To make the submission process easier, we differentiate between initial and revised submissions. Initial submissions can be in any file format providing they adhere to the following requirements:
- Single column, double line spaced, with page- and line-numbers.
- The manuscript should contain: Abstract, Keywords, Introduction, Material and Methods, Results, Discussion, Declarations, References, Figures and Tables with captions.
- Make sure that no author information is present in the manuscript file, since we are using double-blind peer review. Upload a specific title-page with title, author information, abstract and key-words, which will not be included in the review process. If parts of Declarations contain author information, this part should be moved from the manuscript to the extra Title Page.
- Make sure all references are complete and correct. Also make sure all references cited in the text are listed in the reference list and vice versa!
- Check the PDF generated by S1M that equations and text and that all files are correct and complete before submission.
- Statement of where you intend to archive your data.
Research papers - Research papers report original research in all fields of ecology and should aim at a readership from a wide range of ecological disciplines.
Forum - Oikos Forum section is the home for synthesis and review. The format can be short notes or more substantial reviews to bring fields together, to transgress existing boundaries by synthesizing larger fields or seemingly disparate areas, and to offer new ways of interpreting existing data. Forum articles must strive for conceptual unification and serve as a point of departure for future work rather than just summarizing existing bodies of theory and data. It is an arena for challenging current thinking on ecological issues by revising established concepts and insights from critical experiments or for developing new theory to promote novel research. Purely speculative pieces are discouraged. Where uncertainties, problems, or debates in current theory are identified, authors are strongly encouraged to, wherever possible, highlight productive and positive lines of research that may resolve the issue. In particular, we encourage collaboration in debates to promote more effective synthesis and balance.
Forum pieces are commissioned by either direct invitation from the Forum Editor, Andrew Gonzalez (in consultation with the EiC and board), or via unsolicited proposals.
Please include the following in your Forum proposal:
1. The main objective/aim of the article followed by a structured summary (~400-600 words) outlining what will be discussed in the article (by section) and why it is timely and novel. Figures or diagrams that summarize the focus and scope of the article are welcome at this stage.
2. A list of 5-15 key references that indicate the literature the proposed article will draw from. Where relevant, please include any past Oikos Forum articles that focused on a similar or related topic.
3. Suggestion for a member(s) of the editorial board that would be most suited to evaluate the proposal.
Decisions to invite proposals are based on several criteria, including novelty, appeal to our general readership and topics that stand to generate synthesis in the field. These instructions will help us decide whether to invite submission of the full manuscript. Prospective authors are strongly encouraged to read the recent editorial on why many Forum proposals are unsuccessful (https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/oik.03107). We look forward to reading your proposal.
Proposals are submitted in Manuscript Central as "Forum Proposal".
Upload your text file as file type “Forum Proposal”
If your proposal is approved for submission as a Forum paper, you submit the full paper as “Forum paper”, following the general guidelines.
Meta-analyses - Synthesis is a critical component of modern ecology and involves big data in many forms. We welcome meta-analyses and systematic reviews provided quantitative analyses are included either of the literature or of the evidence reported within studies. Novelty, future research, and analysis of gaps are strongly encouraged versus summary. Transparent reporting of the synthesis process is required.
Dialogues: papers submitted to Dialogues are intended to promote ecological synthesis via critical thinking and the expression of contrasting viewpoints on historical or current critically important ecological topics. They have a concise format. Topics are chosen to foster the articulation of constructive debate in the form of, alternative, conflicting or opposed viewpoints among contributors. Dialogues may act as a source for synthesis and insights for future research on the topic.
Dialogues are comprised of three sessions: (1) overture where each contributor explores stimulating views on the topic, including points of tension, disparity in viewpoints and insights that can either promote coherence or insights on why discord is likely to remain (max. 300 words per contributor). In the overture, contributions are made without knowledge of the other contributors and what their views are. In most cases, each text appears separately in alphabetical order based on the first name of the author, promoting a convivial context for debate; this will also be the final authorship order;
(2) in the dialogue section, all contributors receive the contributions of the other reviewers and anonymity is lifted. Contributors then have the opportunity to elaborate further on their views or the views of the other contributors. Each text appears in the same order as the overture;
(3) the epilogue section is meant to emerge as one voice where all contributors participate to promote a synthesis and insights for future research on the topic (max 1000 words).
