Information For Authors

The European Journal of Taxonomy is funded and published by a consortium of (European) natural history institutions. Consequently, authors do not have to pay any fees to have their paper(s) published in the journal. Moreover, there are no limits as regards page number or colour illustrations. This means that also large taxonomic monographs can be published as fully open access at no cost to the author.
Authors are requested to carefully read the Instructions to authors prior to submission. Manuscripts are submitted through the Editorial Manager system In this system, the corresponding author can check the status of his/her submission(s) at all times.

EJT is a peer-reviewed journal. Each new submission is initially checked with regard to scope and technical standard. EJT-papers must be original and adhere to a high scientific (content) and technical (language, artwork,..) standard. Manuscripts that are clearly substandard in either of these categories will not be sent out for review.
If the first technical check is satisfactory, a member of the editorial board is assigned as coordinating editor for the submission, and the manuscript is sent to at least two external referees. Authors have 4 weeks to revise their manuscript, following the comments from the referees and the coordinating editor.
The editor in chief receives a recommendation from the coordinating editor and examines the revised version before taking the final decision. When a submission is accepted, a desk editor is invited to initiate the production process. Each paper is published as an individual issue, and is available when the corresponding author has approved the edited version (after proofreading).

Subjects covered by EJT
The journal publishes contributions in descriptive taxonomy under 4 sections: zoology, entomology, botany and palaeontology. For more information about the coverage of each section and our compliance with the relevant nomenclatural codes, click here.

Categories of papers
EJT publishes three categories of papers:
- taxonomic contributions: contributions to the field of descriptive taxonomy, including (re-) descriptions of taxa, (sub-) continental or global checklists, taxonomic revisions, extensive treatises on comparative morphology, etc. Manuscripts describing a single species will need to demonstrate the general relevance of their publication.
- monographs: papers as above, exceeding 50 printed pages.
- opinion papers: papers in which authors offer information and interpretations of issues related to systematic biology and science policy.

Material policy
The scope of EJT is global; therefore, authorship and geographical region of study do not need to be European. Authors are, however, encouraged to involve European Natural History collections by consulting material or by depositing specimens (e.g., types and figured material) related to the published paper in the collection of a European Natural History Institute.

When new material has been collected for the purposes of the study, the authors must ensure that all necessary permits have been obtained prior to collecting. The authors are required to deposit all type materials in a public natural history collection.

Code of conduct
The integrity of the content published is an essential point and should be ensured during the review and the edition processes and when publishing papers. To that purpose, all the actors of an EJT publication, authors, reviewers, members of the editorial team and of EJT consortium, are expected to fully adhere to our policy regarding publication ethics and malpractice, and respect our Ethics and Malpractice Statement.

Additionally, the editorial team fully adheres to the code of conduct and the best practice guidelines of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE). To ensure the integrity of the content published in European Journal of Taxonomy, editors are strongly encouraged to use COPE’s flowcharts whenever they suspect an ethical issue.
All members of the EJT editorial team, as well as reviewers and authors, are encouraged to express their feedback and suggestions to improve communication during the review process and the treatment of ethical issues.