《當(dāng)代生態(tài)學(xué)問題》是一本多學(xué)科期刊，主要出版生態(tài)學(xué)的理論和方法問題、生態(tài)學(xué)的區(qū)域方面、區(qū)域生態(tài)災(zāi)害、生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的結(jié)構(gòu)和功能、生態(tài)系統(tǒng)的人為改造等方面的原創(chuàng)著作。介紹了現(xiàn)代生態(tài)學(xué)的所有基本方面，包括生物與其環(huán)境之間最復(fù)雜的相互作用。一些期刊專門討論全球生物多樣性的變化在不同層次的組織(人口、物種、生態(tài)系統(tǒng))自然保護(hù)的原則和方法。同行評(píng)審《當(dāng)代生態(tài)學(xué)問題》是一本同行評(píng)議期刊。我們使用單一的盲同行評(píng)審格式。我們的審稿人團(tuán)隊(duì)包括91名審稿人，包括內(nèi)部審稿人和外部審稿人(88%)。2017年從提交到首次評(píng)審的平均周期為15天，從首次評(píng)審到驗(yàn)收的平均周期為30-40天。2017年投稿退稿率為76%。接受發(fā)表的文章由總編作出最后決定。被邀請(qǐng)的審稿人因利益沖突，認(rèn)為不符合審稿條件或者不能審稿的，應(yīng)當(dāng)及時(shí)通知審稿人，并予以拒絕。審稿人應(yīng)以一種合理合理的方式清晰地闡述自己的觀點(diǎn)，這樣作者才能利用審稿人的觀點(diǎn)來完善稿件。必須避免對(duì)作者的個(gè)人批評(píng)。評(píng)論者應(yīng)該顯示發(fā)表的一篇評(píng)論(我)任何相關(guān)的工作沒有被引用的作者,(2)任何已報(bào)道在以前的出版物和沒有適當(dāng)?shù)膮⒖蓟蛞?(2)任何實(shí)質(zhì)性相似或重疊與其他手稿(發(fā)表或未發(fā)表)的個(gè)人知識(shí)。

Contemporary Problems of Ecology is a multidisciplinary periodical that publishes original works on the following subjects: theoretical and methodical issues of ecology, regional aspects of ecology, regional ecological disasters, structure and functioning of ecosystems, anthropogenic transformation of ecosystems. All basic aspects of modern ecology, including the most complicated interactions between living organisms and their environment, are presented. Some of the journal issues are dedicated to global changes in biological diversity at various levels of organization (populations, species, ecosystems) principles and methods of nature conservation.PEER REVIEWContemporary Problems of Ecology is a peer reviewed journal. We use a single blind peer review format. Our team of reviewers includes 91 reviewers, both internal and external (88%). The average period from submission to first decision in 2017 was 15 days, and that from first decision to acceptance was 30-40 days. The rejection rate for submitted manuscripts in 2017 was 76%. The final decision on the acceptance of an article for publication is made by the Editor-in-Chief.Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified or unable to review the manuscript due to the conflict of interests should promptly notify the editors and decline the invitation. Reviewers should formulate their statements clearly in a sound and reasoned way so that authors can use reviewer’s arguments to improve the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors must be avoided. Reviewers should indicate in a review (i) any relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors, (ii) anything that has been reported in previous publications and not given appropriate reference or citation, (ii) any substantial similarity or overlap with any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.