Figures and boxes can be considered in any section. Dialogues can be suggested by the readership at large but they are entirely commissioned by the editor of the section. It should usually include between 4 and 6 contributors. Space is limited for this section as we plan to publish about 4 Dialogues per year. Dialogues will be reviewed by members of the editorial board to expedite review time. Contact the Dialogues Editor, Pedro Peres-Neto, for more details (pedro [dot] peres-neto [at] concordia [dot] ca).
Ignite: papers are short contributions involving very specific and clear results from empirical (observational or experimental) or theoretical research. These results should be considered as timely to address critical ecological research topics and ignite further and critical research to address them. Results that focus on novel patterns and processes in nature at intermediate and large scales without having a strong explanatory basis for its origin are also of interest. In these cases, authors need to provide a strong justification for why they believe the pattern or process needs to be further investigated and which lines of research are necessary to uncover their causes. Ignite papers should have a maximum of 2000 words (not including abstract, reference list and figure/table legends) and 3 elements to summarize results in the form of figures or tables. As much as possible, Ignite papers will be reviewed by members of the editorial board to reduce review time. Contact the Ignite Editor, Pedro Peres-Neto, for more details (pedro [dot] peres-neto [at] concordia [dot] ca).
All manuscripts must be submitted at https://mc.manuscriptcentral.com/oikos.
You are welcome to submit your manuscript in any technical format. High-resolution files are not required for initial submission. Make sure that your manuscript is blinded for author information.
There are no page charges for publishing in Oikos.
You will receive a receipt with a manuscript ID. Please refer to this ID in all correspondence with the Editorial Office.
When submitting a revised manuscript, authors must provide publication-ready source files. The main manuscript file should be provided as word processor files (e.g., .doc, .docx, .odt, .rtf) with high resolution figures submitted as separate files. At this time, we require you follow carefully our instructions on formatting. Guidelines for submitting source files appear below. The text file should include tables and figure legends. Figures and Appendices with supplementary material should be uploaded separately. The text file should include track-changes and you may upload an additional “clean version” without track-changes, as “additional file for review but not for publication”.
Manuscripts should be in British or American English. Be consistent throughout the manuscript. Linguistic usage should be correct. Avoid the use of the passive voice. Avoid extensive reviews in the Introduction and Discussion. Cite only essential sources of a theory or opinion.
The title should be concise, informative and comprehensible to a broad scientific audience. Where possible, it should be a statement of the main result or conclusion presented in the manuscript. When formulating a title you should bear in mind both human readers and search engines. Including keywords in your title, for example, can help readers discover your article online. Do not include specialist abbreviations or authorities for taxonomic names in your title. The title should be brief and contain words useful for indexing and information retrieval.
The first page should contain the title and the abstract, in which the main results of the work should be summarised. The abstract should contain less than 300 words. Begin the introduction on page two. Avoid right margin justification and hyphenation. Double-check the contents of your manuscript before submitting. Add page- and line-numbers to the text.
Use SI units as far as possible.
Binomial Latin names should be used in accordance with International Rules of Nomenclature.
This includes acknowledging persons (authors or not) who have contributed to this paper. Here you can also state any monetary funding you have received or permits you have been granted. See example below. If parts of the declaration contains author information, please move this part to the external Title page-file.
- Acknowledgements – Thanks to Joe Smith for help with the statistics and to Lisa Smith for drawing Figure 1.
- Funding – This study was funded by The International Fund for Ecological Research, grant no. 00543.
- Author contributions – The first and second author contributed equally to this paper.
- Conflicts of interest – John Smith is employed by Ciba-Geigy.
- Permit(s) – Permission to handle our study animals was given by the International Society of Mammalogists, no. 000010004. Landowners Patricia and John Smith have kindly given their permission to work on their land.
