The Journal of Peptide Science is a cooperative venture of John Wiley & Sons, Ltd and the European Peptide Society, undertaken for the advancement of international peptide science by the publication of original research results and reviews.

Three types of article are accepted, full papers, short rapid communications and reviews. Full papers, which make up the greater part of the Journal are definitive reports on substantial experimental (or, occasionally, theoretical) investigations in the field which have reached maturity. They are of the traditional kind, comprising discussion and evaluation of the results at appropriate length, together with experimental detail. If deemed necessary by the Editors, full papers will be treated as accelerated publications. Rapid communications of two to four printed pages are either preliminary reports of important work meriting urgent publication, or concise definitive reports on specific points. Reviews are usually by invitation, but we shall welcome suggestions from anyone and especially offers from potential contributors, who should contact the Editor-in-Chief or one of the Editors before starting work.

The scope of the Journal embraces the whole range of peptide chemistry and biology: the isolation, characterisation, synthesis properties (chemical, physical, conformational, pharmacological, endocrine and immunological) and applications of natural peptides; studies of their analogues, including peptidomimetics; peptide antibiotics and other peptide-derived complex natural products; peptide and peptide-related drug design and development; peptide materials science; combinatorial peptide research; the chemical sysnthesis of proteins; and methodological advances in all these areas. The spectrum of interests is well illustrated by the published Proceedings of the regular international Symposia of the European, American, and Japanese Peptide Societies.

PUBLISHING POLICY OF THE JOURNAL OF PEPTIDE SCIENCE
The formulation of the Publishing Policy of the Journal of Peptide Science was greatly aided by already published accounts, in particular by "The Protein Science Code of Ethics" (the Protein Society) and by "Ethical Guidelines to Publication of Chemical Research" (the American Chemical Society).

The following ethical guidelines apply to scientific research published in the Journal of Peptide Science . They are based on the belief that progress of science rests inter alia on the integrity of research and of research reports.

Obligations of authors
1. Overall obligation: The author must present an accurate, clear and concise description of the research performed as well as an objective discussion of its significance. Sufficient detail is to be provided in order to permit repetition of the work by other scientists.

2. Acknowledgement of prior work: The author should cite those publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported workd and that will guide the reader to the relevant earlier work. All unpublished work of third parties utilised in the research must be cited, and a letter of permission from the parties involved must be submitted together with the manuscript.

3. Research records: Manuscripts reporting original research submitted to the Journal of Peptide Science must be based on work documented in appropriate laboratory records which are to be preserved for a reasonable time.

4. Unusual hazards: Those hazards inherent in the chemicals, equipment or procedures used in a study should be identified and reported at the end of the manuscript.

5. Avoidance of multiple publication: Submitted manuscripts must not be under review by another scientific publication until they have been rejected or withdrawn from the Journal of Peptide Science .

6. Co-authors: The authors of a paper should include those who have made significant scientific contributions to the work reported. All authors must read the final version of the paper submitted and must agree to its submission to the Journal of Peptide Science . All authors must share responsibility for the results and their description.

7. Submitting author: In addition to his other responsibilities, the submitting author has to make certain that all persons entitled to authorship are included among the co-authors and no individual who is not entitled to authorship is included; he also provides the communication between the Journal Editor involved and the other authors.

8. Criticism: If justified and supported by the Editor involved, criticism of a scientific report or parts of a report may be included in a publication in the Journal of Peptide Science . However, in no case is personal criticism acceptable.

9. Authority of the Editor: It is understood that by submitting a manuscript to the Journal of Peptide Science all authors agree to accept the final authority of the Editor involved.

Obligations of editors
1. Overall obligation: The Editors must ensure the scientific integrity of the Journal of Peptide Science .

2. Manuscript decisions: The Editors accept or reject within a reasonable time manuscripts for publication on objective scientific criteria. In order to do this, they must seek the advice of fair and reliable advisors and reviewers. Criteria for rejection may include inappropriate material or presentation, lack of substantial increase in knowledge, lack of originality, lack of scientific credibility of data, lack of clarity.

3. Confidentiality and equity: The Editors must maintain the confidentiality of manuscripts and other materials under review. They are also responsible for maintaining the fairness of the entire review procedure.

4. Authority: The Editors have the ultimate decision as to what is published in the Journal of Peptide Science . They are guided by the Editorial concept which ultimately is defined by the European Peptide Society.

Obligations for advisors and reviewers
1. Overall obligation: Advisors and reviewers must transmit to the Editor an objective, timely and confidential evaluation of the manuscript.

2. Self-disqualification: Advisors and reviewers are expected to disqualify themselves and return materials promptly to the Editor for the following reasons:

a) If they are aware of any conflict of interest, such as a competitive work in their own laboratory, or of a financial, unusually close or acrimonious relationship with any author, or any other factor which might bias the review;

b) If they cannot provide a review within a reasonably short time;

c) If they are insufficiently familiar with the field of the manuscript and cannot provide therefore an informed judgement.

3. Confidentiality: Reviewers are not to disclose the contents of the manuscript, nor their identities to anybody without written permission from the Editor. Reviewers may enlist however the cooperation of a close colleague in the evaluation process. This colleague is bound by the same rules of confidentiality, and the identity of the colleague must be recorded by the reviewer in the confidential part of the review. Reviewers may copy any manuscript materials only with written permission from the Editor and must return materials after review or have them destroyed.

4. Documentation: Assessment of manuscripts must be given in a written report. The reviewer should note scientific shortcomings and note failures of authors to cite relevant work by other scientists.