From Bioblast
Revision as of 13:33, 16 April 2020 by Gnaiger Erich (talk | contribs) (Gnaiger Erich moved page BEC reviewers information to BEC reviewers)
- Bioenergetics Communications is the Open Science journal on bioenergetics and mitochondrial physiology with Living Communications - ISSN 2791-4690
BEC reviewers
- Bioenergetics Communications is the Oroboros Ecosystem journal for publishing and sharing scientific and technical advances in bioenergetics, mitochondrial physiology, and particularly high-resolution respirometry
:::::::: Β»Bioenerg CommunΒ«
Reviewer's assessment
- Manuscript #
- Submission Date
- Current Stage
- Title
- Category
- Contributing Authors
- Associate Editor
Recommendation
BEC spedific
- Is the topic suitable for the journal's aims and scope?
- Yes
- No
Scientific content
- Original
- Confirmatory
- Too preliminary
- Trivial
Experimental approach
- Innovative
- Advanced
- Standard
- Inadequate
Presentation of the data
- Adequate
- Not appropriate
Conclusions
- Justified
- Too speculative
- Unjustified
References
- Adequate
- Incomplete
- Too many
Figures and tables
- Well prepared
- Poor
- Too many
Abstract
- Clear and concise
- Clumsy
- Too long
Language
- Acceptable
- In need of minor corrections
- In need of language editing
Length of the manuscript
- Adequate
- Too short
- Too long
General rating
- Accept
- Minor revision
- Major revision
- Reject
Overall evaluation
- Excellent
- Good
- Average
- Poor
Ethics questions
- For animal studies and human studies, has ethical approval been obtained and so stated in the paper? For human studies has obtaining of written, informed subject consent been noted in the paper?
- Yes
- No
- N/A
Review comments
- Confidential comments to the editor
- Please elaborate on your evaluation of the strengths and weaknesses of the manuscript and how the research will contribute to the field.
- Strengths:
- Weaknesses:
- Open review
- Include in your critique your judgment of the significance of the findings, the clarity of the rationale and hypotheses, accuracy of the experimental design, methods and statistical analysis, quality of data presentation, length and quality of Discussion, and inclusion of appropriate references.
- Please make clear any specific comments for revision.