SPECULATIONS AND ALTERNATIVE viewpoints
Speculation in scientific articles is frequently discouraged, even though it can lead to new hypotheses and interesting debate. Too often, as well, co-authors seek a consensus or commonality regarding the interpretation and conclusions of their collaborative papers. By minimizing these areas of conflict and uncertainty, the scientific publication process may actually inhibit the development of novel ideas and encourage conformity. We at Oikos wish to take a different approach. We henceforth encourage authors to contribute two non-compulsory brief (maximum of 200 words each) additional sections to their articles: Speculations and Alternative Viewpoints. Authors can choose to contribute one or both sections, which will appear after the Discussion in Forum and Research Papers. These two sections can be included after the manuscript undergoes peer review and associate editors may comment on the format of the text in the final version before final acceptance for publication.
The goal of the Speculations section is to elicit a lively discussion. It can include any types of opinion about results and conclusions without strong evidence or consider views about how the work may be perceived by others in the field. Oikos wants to give authors the opportunity to share their “outside the box” thoughts and potentially novel ideas to be explored as a result of their paper.
The Alternative Viewpoints section serves as a forum to describe potential differences of opinion among authors in respect to particular interpretations, conclusions and/or implications of the work. The Alternative Viewpoints is not meant to generate conflict among authors, but rather to provide a forum in which authors expose their differences in points of view in judicious but provocative and productive ways.
Both sections are flexible in style and authors are encouraged to be imaginative about what they want to convey to the readership, and how.
We provide a published example on “alternative viewpoints” but decided not to provide specific examples of speculations to avoid generating creative constraints. A great example of “alternative viewpoints” comes from Abrams and Ginzburg (2000): “If we both agree that functional responses in nature are unlikely to be either purely prey or purely ratio dependent, why is there a controversy? There are two topics about which we disagree. The first is the appropriate mathematical representation when reproduction is not continuous and when significant prey depletion can occur between reproductive events. Abrams feels that this calls for the use of methods that represent the functional response on a continuous basis and reproduction on a discrete basis; for example, as is done in the Nicholson–Bailey host–parasitoid model. Ginzburg thinks that the predator reproductive period is the minimal indivisible unit of time over which both functional and numerical responses should be measured, because capturing interaction is the goal of the model.”
Abrams, P.A and Ginzburg, L.R. 2000. The nature of predation: prey dependent, ratio dependent or neither? - TREE 15: 337-341.
References must follow the style of the journal. Titles of journals should be abbreviated. Check previous issues of the journal. If in doubt, give the title in full. Do not refer to unpublished material or personal communications. [M3] Check that all references in the text are listed in the list of references and that all references listed are cited in the text.
In the main text
References should be listed chronologically: (Smith 1999, Dunn 2000, Nilsson et al. 2017). Do not use semi-colons as separators for the references.
The list of references should be arranged alphabetically on authors' names and chronologically per author.
If the author's name is also mentioned with co-authors the following order should be used: publications of the single author, arranged chronologically - publications of the same author with one co-author, arranged chronologically – publications of the author with more than one co-author, arranged chronologically.
Publications by the same author(s) in the same year should be listed as 2004a, 2004b, etc.
All references must be complete, containing author names, year of publication, title, journal title using standard abbreviation, volume, first and last page numbers or article number. For references to in-press articles include a Digital Object Identifier (DOI) number.
Reference lists not conforming to this format will be returned for revision.
In the list of references (double-spaced), the following usage should be conformed to:
Haila, Y. and Järvinen, O. 1983. Land bird communities on a Finnish island: species impoverishment and abundance patterns. – Oikos 41: 255-273.
Atkinson, C. T. and Samuel, M. D. 2010. Avian malaria Plasmodium relictum in native Hawaiian forest birds: epizootiology and demographic impacts on apapane Himatione sanguinea. – J. Avian Biol. 41: 357–366.
If more than two authors:
Lindsay, A. et al. 2000. Are plant populations seed-limited? A review of seed sowing experiments. – Oikos 88: 225–238.
Mayr, E. 1963. Animal species and evolution. –- Harvard Univ. Press.
Goodall, D. W. 1972. Building and testing ecosystem models. – In: Jeffers, J. N. R. (ed.), Mathematical models in ecology. Blackwell, pp. 173–194.
Tables and legends of illustrations should be written double-spaced on separate sheets. Do not incorporate the legend in the figure itself. Tables and illustration legends should be comprehensible without reference to the text. Do not use italic lettering.
