Preview

Agricultural Machinery and Technologies

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

The «Agricultural machinery and technologies» journal promote the analysis of a development trend of domestic and foreign agricultural machinery, opens the prospect of planning of technique for agricultural production in Russia.

From the first issue of the journal a wide audience is more and more actively involved in discussion and the solution of urgent problems of domestic and world agricultural industry.

The original articles, results of basic researches directed to studying of machines and an equipment for mechanization of production processes in crop industry are published in the journal.

The scientific concept of the edition assumes the publication of modern achievements in the field of mechanization of agricultural industry, results of scientific research.

Results of researches and development of machine technologies, engineering procedures, complexes of technical means and an equipment for their implementation are covered in the journal.

The results of basic scientific research covered in the journal promote ensuring scientific and technical progress in mechanization, automation, computerization of engineering procedures of crop production for increase in intensity and stability of production of competitive and ecologically safe agricultural products.

Also articles about comparative analysis of operation of the domestic and foreign machinery in respect to modern technologies and working conditions on fields of various regions of the country are useful to the reader. This information is useful for agricultural producers matching economically reasonable machines and the equipment for various technological operations during agricultural production.

Both the domestic and foreign scientists working in the field of agricultural industry mechanization are invited to the publication in the journal.

 

Section Policies

MOBILE ENERGY UNITS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MACHINERY FOR ANIMAL INDUSTRY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING PERSPECTIVE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MACHINERY AND TECHNOLOGIES FOR GARDENING
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
GRAIN HARVESTING MACHINERY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
ECOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
MACHINERY FOR PLANT GROWING
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
INNOVATIVE TECHNOLOGIES AND EQUIPMENT
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
DIGITAL TECHNOLOGIES. ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
AUTOMATION AND ROBOTIZATION OF PROCESSES
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
POST-HARVEST PROCESSING OF GRAIN AND SEEDS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
EQUIPMENT FOR TILLAGE AND SOWING
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
BIOMACHINE SYSTEMS
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
SCIENTIFIC AND TECHNICAL POLICY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
POST-HARVEST PROCESSING OF SEEDS FOR GRAIN
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
THE RUSSIAN ACADEMY OF SCIENCES IS 300 YEARS OLD
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
DEVELOPMENT OF SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY
Checked Open Submissions Checked Indexed Checked Peer Reviewed
 

Publication Frequency

4 issues per year

 

Open Access Policy

«Agricultural machinery and technologies»  is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read BOAI statement.

 

 

Archiving

  • Russian State Library (RSL)
  • Scientific electronic library elibrary.ru

 

Peer-Review

1) All scientific articles submitted to the journal are subject to mandatory double-blind peer review.. The journal performs reviews of all materials submitted to the editorial office, corresponding to its subject, for the purpose of their expert evaluation. All reviewers are recognized experts on their subject of peer-reviewed materials and have over the past 3 years publications on the subject of peer-reviewed articles. Reviews are stored in the publishing house and in the editorial office for 5 years.

2) Executive editor of the editorial Board determines the compliance of the article, the requirements for registration and sends the article for first consideration to the editor-in-chief or his Deputy. Next step is reviewing either by two members of the editorial Board or by two external reviewers - specialists, doctors of sciences who have the closest to the topic of the article scientific specialization.

3) The reviewers are notified that the manuscripts sent to them are the property of the authors and contain information that is not subject to disclosure. The review is confidential.

4) Terms of reviewing are determined in each case by the responsible editor, taking into account the creation of conditions for the most rapid publication of the article.

5) The Editorial Board sends copies of reviews or a reasoned refusal to the authors of submitted materials, and undertakes the responsibility to send copies of reviews to the Ministry of education and science of the Russian Federation upon receipt of an appropriate request to the editorial Board. A review indicating the author of the review can be provided at the request of expert advice in the Council for Accreditation (VAK).

6) The review highlights the following issues: correspondence of the content of the article to its title; evaluation of the relevance of the content of the article; assessment of the material flow and availability; what are the advantages and disadvantages of the article, what corrections and additions should be made by the author; expediency of publication of the article.

7) In the final part of the review on the basis of the analysis of the article clear conclusions should be given of the reviewer or the publication of the article in the form provided, or the need to revise (revision) of the article on the reviewer's comments.

8) If the review contains recommendations for correction and revision of the article, the editorial Board sends author the reviewer's comments to the with the proposal or take them into account when finalizing the article, or it is reasoned to refute them. The article revised by the author is repeatedly sent for review.

