《Doklady生物化學(xué)與生物物理學(xué)》是一本由俄語版《Doklady Akademii Nauk》生物化學(xué)與生物物理學(xué)部分發(fā)表的俄文文章英譯而成的期刊。該雜志的目標(biāo)是發(fā)表當(dāng)今在俄羅斯或與俄羅斯作者合作進(jìn)行的最重要的生物化學(xué)和生物物理學(xué)新研究。該雜志只接受俄羅斯科學(xué)院代理俄羅斯或外國成員提交或推薦的俄文文章。該雜志不接受英文的直接投稿。同行評(píng)審《Doklady生物化學(xué)與生物物理學(xué)》是一本同行評(píng)議期刊。我們使用開放/單盲/雙盲同行評(píng)審格式。我們的審稿人團(tuán)隊(duì)包括超過160名審稿人，包括內(nèi)部審稿人和外部審稿人(70%)。2017年從提交到首次評(píng)審的平均周期為3天，從首次評(píng)審到驗(yàn)收的平均周期為30天。2017年投稿退稿率為5%。接受發(fā)表文章的最終決定由編輯委員會(huì)作出。被邀請的審稿人因利益沖突，認(rèn)為不符合審稿條件或者不能審稿的，應(yīng)當(dāng)及時(shí)通知審稿人，并予以拒絕。審稿人應(yīng)以一種合理合理的方式清晰地闡述自己的觀點(diǎn)，這樣作者才能利用審稿人的觀點(diǎn)來完善稿件。必須避免對作者的個(gè)人批評(píng)。評(píng)論者應(yīng)該顯示發(fā)表的一篇評(píng)論(我)任何相關(guān)的工作沒有被引用的作者,(2)任何已報(bào)道在以前的出版物和沒有適當(dāng)?shù)膮⒖蓟蛞?(2)任何實(shí)質(zhì)性相似或重疊與其他手稿(發(fā)表或未發(fā)表)的個(gè)人知識(shí)。

Doklady Biochemistry and Biophysics is a journal consisting of English translations of articles published in Russian in biochemistry and biophysics sections of the Russian-language journal Doklady Akademii Nauk. The journal's goal is to publish the most significant new research in biochemistry and biophysics carried out in Russia today or in collaboration with Russian authors. The journal accepts only articles in the Russian language that are submitted or recommended by acting Russian or foreign members of the Russian Academy of Sciences. The journal does not accept direct submissions in English.PEER REVIEWDoklady Biochemistry and Biophysics is a peer reviewed journal. We use open/single blind/double blind peer review formats. Our team of reviewers includes over 160 reviewers, both internal and external (70%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 3 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 5%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editorial Board.Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.