scholarly journals Analytical Chemistry and Innovative Applications

Analytica ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 37-37
Author(s):  
Marcello Locatelli
Keyword(s):  
Applied Sciences ◽  
Analytical Chemistry ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Selection Of

In this issue of the Journal “Analytica”, there is a selection of accepted articles, after peer-review process, in which the great importance that Analytical Chemistry plays in the field of Applied Sciences and the vastness of the implications in the various sectors are highlighted [...]

Glycogen: an overview of possible regulatory roles of the proteins associated with the granuleThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 14th International Biochemistry of Exercise Conference – Muscles as Molecular and Metabolic Machines, and has undergone the Journal’s usual peer review process.

2009 ◽  
Vol 34 (3) ◽  
pp. 488-492 ◽  
Author(s):  
Terry E. Graham
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Muscle Glycogen ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Glycogen Granule ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Dynamic Regulation ◽  
Considerable Evidence ◽  
The Past ◽  
Selection Of

While scientists have routinely measured muscle glycogen in many metabolic situations for over 4 decades, there is surprisingly little known regarding its regulation. In the past decade, considerable evidence has illustrated that the carbohydrate stores in muscle are not homogeneous, and it is very likely that metabolic pools exist or that each granule has independent regulation. The fundamental aspects appear to be associated with a complex set of proteins that associate with both the granule and each other in a dynamic fashion. Some of the proteins are enzymes and others play scaffolding roles. A number of the proteins can translocate, depending on the metabolic stimulus. These various processes appear to be the mechanisms that give the glycogen granule precise yet dynamic regulation. This may also allow the stores to serve as an important metabolic regulator of other metabolic events.

scholarly journals No evidence of any systematic bias against manuscripts by women in the peer review process of 145 scholarly journals

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Flaminio Squazzoni ◽  
Giangiacomo Bravo ◽  
Pierpaolo Dondio ◽  
Mike Farjam ◽  
Ana Marusic ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Gender Diversity ◽  
Systematic Bias ◽  
Scholarly Journals ◽  
Female Authors ◽  
Social Nature ◽  
Editorial Decisions ◽  
Selection Of

This article examines gender bias in peer review with complete data on 145 journals in various fields of research, including about 1.7 million authors and 740,000 referees. We reconstructed three possible sources of bias, i.e., the editorial selection of referees, referee recommendations, and editorial decisions, and examined all their possible relationships. In line with previous research, we found that editors were sensitive to gender homophily in that they tended to match authors and referee by gender systematically. Results showed that in general manuscripts written by women as solo authors or co-authored by women are treated even more favorably by referees and editors. This is especially so in biomedicine and health journals, whereas women were treated relatively less favorably in social science & humanities journals, i.e., the field in which the ratio of female authors was the highest in our sample. Although with some caveat, our findings suggest that peer review and editorial processes in scholarly journals do not penalize manuscripts by women. However, considering the complex social nature of gender prejudices, journals should increase gender diversity among reviewers and editors as a means of correcting signals potentially biasing the perceptions of authors and referees.

IMPROVING THE PEER REVIEW PROCESS IN DEVELOPING COUNTRIES

2021 ◽  
pp. 82-83
Author(s):  
Oluwole Gbolagunte Ajao ◽  
Adekola Alao
Keyword(s):  
Developing Countries ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Research Work ◽  
Developing Nations ◽  
Peer Review System ◽  
Review System ◽  
Administrative Positions ◽  
Selection Of

SUMMARY: The peer review process has been regarded as an essential part of accepting or rejecting a paper for publication since 1752 when the process was started by The Royal Society of London in the publication entitled “Philosophical Transactions”. In developing countries, one of the primary reasons for submitting pieces for publication is to support promotion in universities. In fact, the argument can be made that the only reason for publishing in developing countries is for faculty promotion. Despite the peer review process being standard practice for scientic journals, many of the research publications on COVID-19 were not subjected to the peer review system. In fact, numerous publications were pre-prints and papers shared by researchers online which were not peer reviewed, yet they were accepted and published by scientic journals in developing nations. When authors start to lose condence in the peer review process of a journal, they are not likely to submit their research work to such journals and this can lead to a diminished impact and reputation of such journals. Additionally, the selection of the assessors by the Editor-in -Chief is usually from the academic space of the editor and from the colleagues of the editor that usually share the editor's view. Contrary to what some editors in the developing countries believe, medical and academic administrative positions do not necessarily result in expertise in the peer review process. An editor can easily identify a poor assessment of an article, from the vitriolic feed-back of the author to the editor about an assessor when a paper is not recommended for publication. This paper provides evidence of and outlines the possible reasons that the peer review process is substandard in developing countries.

In vitro chromatin self-association and its relevance to genome architectureThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 27th International West Coast Chromatin and Chromosome Conference, and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.

