HOW TO WRITE A GOOD

JOURNAL PUBLICATION ?

PROF. DR. C. SHREESHIVADASAN

RAZAK FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY AND INFORMATICS

26TH OCTOBER 2018

 HOW TO WRITE A GOOD
JOURNAL PUBLICATION ?

PROF. DR. C. SHREESHIVADASAN

RAZAK FACULTY OF TECHNOLOGY AND INFORMATICS

26TH OCTOBER 2018

 Where to Publish?

Indexed Journal

Non-indexed Journal

Conference
 Types of Journal Papers

 Full Papers: contains original research

 Short Communications
 Review Articles
 Case studies
 Criteria for choosing a journal

• Scope of journal
• Indexing
• Impact factor
• Journal ranking
• Publication frequency
• Time to publish
 Criteria for choosing a journal

• Time to review
• Friendliness of the editor
• Rejection rate
• Reference
• Quality of review
• Members of editorial board
• Categories of journal
 Read the Scope of the Journal

Bioresource Technology (IF – 5.807)

The journal's aim is to advance and disseminate knowledge in all the related areas
of biomass, biological waste treatment, bioenergy, biotransformations, and
bioresource systems analysis, and technologies associated with conversion or
production.

Topics include:
• Biofuels: liquid and gaseous biofuels production, modeling and economics
• Bioprocesses and bioproducts: biocatalysis and fermentations
• Biomass and feedstocks utilization: bioconversion of agro-industrial residues
• Environmental protection: biological waste treatment
• Thermochemical conversion of biomass: combustion, pyrolysis, gasification, catalysis.

The Journal does not consider articles dealing with crop cultivation, breeding and
agronomy, plant extracts and enzymes, composites, marine organisms (except
microorganisms and algae for bioprocesses), soil and air pollution, and performance of
fuel combustion in engines.
 Structure of Manuscript
(i) Title
(ii) Abstract
(iii) Introduction
(iv) Material and Methods
(v) Results and Discussion
(vi) Conclusion
(v) Acknowledgement
(vi) References
 Title
• What your paper is all about. It should be:
• Concise and relevant to the subject matter
• Attract attention (editors and readers)
• Interesting, significant and different from other papers
• Avoid abbreviations (depends on journal)
• Less than 15 words (depends on journal)

10
 Title

Evaluation of Lemna minor and Chlamydomonas to treat palm

oil mill effluent and fertilizer production

Hesam Kamyaba, Shreeshivadasan Chelliapana*, Mohd Fadhil Md Dinb

aDepartment of Engineering, Razak Faculty of Technology and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi

Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100, Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia
bCentre for Environmental Sustainability and Water Security (IPASA), Faculty of Civil Engineering,

Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, 81310 Johor Bahru, Malaysia

*Corresponding author
• The abstract should be short and precise
• Selling point of the paper.
• It is summary of the work
(Introduction & Objective, Method, Results,
Conclusion)
• No figure, table and reference.
• About 200 words should be sufficient
(depends on journal requirement)
Abstract: Problem statement: Tylosin has been considered inhibiting COD removal in
anaerobic digestion. In this study it is proven that this is not always the case.
Accordingly, elevated concentrations of Tylosin (100–800mgL1) could be tolerated by the
anaerobic system. Approach: The influence of Tylosin concentrations on an up-flow
anaerobic stage reactor (UASR) was assessed using additions of Tylosin phosphate
concentrate. Results: Results showed high efficiency for COD removal (average 93%)
when Tylosin was present at concentrations ranging from 0 to 400mgL1. However, at
Tylosin concentrations of 600 and 800mgL1 treatment efficiency declined to 85% and
75% removal respectively. The impact of Tylosin concentrations on archaeal activity were
investigated and the analysis revealed that archaeal cells dominated the reactor,
confirming that there was no detectable inhibition of the methanogens at Tylosin levels
between 100 and 400mgL1. Nevertheless, the investigation showed a slight reduction in
the number of methanogens at Tylosin levels of 600 and 800mgL1. Conclusion/
Recommendations: These results demonstrated that the methanogens were well, adapted
to Tylosin. It would not be expected that the process performance of the UASR would be
affected, not even at a level well in excess of those appearing in real wastewater from a
Tylosin production site.
 The keywords should reflect the subject matter of the
manuscript in the same way the title of the manuscript
should.
 Most of the keywords may already be present in the
title
 The number of keywords should not be more than
five
 Use only established abbreviations (i.e. DNA)
 Serves as an orientation for readers, giving them
the perspective they need to understand the
detailed information coming in later sections.