Our preferred files are vector-images e.g. as: .eps or .pdf
Rasterised (pixelated) files are also welcome but have to follow the specifications below. Can be submitted as: .tif, .jpeg, .pdf and other formats.
All images (but vector-files) must be supplied at 300–600 dpi (print resolution), not 72 dpi (screen resolution). The 300–600 dpi resolution must be generated in the application used to create the image and at approximately the correct size. If your system cannot produce variable output resolutions, the image should be created at a larger size so that the effective resolution is increased when the image is scaled down by us.
Width: 8 cm (single-column), 12.5 cm (1.5 column) or 16.6 cm (double-column).
The quality of a low-resolution figure cannot be improved by simply increasing the resolution in graphics software. To improve the resolution of your figure, you must re-create the figure from the beginning.
Resolution below 300 dpi results in blurred, jagged or pixelated published figures.
The quality of your figures is only as good as the lowest-resolution element placed in them. If you created a 72 dpi line graph and placed it in a 300 dpi .tif, the graph will look blurred, jagged, or pixelated.
On figures, use only common sans-serif fonts, such as Geneva, Helvetica, or Arial. Letters, numbers and symbols must appear clearly but not oversized.
Be consistent throughout the figure with colours, line weights, and styles. Panels within the figure should be designated with lower case letters in parentheses (e.g. (a), (b), (c)...).
You cannot submit individual image-files with a size > 50MB.
Colour figures are most welcome and will be published free of charge.
A Title page including title, the author's name, ORCiD IDs (check carefully), address, and email-address, should be uploaded separately. ORCiD id (http://orcid.org) is mandatory for the corresponding author, and strongly recommended for additional authors.
Supplementary material may be posted as electronic files on the journal's website, preferably as one single file.
Read important instructions on how we handle Supplementary material http://www.oikosoffice.org/sites/default/files/files/nso_-_supplementary...
Note: Supplementary material files will not be copy-edited and proofs will not be provided.
Our publication policies
Our detailed publication policies can be found in the NSO|OEO Editorial and Publishing policies file [http://bit.ly/2oqFgFB]. Our compiled policies cover various topics like conflict of interest, authorship, roles of editors, copyright and license policies.
We will follow recommendations by the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) https://publicationethics.org/
Short summaries of our policies for key issues can be found below. Download the complete set of policies here: http://bit.ly/2oqFgFB
Submitting a paper
Authors submitting a manuscript do so on the understanding that the work has not been published before, is not being considered for publication elsewhere and has been read and approved by all authors. Manuscripts submitted to NSO journals will be checked using anti-plagiarism software provided by iThenticate.
Manuscripts are submitted to reviewers for evaluation of their significance and soundness. Authors will generally be notified of acceptance, rejection, or need for revision within two months. Decisions of the editor are final.
Statement on authorship
Manuscripts should conform to recommendations for authorship provided by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (the Vancouver Group; see http://www.icmje.org). That is, authorship of a paper carries with it responsibility as well as credit. All those whose names appear as authors should have played a significant role in designing or carrying out the research, writing the manuscript, or providing extensive guidance to the execution of the project. They should be able to present and defend the work in a public forum. Honorary authorship is to be avoided. All authors must agree on both the submission and full content of any article carrying their name. Any violation of these conditions may represents academic misconduct and will be dealt with accordingly.
Please make sure you have correctly selected the corresponding author, as it is stated on the manuscript. Note that an ORCiID ID is mandatory for corresponding author and strongly recommended for co-authors.
We accept one corresponding author only.
Conflicts of interests
At submission, you are requested to declare any conflict of interest.
Oikos assumes authors of a paper have acquired any permits needed planning and executing the study reported in the paper.