 9) If the article is not recommended for publication by the reviewer, the text of the negative conclusion is sent to the author. In case of the author's reasoned disagreement with the reviewer's opinion, the author of the article may apply to the editorial office with a request to send his article for review to another reviewer. In this case, the editorial Board of the journal either sends the article for re - (additional) reviewing, or provides the author with a motivated refusal to publish. The final decision on this issue is made by the editor-in-chief or his Deputy, who has the right to publish the article as a discussion.

10) The presence of a positive review is not a sufficient basis for the publication of the article. The final decision on the expediency and timing of publication after reviewing is made by the Chief editor or his Deputy, and if necessary - the editorial Board of the journal.

11) The Editorial Board does not keep articles not accepted for publication. All articles received by the editorial office are not returned to the author.

12) The Editorial Board strictly adheres to the norms and rules of international publication ethics.

 

Indexation

Articles in «Agricultural machinery and technologies» are indexed by several systems:

  • Russian Scientific Citation Index (RSCI) – a database, accumulating information on papers by Russian scientists, published in native and foreign titles. The RSCI project is under development since 2005 by “Electronic Scientific Library” foundation (elibrary.ru).
  • Google Scholar is a freely accessible web search engine that indexes the full text of scholarly literature across an array of publishing formats and disciplines. The Google Scholar index includes most peer-reviewed online journals of Europe and America's largest scholarly publishers, plus scholarly books and other non-peer reviewed journals.
  • Dimensions
  • SOCIONET
  • Agris
  • DOAJ
  • WorldCat
  • EDS
  • Base

 

Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal «Agricultural machinery and technologies» are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at www.publicationethics.org,  and requirements for peer-reviewed journals, elaborated by the "Elsevier" Publishing House (in accordance with international ethical rules of scientific publications)

1. Introduction

1.1. The publication in a peer reviewed learned journal, serves many purposes outside of simple communication. It is a building block in the development of a coherent and respected network of knowledge. For all these reasons and more it is important to lay down standards of expected ethical behaviour by all parties involved in the act of publishing: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the society for society-owned or sponsored journal: «Agricultural machinery and technologies»

1.2.Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in its publications.

1.3. Publisher takes its duties of guardianship over the scholarly record extremely seriously. Our journal programmes record «the minutes of science» and we recognise our responsibilities as the keeper of those «minutes» in all our policies not least the ethical guidelines that we have here adopted.

2. Duties of Editors

2.1.Publication decision – The Editor of a learned «Agricultural machinery and technologies» is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the journal should be published, often working on conjunction with the relevant society (for society-owned or sponsored journals). The validation of the work in question and its importance to researchers and readers must always underwrite such decisions. The Editor may be guided by the policies of the «Agricultural machinery and technologies» journal’s editorial board and constrained by such legal requirements as shall then be in force regarding libel, copyright infringement and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers (or society officers) in making this decision.

2.2.Fair play – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political philosophy of the authors.

2.3.Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of «Agricultural machinery and technologies» must not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.

2.4.Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in an editor’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

2.4.2. Editors should recuse themselves (i.e. should ask a co-editor, associate editor or other member of the editorial board instead to review and consider) from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or (possibly) institutions connected to the papers.

2.5.Vigilance over published record – An editor presented with convincing evidence that the substance or conclusions of a published paper are erroneous should coordinate with the publisher (and/or society) to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note, as may be relevant.

2.6.Involvement and cooperation in investigations – An editor should take reasonably responsive measures when ethical complaints have been presented concerning a submitted manuscript or published paper, in conjunction with the publisher (or society). Such measures will generally include contacting the author of the manuscript or paper and giving due consideration of the respective complaint or claims made, but may also include further communications to the relevant institutions and research bodies.

3.    Duties of Reviewers

3.1.Contribution to Editorial Decisions – Peer review assists the editor in making editorial decisions and through the editorial communications with the author may also assist the author in improving the paper. Peer review is an essential component of formal scholarly communication, and lies at the heart of the scientific method. Publisher shares the view of many that all scholars who wish to contribute to publications have an obligation to do a fair share of reviewing.

3.2.Promptness – Any selected referee who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should notify the editor of «Agricultural machinery and technologies» and excuse himself from the review process.

3.3.Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review must be treated as confidential documents. They must not be shown to or discussed with others except as authorised by the editor.

