Instructions for authors

These instructions follow the guidelines of the European Association of Science Editors (EASE). For more details, please consult these guidelines to be found at:

Electronic submission

Manuscripts should be submitted electronically through the Editorial Manager System at
Authors can submit their manuscripts and all associated files via the web to the editorial office, and track the progress of their manuscript throughout the peer review process. Authors will receive e-mail notifications at key stages in the process.

Ethics before submission

OCL Journal can only process articles that have been approved by all co-authors and are not under review for publication elsewhere

Authors are encouraged to refer to The Committee on Publishing Ethics (COPE) for all aspects of publication ethics:

Should a paper turn out to have been submitted to other journals concurrently, or to have been published in essentially the same form elsewhere, it will be rejected categorically and immediately; the editorial office(s) of the other journal(s) will be notified. The authors concerned will not be allowed to publish in OCL for at least two years.


Authors of accepted papers will be requested to submit a 300 character text (3-4 lines), headed ‘Highlights’, outlining the key findings of their paper and its contribution to the discipline. The Highlights should be uploaded in the Editorial Manager System as a separate Word file. They will be published in the online table of contents, along with the title of the article and the list of authors.


Manuscripts should be written in English preferably, although French is acceptable. For authors not perfectly fluent in English, we recommend that the manuscript be read carefully by a native speaker before its submission.Manuscripts should not exceed 20 pages (tables, figures or pictures included) for a total of 7 printed pages (one printed page equals 5,000 characters including spaces).

The manuscript should be organized as follows:

  • The first page should contain the full title, the author’s names and affiliations
  • Page two contains the abstract (no more than 250 words) and up to five keywords useful for indexing.
  • Begin the introduction on page three.
  • Acknowledgements: please keep them short.
  • Disclosure: any potential conflicts of interest. For example, consultancies.
  • Reference list
  • Tables (one page per table, with a fully informative caption as a heading).Figures and legends.

Authors and affiliations

All author names should be listed in the following order:

First names (written in full),
Middle name(s) or initial(s), if desired and
Last names (surname, family name)

Each author should list an associated department, university, or organizational affiliation and its location, including city, state/province and country.

One author should be appointed as the corresponding author and his or her email address should be mentioned at the time of submission.

The list of co-authors should remain unchanged from submission to final decision. It is nevertheless permissible to add as new co-authors the names of persons who contributed to the revisions. Any removal of a co-author requires that person's written agreement.


Between 150 and 200 words, the abstract should describe the main objective(s) of the study. It should be informative and mention the main results and conclusions. For papers written in English, an abstract in English only is required (the Journal will take care of the French translation).

For papers written in French, abstracts in both English AND French are required.


Keywords may number up to five.

English keywords only are required in the case of papers written in English.

English AND French keywords are required in the case the papers written in French.


The introduction should provide background that puts the manuscript into context and allows readers outside the field to understand the purpose and significance of the study. It should define the problem addressed and explain why it is important.

Conventions and abbreviations

Scientific names of species and genera should be in italics.

Abbreviations should be defined in brackets when they first appear in the text. Units, symbols and nomenclature should follow international conventions. Standard units and symbols of chemical elements do not need defining.

Reference Style

It is important to verify the accuracy of bibliographic information contained in references. This has become particularly important with the advent of online versions. Hyperlinks will be programmed to enable readers to jump directly to the material cited. If your cited references are incorrect or incomplete (e.g., missing author name, or an incorrect volume number or page), the associated hyperlink may fail, and the usefulness of your paper in the online environment may be reduced.

References in the text must include the name of author followed by the year of publication. For example: (Smith, 2002), According to Smith (2002), (Smith and Davies, 2002; Davies, 2003; Smith, 2005; Smith et al., 2007).

Reference list

The names of journals should be abbreviated according to the World list of scientific periodicals and italicized. The following usage should be conformed to:

Goozner M, Caplan A, Moreno J, Kramer BS, Babor TF, Husser WC. 2009. A common standard for conflict of interest disclosure in addiction journals. Addiction 104:1779-1784.