Permits given shall be listed under “Declarations”
Data archiving and registration of sequences –- Oikos requires authors to deposit the data supporting the results in the paper in an appropriate publically accessible archive, such as e.g. Dryad (DataDryad.org), TreeBase, figshare, or other archive that guarantees preservation and access as well as a permanent identifier of the data (such as e.g. DOI-number or Genbank accession number) for access. The permanent DOI-number from the archiveidentifier should be provided by the authors or the archive, after acceptance of the paper. Data should normally be made publicly available at the time of publication, but may be postponed for up to one year if the technology of the archive allows for it. Longer emabrgos embargoes may be granted in exceptional cases after correspondeancde with the Eeditorial Ooffice of Oikos. Derived, summary data may also be archived. DNA sequences published in Oikos should be deposited in the EMBL/GenBank/DDJB Nucleotide Sequence Databases. An accession number for each sequence must be included in the manuscript. Oikos submission system is integrated with Dryad and the journal will cover the Data Processing Charge if you decide to deposit your data there.
Here is aA list of suggested repositories can be found
How to cite data in a manuscript:
-Data should be cited both in the text and in the BibliographyReferences. When referencing data in the text put this as the last part of material and methods:
Data available from the Dryad Digital Repository: http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s653s Bergeron et al. 2017
In the Bibliography/References:
Bergeron JAC, Pinzon J, Odsen S, Bartels S, Ellen Macdonald S, Spence JR (2017) Data from: Ecosystem memory of wildfires affects resilience of boreal mixedwood biodiversity after retention harvest. Oikos http://dx.doi.org/10.5061/dryad.s653s
If several data sources are used cite these as 2011a, 2011b etc.
If funding has been received for the study, it shall be listed under “Declaration” in the manuscript and have to be listed during the submission.
Oikos will consider for review articles previously available as preprints. Authors may also post the submitted version of a manuscript to a preprint server at any time. Authors are requested to update any pre-publication versions with a link to the final published article.
What happens next – after acceptance
The decision to accept your manuscript for publication will be communicated by the EiC through email.
The accepted manuscript will be published on Wiley Online Library prior to copy-editing and proof production. At this stage, a DOI (Digital Object Identifier) will be assigned to your manuscript. The accepted version will eventually be replaced by the final publication.
Manuscripts are edited to improve communication between author and reader. During this process, we may contact the corresponding author to request additional information.
Authors will receive electronic proofs. Correct only printer's mistakes.
No offprints will be supplied. Instead corresponding authors will receive a locked PDF file to the use at their discretion.
If a paper is accepted for publication, the author identified as the formal corresponding author will receive an email prompting them to log in to Author Services, where via the Wiley Author Licensing Service (WALS) they will be required to complete a copyright license agreement on behalf of all authors of the paper.
Authors may choose to publish under the terms of the journal’s standard copyright agreement, or OnlineOpen under the terms of a Creative Commons License.
General information regarding licensing and copyright is available here. To review the Creative Commons License options offered under OnlineOpen, please click here. (Note that certain funders mandate that a particular type of CC license has to be used; the Wiley Author Compliance Tool, available at www.wileyauthors.com/compliancetool, provides assistance to authors in checking for any open-access mandates from their funder(s).)
Authors choosing to publish their article in an open-access format through the OnlineOpen service will be charged an Article Publication Charge (APC). The APC for Oikos is currently $2400
For more information on our compliance with the open-access policies of specific funders, visit www.wileyauthors.com/funderagreements.
Promoting your paper on Social Media
Oikos is active on several Social Media channels.
Authors to of accepted papers are encouraged to make contributions to blogs, Twitter, Facebook, in form of photos, a popular summary of the study and/or a short video.
We encourage you to contribute to Twitter/Facebook, please send an email to the Managing Editor with a short text (max 140 characters) and a few pictures of for e.g. your study organism, from the field or a good image from your paper. Make sure to include your Twitter-handle if you are active on Twitter. You are welcome to submit infographics. All these will help to promote your paper.
We encourage you to write a blog post, please send an email to the Managing Editor with popular scientific text along with some nice pictures of e.g. your study organism, or from the field or a good image from your paper, or any other relevant image that will attract attention to your paper. Please see examples here: http://www.oikosjournal.org/blog
Blog posts are shared on both Twitter and Facebook.
Video abstracts are most welcome
If you would like to have an image selected as cover, please email the image to the Managing Editor along with a photo credit/description and a signed cc-by form, which allows us to use the image for promotion.
Questions and enquiries
The Managing Editor will provide answers to any questions you might have. Send an email to: <oikos [at] oikosoffice [dot] lu [dot] se>.