 Contain review of up-to-date literature.

 Explain the novelty of the work.

 Discuss the objective and significance of the

work.
 Introduction

First Stage: general statements about field of research.

Second Stage: More specific statements about the aspects of the

problem.

 Third Stage: Statements that indicate the need for more investigation.

 Fourth Stage: Very specific statements giving the objectives.

 Fifth Stage: Optional statements that give values or justification.

 Examples of 3rd Stage Introduction

 However, few studies have reported on the effects of

computer assisted instruction
 But there is little information available on the air flow
rates on simple flat plate solar collectors
 Example of 3rd Stage Introduction

Flammability of Wood-Polypropylene Composites.

On the basis of the above mentioned facts, it may be
concluded that it is worth studying the influence of
rheological properties of polymeric matrix on the
supermolecular structure and mechanical properties
obtained in polypropylene/wood composites. Until now,
investigations of the influence of polypropylene matrix
melt flow index (MFI) on the flammability characteristic of
the composites with lignocellulosic materials have not
been carried out.
 Example of 4th Stage Introduction

Even though a lot of work has been reported on the

flammability of polymers, very little work has been
reported on the flammability of the composites. The
objective of this paper is to study the effects of
Mg(OH)2 on the flammability and mechanical properties
of wood/natural fibre composites.
Very recently, a comprehensive and general review article dealing with study on
various aspects of cellulosic biofibers and biocomposite materials was published [19].
The overview on biocomposite science and technology, its environmental issues and
market potential were found in the literature [8]. In year 2013 and 2016, a review
article [20] about structural discussion on certain biofibers, biodegradable polymers,
and biocomposites, and an overview article [21] on pineapple leaf and sisal fiber and
their biocomposite reinforced with thermoset and thermoplastic polymers was
published, respectively. Nevertheless, a specific review article on pretreatment of oil
palm empty fruit fiber (OPEFB) fiber polymer composite materials including both
thermoplastic and thermosets polymers have not been published so far to our
knowledge. Indeed, it becomes essential to assess the previous and ongoing
research for OPEFB fiber polymercomposite materials. This will surely enable the
researchers, materialist, industrialists, scientist, and upcoming experts to establish
the lag in till date research work and find approach for futuristic development for
OPEFB fiber polymer composite materials. This might even open room for
development of other natural fiber polymeric composite materials.

Shows our understanding of the literature and our

ability to or analyze people’s work.
The description should be detail enough for
others to repeat the experiment.

The equipment and materials must be adequately
described.

The measurements must clearly described.

 Results and Discussion section is the most
important part of the manuscript in which
critical analysis of the results are done.

 Sufficient number of Figures and Tables

with good quality.

 Compare with previous studies.

 Consistent with Material and Methods.

• Must fulfill the study objectives

• Include how the paper advances research in this area

• Refers to only work done in the present study

• Should not be more than one third of a page

• Include practical implications of the study

• Recommendations for future works

 Give credit to funding authorities, collaborators or other colleagues
whose names do not appear as co-authors but had made some
contribution in producing the material for the manuscript.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The authors desired to show their highest gratitude to Universiti Teknologi
Malaysia (UTM) and Ministry of Education Malaysia (MoE) for funding this
study under the Research University Grant (RUG), Vote number:
Q.K130000.2510.13H11. The authors also thank Mr Azmi Abu Bakar
(Environmental Engineering Laboratory, UTM) who helped with the apparatus
and materials for the experiments.
Author, year style (Harvard)

Adrian, R.J., Particle-imaging techniques for experimental fluid mechanics.

Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 1991. 23: p. 261-304.
Alapati, A., Kang, S., Suh, Y.K., 3D lattice Boltzmann simulation of
droplet formation in a cross-junction microchannel, in Proc.
3rd IASME/WSEAS Intl. Conf. Cont. Mech. 2008.
Breyiannis, G.V., Lattice kinetic simulations in three-dimensional
magneto hydrodynamics. Phys. Rev. , 2004. E 69: p.
065702/1-065702/4.
Cercignani, The Boltzmann equation and its application in applied
mathematical sciences. Springer, 1988.
Numbering style
[1]Couette, M., 1890. Etudes sur le frottement des liquides. Ann. Chim.
Phys., 21: 433.
[2]Taylor, G.I., 1923. Stability of a viscous fluid contained between two
rotating cylinders. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A, 233: 289.
[3]Di Prima, R. C., Swinney, H. L. 1981. Instabilities and transition in
flow between concentric rotating cylinders, in: Hydrodynamic instabilities
and transition to turbulence (Swinney, It. L., Gollub, J. P., eds.), p. 139.
Springer
[4]Bühler, K., Wimmer, Zierep, M. J., and Coney J. E. R., 1986 Advances
in Taylor Vortex Flow: A report on the Fourth Taylor Vortex Flow
Working Party meeting Acta Mechanica, Vol 62(1) pp 47-61
 Traditional submission (by mail)
 As e-mail attachment
 Via a journal online submission (most
favorable)

Include a cover letter

 Title and author(s) of paper
 Type of submission (full length article/
technical note)
 Fact that paper is new and not being submitted
elsewhere
 Why the paper is important
 Some possible peer reviewers (some journal
request that)
Editor,
Journal of Hazardous Materials

20th October 2018

Submission of research article

We would like to submit the following research article to the Journal of Hazardous Materials:
“Comparison of COD removal from pharmaceutical wastewater using combined biological and advanced
oxidation processes”

Manuscript word count: 4436

The paper was based on an original work (part of PhD research) carried out at Universiti Teknologi Malaysia. It is a
collaborative research with Glaxo Smith Kline; a leading pharmaceutical company in the world. The paper highlights a
novel combined treatment of pharmaceutical wastewater containing antibiotics using anaerobic-aerobic and advanced
oxidation processes.

We declare that this paper has not been published in the same form elsewhere and will not be submitted anywhere
else for publication prior to acceptance/rejection by Journal of Hazardous Materials.
We hope to get your kind consideration for the article to be reviewed and published in your journal.
Thank you.

Yours sincerely,
Prof. Dr. Shreeshivadasan Chelliapan
PhD (Environmental Engineering) (Newcastle, UK)
Corresponding author
Razak Faculty of Technology and Informatics, Universiti Teknologi Malaysia, Jalan Sultan Yahya Petra, 54100, Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia.
Tel: 006-03-26154581; Fax: 006-03-26934844; E-mail: shreeshivadasan.kl@utm.my
 For appropriateness of subject matter

 For compliance with instructions

 For overall quality : anything new ?

 Language
 Purpose:
 To help the editor decide whether to publish the
paper.

 To help the authors improve the paper, whether or not

the journal accepts it.

Some ways peer reviewers are identified: References,

literature searching, editors’ knowledge, databases,
authors’ suggestions
 It may take from 1 hr to 6 months
 One to 4 reviewers along with editorial comments
 Decision from Editor: Accept/reject/revise
 Corrections by production dept
 Proof preparation for checking by authors
 In press/queue/article in press
 Completion (vol, issue, page number, year)
 The editors and reviewers need to make
recommendation whether your paper is
acceptable:

 In its present form

 After a minor revision
 After a major revision
 Not at all
 Rejection with recommendation for
submission.
 Rejection
 Decision: Rejection