3.4.Standard and objectivity – Reviews should be conducted objectively. Personal criticism of the author is inappropriate. Referees should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers  should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that an observation, derivation, or argument had been previously reported should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also call to the editor’s attention any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published paper of which they have personal knowledge.

3.6.Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1.Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

3.6.2. Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

4. Duties of Authors

4.1.Reporting standards

4.1.1. Authors of reports of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Underlying data should be represented accurately in the paper. A paper should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behaviour and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Review and professional publication articles should also be accurate and objective, and editorial 'opinion’ works should be clearly identified as such.

4.2.Data Access and Retention – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a paper for editorial review, and should be prepared to provide public access to such data (consistent with the ALPSP-STM Statement on Data and Databases), if practicable, and should in any event be prepared to retain such data for a reasonable time after publication.

4.3.Originality and Plagiarism

4.3.1. The authors should ensure that they have written entirely original works, and if the authors have used the work and/or words of others, this has been appropriately cited or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from ‘passing off’ another’s paper as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another’s paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.Multiple, Redundant or Concurrent Publication

4.4.1. An author should not in general publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research in more than one journal of primary publication. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behaviour and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit for consideration in another journal a previously published paper.

4.4.3. Publication of some kinds of articles (eg, clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publication can be found at www.icmje.org.

4.5.Acknowledgement of Sources – Proper acknowledgment of the work of others must always be given. Authors should cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately, as in conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties, must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Information obtained in the course of confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, must not be used without the explicit written permission of the author of the work involved in these services.

4.6.Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of the reported study. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. Where there are others who have participated in certain substantive aspects of the research project, they should be acknowledged or listed as contributors.

4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate co-authors and no inappropriate co-authors are included on the paper, and that all co-authors have seen and approved the final version of the paper and have agreed to its submission for publication.

4.7.Hazards and Human or Animal Subjects

4.7.1. If the work involves chemicals, procedures or equipment that have any unusual hazards inherent in their use, the author must clearly identify these in the manuscript.

4.7.2. If the work involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with relevant laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. Authors should include a statement in the manuscript that informed consent was obtained for experimentation with human subjects. The privacy rights of human subjects must always be observed.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflict of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which should be disclosed include employment, consultancies, stock ownership, honoraria, paid expert testimony, patent applications/registrations, and grants or other funding. Potential conflicts of interest should be disclosed at the earliest possible stage.

4.9. Fundamental errors in published works – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published work, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of «Agricultural machinery and technologies» journal and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published work contains a significant error, it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.

5. Duties of the Publisher (and if relevant, Society)

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of «Agricultural machinery and technologies» in performing their ethical duties under these ethics guidelines. The publisher should ensure that the potential for advertising or reprint revenue has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support «Agricultural machinery and technologies» journal editors in the review of complaints raised concerning ethical issues and help communications with other journals and/or publishers where this is useful to editors.

5.3. Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors and retractions.

5.4. Publisher should provide specialised legal review and counsel if necessary.

The section is prepared according to the files (http://health.elsevier.ru/attachments/editor/file/ethical_code_final.pdf) of Elsevier publisher (https://www.elsevier.com/) and files (http://publicationethics.org/resources) from Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE - http://publicationethics.org/). 

 

 

Founder

  • Federal State Budgetary Scientific Institution «Federal Scientific Agroengineering Center VIM»

 

Author fees

Publication in «Agricultural machinery and technologies» is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Arcticle processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.

 

Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

Unpublished materials disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for personal advantage.

Reviewers should not consider manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers.

 

Plagiarism detection

«Agricultural machinery and technologies» use native russian-language plagiarism detection software Antiplagiat to screen the submissions. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.

 

Preprint and postprint Policy

Prior to acceptance and publication in «Agricultural machinery and technologies», authors may make their submissions available as preprints on personal or public websites.

As part of submission process, authors are required to confirm that the submission has not been previously published, nor has been submitted. After a manuscript has been published in «Agricultural machinery and technologies» we suggest that the link to the article on journal's website is used when the article is shared on personal or public websites.

Glossary (by SHERPA)

Preprint - In the context of Open Access, a preprint is a draft of an academic article or other publication before it has been submitted for peer-review or other quality assurance procedure as part of the publication process. Preprints cover initial and successive drafts of articles, working papers or draft conference papers.

Postprint - The final version of an academic article or other publication - after it has been peer-reviewed and revised into its final form by the author. As a general term this covers both the author's final version and the version as published, with formatting and copy-editing changes in place.