portable data storage devices, such as a memory stick, portable hard drive, laptop, tablet or mobile phone which you use to store or access your JXB work.

2. Conflicts of Interest: A Guide for Reviewers

Before reviewing a paper, please carefully consider whether there could be a conflict of interest (also known as a competing interest) and declare any such conflicts to the editorial office before proceeding.

"Conflicts of interest exist when there is a divergence between an individual’s private interests (competing interests) and his or her responsibilities to scientific and publishing activities such that a reasonable observer might wonder if the individual’s behaviour or judgment was motivated by considerations of his or her competing interests."

World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

To help, we have compiled the following list of examples to use as a guide. It is by no means comprehensive, so please contact the editorial office if you feel there are reasons that may prevent you from being able to provide a fair assessment of the manuscript you have been asked to review.

Your personal relationships may create a conflict of interest if you:

• have published or collaborated with an author within the last two years
• have been a postdoctoral student of, or postdoctoral advisor to, an author within the last five years
• have been a PhD student of, or PhD supervisor to, an author within the last ten years
• are currently working at the same institution as an author or have worked in the same research group as an author in the last two years
• have a close friendship, business or professional partnership, family relationship, or if you are co-habiting with or married to an author.

Your professional circumstances or intellectual opinions may create a conflict of interest if:

• you are directly competing over publications or research funding with an author
• you hold very strong opinions on the work presented or research conducted by an author that may prevent you from providing a fair and balanced review.

Your financial interests or institutional affiliations may create a conflict if, for example:

• you receive funding from an organisation or body that stands to lose or gain financially through publication of a paper
• you own or have a stake in a company or product that stands to lose or gain financially through publication of a paper
• you are a member of an institution, organisation or society that stands to lose or gain through publication of a paper.

Please note an instance of conflict of interest may not always simply be a case of whether you can or cannot be objective about a piece of work. You may also wish to avoid being placed in the position of giving the impression to a reasonable observer that your relationship with an author may have affected your judgment.

3. The aims and scope of JXB

When reviewing the manuscript, you should consider whether it fits the scope of JXB:

The aim of Journal of Experimental Botany (JXB) is to publish papers that advance our understanding of plant biology. Original research should provide new information on fundamental processes or mechanisms including those underpinning the improvement of plants for the sustainable production of food, fuel and renewable materials. When deciding whether a paper is suitable, consideration will be given to the breadth of the work and its significance to the plant science community.

Areas of particular focus:

• Cell Biology - molecular and vesicular trafficking; cell-to-cell communication; cytoskeleton; cell division; differentiation and death.
• Crop molecular genetics - trait and gene characterization; molecular analysis; metabolic processes.
• Growth and Development - integration of internal and external cues determining development and architecture; reproductive biology.
• Metabolism - photosynthesis; carbon uptake and assimilation; resource allocation; nutrition.
• Plant–Environment interactions - global change; biotic and abiotic stress; symbioses; plant-rhizoflora interactions; mineral nutrition.

We are unable to consider papers that are essentially descriptive.

4. JXB Privacy Notice

Privacy notice for authors, editors and referees

About us

We are the Journal of Experimental Botany (JXB) of County College, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YN. We are a journal of the Society for Experimental Biology. We take our data protection responsibilities seriously and would like to inform you about what we intend to do with personal data that relates to you.

Where do we get the information that we hold about you?

The information we have about you was supplied either by you, your employer or colleagues, or by editors who have recommended you as an author, editor or referee. We may have obtained your name and contact details from publicly available sources, such as professional webpages, registers and ORCID. Some of the personal data we hold about you is generated during the manuscript submission and peer review processes; this information will have come from authors, editors and referees working on the publication.

What information do we hold about you?

We may hold your name, email address, contact and personal addresses, title, correspondence, a link to your digital ORCID professional profile, your areas of expertise, your availability information and a link to submission and refereeing history. We need to keep this information to communicate with you and to manage the peer review process of the scientific articles that we publish. In addition, we hold the information detailed below, according to your role in the publication process.