Ms. Ref. No.: BITE-D-13-03053

Title: Cleaning performance and biological properties of zero-
phosphate detergent powders incorporated with biorenewable C16 palm
methyl ester sulphonates (C16MES)
Bioresource Technology
Dear sparthi
Thank you for submitting your paper entitled "Cleaning performance
and biological properties of zero-phosphate detergent powders
incorporated with biorenewable C16 palm methyl ester sulphonates
(C16MES)" to Bioresource Technology. I regret to inform you that your
submission is outside the scope of the journal, therefore I would
suggest that you resubmit this paper to another journal.
Please note that Bioresource Technology will not consider a resubmitted
version of the rejected manuscript.
Thank you for your interest in Bioresource Technology.
Yours sincerely,
Ashok Pandey, PhD
Executive Editor
Bioresource Technology
The manuscript apparently seems to correspond to the
standard of scientific papers; however, a closer scrutiny
reveals numerous deficiencies, which make it
unacceptable for publication.

Apart from publishing another paper, I do not see the

philosophy of the work, the message sent or any new
information offered, which could be used by the
scientific community or anyone in industrial practice.
Ms. Ref. No.: CEJ-D-13-02894
Title: Laboratory and pilot scale investigations on development and characterization of phosphate-free detergent powders
incorporated with sustainable C16 palm methyl ester sulphonate (C16MES)
Chemical Engineering Journal

Dear Dr. Siwayanan,

I thank you for your recent contribution sent to the Chemical Engineering Journal. However, due to the large number of papers
submitted to the Materials Synthesis and Processing (MSP) section of the CEJ, we are able to process only those manuscripts
whose subject is close to the main areas of interest in the MSP section.

As you can see in the Guide for Authors of the Chemical Engineering Journal (see description below), the MSP section focuses
mainly on new methods for the synthesis of advanced materials, with an emphasis on nanomaterials. In my opinion the focus
of your contribution departs considerably from the main areas of interest of our readership. I have consulted with a potential
reviewer who is of the same opinion.

Thus, at this stage, I have decided to withdraw your manuscript from further consideration. Please note that this does not
reflect any judgment on the quality and novelty of your manuscript. I would also like to apologize for the long time involved in
taking this decision, normally out of scope decisions are made within 3-4 days since reception.

I will be happy to process any future contributions from your laboratory dealing with Materials Synthesis and Processing, as
described in the Guide for Authors. The Journal also publishes contributions dealing with Environmental Chemical Engineering
or Chemical Reaction Engineering, which are handled by other Editors.

I am sorry not to have better news on this occasion and I thank you for choosing the Chemical Engineering Journal as a
publishing medium.

Yours sincerely,

Dr. Jesus Santamaria

Editor
Chemical Engineering Journal

University of Zaragoza
Ms. No.: JCIS-13-2006
Title: Production and characterization of phosphate-free detergent powders incorporated with anionic surfactant of C16 palm
methyl ester sulphonate (C16MES)
Corresponding Author: Mr. Parthiban Siwayanan
Authors: Ramlan Abdul Aziz, PhD; Nooh Abu Bakar, PhD; Hamdan Ya, PhD; Ropien Jokiman, MSc;
Shreeshivadasan Chelliapan, PhD

Dear Mr. Siwayanan,

Thank you for submitting your article to the Journal of Colloid and Interface Science.

This manuscript has been received and reviewed by the editorial board. Unfortunately, we regret to inform you that we are unable
to publish it. Hence, you have the option to send your manuscript to another journal without delay. Such a decision is made by the
board of editors when it appears that a manuscript is unlikely to be rated among the accepted upper 30% of manuscripts submitted
to JCIS. The most important criteria are the novelty and scientific significance of the contents of the manuscript. Further criteria
are: the likelihood that the manuscript would be of general interest to the readers of the journal; the degree to which the contents fit
within the Aims and Scope of JCIS; and, the fluency of communication, including English grammar and usage.

Thank you for your interest in the Journal of Colloid and Interface Science.

For further assistance, please visit our customer support site at http://help.elsevier.com/app/answers/list/p/7923. Here you can
search for solutions on a range of topics. You will also find our 24/5 support contact details should you need any further assistance
from one of our customer support representatives.