2006 ◽  
Vol 84 (4) ◽  
pp. 411-417 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xu Lu ◽  
Joshua M. Klonoski ◽  
Michael G. Resch ◽  
Jeffrey C. Hansen
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
West Coast ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Eukaryotic Nucleus ◽  
Self Association ◽  
Selection Of

Chromatin in a eukaryotic nucleus is condensed through 3 hierarchies: primary, secondary, and tertiary chromatin structures. In vitro, when induced with cations, chromatin can self-associate and form large oligomers. This self-association process has been proposed to mimic processes involved in the assembly and maintenance of tertiary chromatin structures in vivo. In this article, we review 30 years of studies of chromatin self-association, with an emphasis on the evidence suggesting that this in vitro process is physiologically relevant.

Cryo electron microscopy structures of Hsp100 proteins: crowbars in or out?This paper is one of a selection of papers published in this special issue entitled 8th International Conference on AAA Proteins and has undergone the Journal's usual peer review process.

2010 ◽  
Vol 88 (1) ◽  
pp. 89-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Petra Wendler ◽  
Helen R Saibil
Keyword(s):  
Electron Microscopy ◽  
Peer Review ◽  
Atomic Structure ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Experimental Information ◽  
Related Protein ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Cryo Electron Microscopy ◽  
Selection Of

Independent cryo electron microscopy (cryo-EM) studies of the closely related protein disaggregases ClpB and Hsp104 have resulted in two different models of subunit arrangement in the active hexamer. We compare the EM maps and resulting atomic structure fits, discuss their differences, and relate them to published experimental information in an attempt to discriminate between models. In addition, we present some general assessment criteria for low-resolution cryo-EM maps to offer non-structural biologists tools to evaluate these structures.

Sampling Research on Advanced Computational Intelligence in Canada

2000 ◽  
Vol 4 (3) ◽  
pp. 187-187
Author(s):  
Max Meng ◽  
◽  
Witold Pedrycz
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Computational Intelligence ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Great Success ◽  
Computer Engineering ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
Research Results ◽  
Conference Centre ◽  
Selection Of

The 1999 IEEE Canadian Conference on Electrical and computer Engineering (CCECE'99) was held from May 9 to 12, 1999, at the Shaw Conference Centre in Edmonton. The conference was a great success with over 380 papers presented and more than 400 peoples from 38 different countries presenting their recent research results. The area of Computational Intelligence was one of the vivid pursuits presented at the conference. Subsequently, we have been invited by the Editors-in-Chief of the Journal of Advanced Computational Intelligence to prepare a Special Issue of the Journal CCECE'99 conference. After a careful and strict peer review process, we have chosen six papers to be included in this special issue. They are selected from more than 20 papers submitted to this special issue, which are extended versions of the papers presented at the CCECE'99 conference in the areas of advanced computational intelligence. The papers fully reflect the breadth and diversity of conceptual and algorithmic facets of Computational Intelligence along with a spectrum of applications. We thank the authors and reviewers for doing an excellent job. We are grateful to Kaoru Hirota and Toshio Fukuda for making this selection of papers a part of the journal. We do hope the readers will enjoy this issue.

A moment’s pause: putative nucleosome-based influences on MeCP2 regulationThis paper is one of a selection of papers published in this Special Issue, entitled 30th Annual International Asilomar Chromatin and Chromosomes Conference, and has undergone the Journal’s usual peer review process.

2009 ◽  
Vol 87 (5) ◽  
pp. 791-798 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anita A. Thambirajah ◽  
Juan Ausió
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Critical Points ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Special Issue ◽  
The Past ◽  
Chromatin Template ◽  
The Brain ◽  
Complex Activities ◽  
Selection Of

There has been a hotbed of activity surrounding MeCP2 research in the past number of years. Despite better characterizing the functions and nature of this protein, it has become abundantly clear that MeCP2 is involved in far more complex activities than perhaps initially anticipated. Recent publications have shown that MeCP2 is dynamically post-translationally modified, and it is possible that these marks permit MeCP2 to inhabit very diverse chromatin environments. It is also of interest to consider how nucleosome composition differs in these varying chromatin regions, and how the chromatin template itself contributes to diversifying the regulatory roles of MeCP2. These will be critical points to examine when seeking to understand how MeCP2 behaviour differentiates in tissues other than the brain. By understanding the chromatin and (or) tissue context in which MeCP2 interacts, it may be possible to discern the specific etiology of diseases linked to MeCP2 dysfunction.

Improving the peer-review process for grant applications: Reliability, validity, bias, and generalizability.

2008 ◽  
Vol 63 (3) ◽  
pp. 160-168 ◽  
Author(s):  
Herbert W. Marsh ◽  
Upali W. Jayasinghe ◽  
Nigel W. Bond
Keyword(s):  
Peer Review ◽  
Review Process ◽  
Peer Review Process ◽  
Grant Applications
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document