Scientific journals



RUSSIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY (ISSN print version 0869-8139, ISSN online version 2658-655X) is issued monthly and publishes the works in all fields of physiology and physiological aspects of related sciences.

Currently, the papers are indexed in VINITI, RISC (, EBSCO, Google Scholar and RSCI (on the Web of Science platform) databases.


(for Russian version – ISSN of print edition: 0044-4529, ISSN of WEB edition: 0044-4529)

Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology (English version: ISSNp 0022-0930, ISSNe 1608-3202)

The Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology is issued 6 times per year and publishes original research papers and reviews on comparative and evolutionary physiology, biochemistry, and related sciences.

Russian version of the Journal is indexed in the VINITI, RISC (, EBSCO, Google Scholar and RSCI (on the Web of Science platform) databases.

The English version – Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology – is indexed in more than 30 scientific bases, including Web of Science (SJR 0.14(Q4)).


Editorial Policies

Focus and Scope
Society supports the journals publishing original high-quality papers and reviews in the field of human and animal physiology, morphology, histology, embryology, molecular biology, biochemistry.

JOURNAL of EVOLUTIONARY BIOCHEMISTRY and PHYSIOLOGY publishes original research papers and reviews on comparative and evolutionary physiology, biochemistry and related sciences.

RUSSIAN JOURNAL OF PHYSIOLOGY publishes the works in all fields of physiology and physiological aspects of related sciences — zoology, anatomy, histology, embryology, molecular biology, biochemistry.

Publication Frequency
The Russian Journal of Physiology publishes 12 issues per year.

The Journal of Evolutionary Biochemistry and Physiology publishes 6 issues per year.

Archives of issues of each Journal could be found on their pages. The Russian issues are archived with metadata in English (including abstracts, keywords, links of papers) and readers can also find links to English version of articles on the pages of the Journals that are partly translated into English with Springer edition.

Papers of all Journals of the Russian Pavlov Physiological Society are currently indexed for VINITI, RISC (, EBSCO, Google Scholar, and RSCI (on the Web of Science platform) databases. All published papers have a digital object index (DOI).

Please find indexation information about Journals below:



Guidelines for Authors
Each Journal has the information for Authors that can be found on the Journal’s home page in the Section for Authors. Paper publications are free of charge for Authors.


All Society’s Journals are peer-reviewed and accept original high- studies not published previously anywhere else. The Journals operate a single-blind review process. The submission of articles is carried out in the electronic form. All manuscripts will be initially assessed by the Editor for suitability for the review process. The suitable papers will then be sent to at least two independent reviewers to be evaluated for its scientific quality. The Editor is responsible for making a final decision on acceptance or rejection of articles. The Editor’s decision is definitive. Papers irrelevant to the Journal’s aims and scope or containing no new scientific data will be rejected.


Based on the Editorial Board’s decision, The Russian Pavlov Physiological Society does not accept advertising for products/services or any direct marketing activities in their journals. Editorial content is not compromised by commercial or financial interests, or by any specific arrangements with advertising clients or sponsors.


1. Introduction
1.1. The publication in peer-reviewed journals 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 essential to lay down standards of expected ethical behavior 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 journals.
2. Duties of Editors

2.1. Publication decision

The Editor is solely and independently responsible for deciding which of the articles submitted to the Journal should be published. 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 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 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 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 authorized 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. Acknowledgment 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 behavior and are unacceptable.

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 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 behavior 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 behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. Publication of some kinds of articles (e.g., 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

4.5. Acknowledgment 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

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

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors should disclose in their manuscript any financial or other substantive conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or interpretation of their manuscript.

4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that 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, the author should promptly notify the Editor of journals and cooperate with Publisher to retract or correct the paper, If the Editor or the Publisher learns 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 Publishers

5.1. The Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors 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 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. The Publisher should develop codes of practice and inculcate industry standards for best practice on ethical matters, errors, and retractions.

5.4. The Publisher should provide specialized legal review and counsel if necessary.


Studies on patients or volunteers require ethics committee approval and informed consent, which should be documented in the paper. Patients have a right to privacy that should not be violated without informed consent. Identifying information, including names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, or pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Authors should disclose to these patients whether any potential identifiable material might be available via the Internet as well as in print after publication. Patient consent should be written and archived with the Journal, the authors, or both, as dictated by local regulations or laws.

Patient identifiers will not be published in Journals of The Russian Pavlov Physiological Society unless written informed consent is given and the content is essential for the scientific purpose and merit of the manuscript. Failure to obtain the informed consent of a patient before submission would result in manuscript rejection.


The Russian Pavlov Physiological Society is committed to correct the errors in published papers according to guidelines set by various international organizations i.e., Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE, i.e., flowchart for retraction of a published article), International Committee of Medical Journal Editors (ICJME) and World Association of Medical Editors (WAME).

Corrections to or retractions/editorial expressions of concern of published articles will be made by publishing an erratum/corrigendum or editorial expressions of concern/retraction note without altering the original article. Thus, the original article remains in the public domain, and the erratum/corrigendum or note will be widely indexed.

We aim to ensure the integrity of the academic record of all published or potential publications. Whenever it is recognized that a significant inaccuracy, misleading statement, or distorted report has been published, it must be corrected promptly and with due prominence. If, after an appropriate investigation, an item proves to be fraudulent, it should be retracted. The retraction should be clearly identifiable to readers and indexing systems.