As part of the submission process, authors are required to check off their submission's compliance with all of the following items, and submissions may be returned to authors that do not adhere to these guidelines.
INSTRUCTIONS FOR AUTHORS
The Journal is founded with the purpose to publish, divulge and stimulate research activities related with the application of microscopy. It will be edited twice a year. The publications are oriented to:
The articles will be review by at least two (2) referees and the content of the articles should have not being submitted to any other publication.
Graphical Abstract Authors must provide images that clearly represent the work described in the paper. A key, summarising figure taken from the original paper can also be submitted as a graphical abstract. Graphical Abstracts should be submitted as a separate files
Specifications: maximum image size 400x600 pixels (hxw, recommended size 200 x 500 pixels) using Arial font with a size of 10-16 points; preferred file types TIFF, EPS, PDF or MS Office files. A Graphical abstract should be one image file that represent a main idea discuss in the paper
Language . All manuscripts submitted for publication can be written in English, Spanish or Portuguese. The abstract should be written in English, independently of the language selected for the manuscript.
Cover Letter A cover letter must be included with each manuscript submission. It should be concise and explain why the content of the paper is significant, placing the findings in the context of existing work and why it fits the scope of the journal. Confirm that neither the manuscript nor any parts of its content are currently under consideration or published in another journal. Three names of proposed reviewers should be provided, indicating full name, affiliation, email and reason why it is recommended.
Instructions for the manuscripts
You can find a template for the final submission in the following link:TEMPLATE FINAL SUBMISSION
For initial submission you could either use the template given above or the manuscripts could be typed 2 spaced using font Times New Roman 12, in one column using letter size (21,6x28 cm). The figures should be placed embedded in the text where they are mentioned.
However, once the manuscript if accepted, you will be requested to put it in the final format (download template): The manuscripts should be typed 1 ½ spaced using font Times New Roman 10, in two columns with a margin of 2 cm on all sides, text justified, using letter size (21,6x28 cm). Figures should be embedded in the text where they are mentioned . A template is provided in the following link provided above.
Divisions The text should be divided in the following order:
Research Manuscript Sections
The text should be presented in the following order (these instructions does not refer to review articles or educational articles):
Review articles: for review articles the title should be preceded by the heading in capital letters: REVIEW:
These articles should have a broader technical content than scientific articles, and should have a wide literature review. A free organization of the test is accepted, however keeping the format requirements described above.
Educational articles: also have a free organization of the text, keeping the format requirements described above.
It should not be forgotten that these articles are directed to students or new users, therefore, it might be useful (although not obligatory) to include practical examples for a clear description of specific topics.
A list of references should be numbered in square brackets according to the order of the citation in the text. Each reference should be typed in this order: author’s name, year of publication in brackets, full title of the reference , name of the journal in italics, volume and pages, as follows
 Faridani A., Ritman E.L., Smith K.T. (1992) “Local Tomography. SIAM” J Appl Math 52:459–484 If the reference is a book, the information of publisher should be typed in this order: author’s name, year of publication in brackets, full title, place of publication, editor and pages, as follows
 Cao G, (2004) Nanostructures & Nanomaterials. Synthesis, Properties & Applications, London, Imperial College Press, pp. 135–138
In the reference list “et al.” is unacceptable, the full authors should be listed. References to personal communications, unpublished data and manuscripts in preparation are unacceptable.
Figures and tables Figures should be good quality photographs or drawings. Symbols, letters, numbers and scale bars should be of sufficient size to be clear recognizable. Symbols and letters used in micrographs and tables must be explained in the legend.
Manuscript Submission Overview
The corresponding author, (submitting author) is responsible for the manuscript during the submission and peer-review process. The submitting author must ensure that all eligible co-authors have been included in the author list and that they have all read and approved the submitted version of the manuscript.
The corresponding author’s roles and responsibilities are as follows:
Research Involving Human Subjects
When reporting on research that involves human subjects, human material, human tissues, or human data, authors must declare that the investigations were carried out following the rules of the Declaration of Helsinki of 1975 (https://www.wma.net/what-we-do/medical-ethics/declaration-of-helsinki/), An approval from an ethics committee should have been obtained before undertaking the research. At a minimum, a statement including the project identification code, date of approval, and name of the ethics committee or institutional review board should be cited in the Methods Section of the article. Editors reserve the right to reject any submission that does not meet these requirements.
Example of an ethical statement: "All subjects gave their informed consent for inclusion before they participated in the study. The study was conducted in accordance with the Declaration of Helsinki, and the protocol was approved by the Ethics Committee of XXX (Project identification code)."
A written informed consent for publication must be obtained from participating patients who can be identified (including by the patients themselves).
Research Involving Cell Lines
Methods sections for submissions reporting on research with cell lines should state the origin of any cell lines. For established cell lines the provenance should be stated and references must also be given to either a published paper or to a commercial source. If previously unpublished de novo cell lines were used, including those gifted from another laboratory, details of institutional review board or ethics committee approval must be given, and confirmation of written informed consent must be provided if the line is of human origin.
Publication Ethics Statement
The editors of this journal enforce a rigorous peer-review process together with strict ethical policies and standards to ensure to add high quality scientific works.
Unfortunately, cases of plagiarism, data falsification, image manipulation, inappropriate authorship credit, and the like, could arise. The editors of Acta Microscopica take such publishing ethics issues very seriously and in such cases proceed with a zero tolerance policy.
Authors submitting the papers to publish in Acta Microscopica must know:
Plagiarism includes copying text, ideas, images, or data from another source, even from your own publications, without giving any credit to the original source.
Reuse of text that is copied from another source must be between quotes and the original source must be cited. If a study's design or the manuscript's structure or language has been inspired by previous works, these works must be explicitly cited.
If plagiarism is detected during the peer review process, the manuscript may be rejected. If plagiarism is detected after publication, we may publish a correction or retract the paper
Authors should ensure that where material is taken from other sources (including their own published writing) the source is clearly cited and that where appropriate permission is obtained.
Authors should not engage in excessive self-citation of their own work.
Authors should not copy references from other publications if they have not read the cited work.
Authors should not preferentially cite their own or their friends’, peers’, or institution’s publications.
Authors should not cite advertisements or advertorial material.
To facilitate proper peer-reviewing of your manuscript, it is essential that it is submitted in grammatically correct language (English, or Spanish or Portuguese.)
authorship of a manuscript, the following criteria should be observed:
Those who contributed to the work but do not qualify for authorship should be listed in the acknowledgements.
The corresponding author should act as a point of contact between the editor and the other authors and should keep co-authors informed and involve them in major decisions about the publication. We reserve the right to request confirmation that all authors meet the authorship conditions.
Editorial Procedures and Peer-Review
All submitted manuscripts received by the Editorial Office will be checked to determine whether they are properly prepared and whether they follow the ethical policies of the journal. Manuscripts that do not fit the journal's ethics policy or do not meet the standards of the journal will be rejected before peer-review. Manuscripts that are not properly prepared will be returned to the authors for revision and resubmission.
Once a manuscript passes the initial checks, it will be assigned to at least two independent experts for peer-review.
Potential reviewers suggested by the authors may be considered. Reviewers be from a different institution of any of the coauthors and should not currently work or collaborate with any of the co-authors of the submitted manuscript.
Editorial Decision and Revision
All the articles, reviews and communications go through the peer-review process and receive at least two reviews. The editor will communicate the decision to the author, which will be one of the following:
All reviewer comments should be responded to in a point-by-point fashion. Where the authors disagree with a reviewer, they must provide a clear response.