Editors

If you are an editor, we hold an indication of whether you are on our editorial review board. We also hold details of any reviews you have received and confidential comments and decisions you have made about the work of authors or referees. On our website we hold your photograph with a link to your ORCID profile and professional webpage.

Referees

If you are a referee, we hold reviews of authors’ work that you have submitted; the number of times we have asked you to be a referee; the average number of days you have taken to return a review; incidental details of your working relationship with authors, where a conflict of interest is raised; comments and decisions by editors relating to your reviews and ratings of the feedback you provide to our editors.

Authors

If you are an author, we hold reviews of your work by referees and editors, comments on your work by those third parties and details of sponsorship and funding included in the acknowledgments section of manuscripts (this is incidental not solicited).

What do we use your personal data for?

Whenever we use and store data it is to facilitate the general functioning of the journal and the editorial process, peer review, publication and dissemination of scientific research. We hold the data necessary to appointing and contacting editors, authors and referees, as well as to producing the licence to publish between JXB and authors.

Photographs of editors are published on our website to publicise our work and promote our organisation by demonstrating the quality of our editorial board, which is in our legitimate business interests and only with the consent of the individuals concerned.

Who we work with

We share your data with Oxford University Press, copy editors, production editors, referees and authors as a necessary part of the peer review and publication process. We share details of any business financial transactions you have made with us with our accountant, JS2, in order to comply with legal obligations relating to tax reporting. We will also share data where we are under a legal obligation to do so. 

We use third parties to provide IT services (Lancaster University, Dropbox, Box, HighWire Press) and we have GDPR compliant wording in our contracts and terms with these companies.

When we share your data outside of Europe

When you submit your details to us we rely on your implicit agreement in supplying us with your personal data and in participating in our review process, particularly if the UK leaves the EU.

Due to the international collaborative nature of academic research, we often use authors, editors and referees who are located outside the EU/EEA. For this reason, your personal data may be transferred outside Europe. Where freelancer personal data is transferred potentially worldwide as part of the peer review process, we rely on your consent to these transfers. We are committed to keeping your personal data secure and as such require all contributors to our process to observe strict confidentiality and data security measures at all times regarding any personal data that we send them.

Additionally, some of the data processing services we use (Dropbox, Box and HighWire Press) are located in the US and this means that your personal data is transferred outside the EEA. Box and Dropbox are subscribers to Privacy Shield, the framework for data transfers between the EU and the US. We share the minimum data required to meet this need and it is done with your knowledge and consent. We have taken steps to include appropriate clauses in contracts with these companies to protect your data.

How long we keep your data for

Personal data related to licence and copyright agreements is kept by us indefinitely. Personal data that is part of the peer review process is deleted two years after publication of the article to which it relates. Details of financial transactions are kept for seven years to comply with tax legislation. 

Author, referee and editor contact details will be kept until we are advised that they are no longer available for work related to JXB.

Your data protection rights

You have the right to ask for a copy of the personal data we hold that relates to you. If you think that information we hold about you is incorrect or misleading you have the right to have the information corrected, provided you can demonstrate that it is incorrect. You can also request the erasure of personal data relating to you in certain circumstances, where we do not require it to meet a legal obligation. You can also request access to or restriction of processing, so that your records are maintained beyond our usual retention period. You have the right to object to processing on the grounds that it causes you damage or distress and the right to obtain a copy of your personal data in electronic format in certain circumstances.

You have the right to withdraw your consent to our using your personal data where we are relying on your consent for the processing.

If you are unhappy about the way we use your personal data or the way in which we respond to your request to exercise your data protection rights, you can contact us at The Journal of Experimental Botany (JXB), County College, Lancaster University, Lancaster, LA1 4YN, United Kingdom. You also have the right to lodge a complaint with a supervisory authority, the Information Commissioner at the Information Commissioner’s Office, Wycliffe House, Water Lane, Wilmslow, Cheshire, SK9 5AF.