Sincerely,

The Editors
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
Editorial Office
Elsevier
525 B Street, Suite 1900
San Diego, CA 92101-4495
USA
 Decision: Revision and Resubmission

Your manuscript # APP-2009-03-0676 entitled "MECHANICAL,

THERMAL AND MORPHOLOGICAL PROPERTIES OF POLYLACTIC
ACID/LINEAR LOW DENSITY POLYETHYLENE BLENDS" which you
submitted to the Journal of Applied Polymer Science, has been
reviewed. I am sorry to inform you that based on the reviewers'
comments, I must ask you to revise and resubmit this
manuscript before I can reach an editorial decision. The
comments from reviewers are included at the bottom of this
letter.

Please note that resubmitting your manuscript does not

guarantee eventual acceptance, and that your resubmission will
be subject to re-review by the reviewers before a decision is
rendered.
 Decision: Acceptance
Ms. Ref. No.: BITE-D-12-05504R3
> Title: Livestock wastewater treatment using aerobic
granular sludge
> Bioresource Technology

> Dear Ms. Inawati Othman,

> I am pleased to inform you that your manuscript

"Livestock wastewater treatment using aerobic granular
sludge" has been accepted for publication in Bioresource
Technology.

> Thank you for submitting your work to Bioresource

Technology.

> Yours sincerely,

> HUU HAO NGO, Ph.D

> Editor
> Bioresource Technology
1. The paper does not fit the scope of
the journal.

2. The paper does not make a

contribution to new knowledge.

3. The paper does not meet established

ethical standards.

4. The paper has been carelessly

prepared.

5. The paper has not been prepared

according to journal’s guidelines for
presentation.
 Reasons for Rejection
6. The paper has methodological
problems.

7. The amount of experiment was

inadequate.

8. The statistics are inadequate.

9. The language is poor.

10. The paper is over the journal’s word

limit.
12. The paper cannot compete with the
high quality of other papers submitted to
the journal.

13. Publication bias.

14. The data have been interpreted

poorly.

15. The analysis is weak.

16. The literature review is inadequate.

 Revise and submit promptly.
 Include a letter saying that what revisions were
made.
 If you disagree with any comments by the
reviewers explain the reason clearly.
 If any point raised by referee is not clear, please
communicate with the referee through editor.
 Dealing With Reviewer- Response
Dear Professor Roger Haworth,

We first gratefully thank you for accepting our

manuscript (#APP-2007-02-0609) entitled
“Interface and mechanical properties of peroxide
cured silicate nanofiber/rubber composites ", and
two reviewers for good suggestion as well. We
also feel terribly sorry to submit the revised
manuscript so late.

Based on two reviewer’s comments, some

changes including English improvements and
supplements have been done in the revised
manuscript, in which the fonts were highlighted
with red color. Another twelve references were
added. We think it is more understandable and
more explicit, compared with the old manuscript.
 When you rewrite the paper, please improve the
english expression thoroughly, and follow
STRICTLY the format described in the Instructions
to authors of the journals:
 The English has been checked and improved
thoroughly.
 The revised manuscript been prepared according to
the journal format.

 A suggestion is to add “the Malaysian” in the title,

i.e. END USE ENERGY ANALYSIS IN “THE
MALAYSIAN” INDUSTRIAL SECTOR
 “THE MALAYSIAN” has been added in revised title
of the manuscript.
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in revised
manuscript
 I suggest, however that the authors consider the
following comments if possible:
It would be good to calculate expected GHG
emmisions reduction in tons for the potential
savings in energy using standard emissions factors.

 Emission reductions associated with the energy

savings have been estimated and presented in
Table 8. Details of estimation formulation have
been added in section 2.5.2.
 Addressing reviewers’ comments in revised
manuscript
Introduction

Explain why these two polymers were selected for the study. Is
there any expected difference between these two polymers in terms
of the effect of phosphor?
• The criterion for choice of polymer type was to have a readily
available and environmentally stable semicrystalline (LDPE) and an
amorphous (PMMA) polymer respectively. Some semicrystalline
polymers are known to undergo strain-related deformations that are
likely to facilitate the occurrence of phosphorescence, hence the
choice of LDPE, while PMMA was more or less a control parameter.
• The above explanation has been appropriately included in the
Introduction section (1.0).