Book's chapter:
Lepoivre P, Kummert J. Le diagnostic des maladies parasitaires. In : Semal J, Ed. Traité de pathologie végétale. Gembloux (Belgique) : Presses agronomiques de Gembloux, 1989, pp. 54-76.

AuthorAID Resource Library. Available from (last consult: 2013/23/03) -- please note the American date format.


When an author has reproduced a table from another publication, its origin should be indicated clearly in the manuscript; the author should also obtain reproduction permission from the publisher concerned.

Tables should be numbered consecutively throughout (Table 1, etc.) and be cited in the text as follows:

There are about 185 901 nodes and 113 367 elements used (Tab. 2).

Each table must be accompanied by a brief caption situated directly above the table. Each table should be printed on a separate page.


When an author has reproduced a figure from another publication, its origin should be indicated clearly in the manuscript; the author should also obtain reproduction permission from the publisher concerned.

Each figure should be cited in the text and should be numbered as follows:

There are about 185 901 nodes and 113 367 elements used (Fig. 1).

Each figure should have a brief caption describing it.There is no limit on the number of figures used. However it is important to make sure that all figures are absolutely necessary, and are well designed.


Please note that no modifications can be made to the text or to the figures once the manuscript has been sent to production.

The galley proofs will be sent to the corresponding author in .pdf format and should be returned promptly.

Should the author be absent during that period, it is preferable to delegate proofreading to a collaborator.

Proofs can be handled electronically only. In the proofs, only minor changes and corrections of typos or mistakes that occurred in the production process itself are permitted. If the corrections go beyond what can be normally accepted, regarding either the form or the content, they will be submitted to the Editor for approval; this will certainly delay the publication of the paper.

Declaration of conflict of interest

The authors must state whether or not they have a conflict of interest (financial connection with an organisation or establishment, whether public or private, which might be concerned by the results presented). Any funding which supported the work presented shall be mentioned in the acknowledgement.

Evaluation in the first instance

The Editors-in-chief reserve the right to decide whether or not a new submission should be sent to the referees. They can also reject a manuscript which does not meet the publication criteria (namely poor quality of presentation, inappropriate subject matter or errors). The paper should be:

  • Basically correct and sound;
  • A significant advance, not just a minor improvement on earlier work;
  • Accessible to the general readership of the journal.

Regarding the scientific content, a part covering the scientific developments and/or industrial applications in the domain should be developed. The following questions/criteria will be addressed to referees for further judgment:

  • Is the subject matter within the scope of the Journal?
  • Is the paper technically sound and free of errors?
  • Does the paper contain enough original results or insights to warrant publication?
  • Is the paper expected to have a high impact?
  • Is the quality of the drafting satisfactory? Should the paper be shortened (material irrelevant or redundant)?
  • Is the work clearly and concisely presented? Is it well organized?
  • Are the industrial applications sufficiently developed?
  • Are the scientific developments adequately investigated?
  • Does the title clearly and sufficiently reflect its contents? Is the abstract informative?
  • Are the main results and conclusions mentioned? Is the scientific discussion sound and not misleading?
  • Are the illustrations of adequate quality? Are they relevant and understandable?
  • Does the bibliography give a clear view of the current state-of-the-art in the domain?

Peer review

Referees are invited to submit their report within a period of 3 weeks.

The editor usually collects two independent reports. However in the case of a clear cut decision, the editor is allowed to reject or to accept the manuscript on the basis of a single report.

In the case where the referees cannot agree, an independent expert can be asked to act as an adjudicator.

Deadline for revision

The revised version should be received within 2 months from the editorial decision; resubmission after that date will be dealt with as a new manuscript. However, should the revisions require more time it is possible to request an extended deadline from the editorial office.

Withdrawal / retraction of a paper

Papers can be withdrawn from the journal after submission on the condition that they are accompanied by a letter of explanation giving the reasons of the withdrawal. After the withdrawal, the article file is closed immediately and the authors’ letter of explanation is sent to the referees. It is against this Journal's editorial policy, and ethical standards in publishing more generally, to permit freely the withdrawal and subsequent submission elsewhere of a paper which has been improved through referees' recommendations.


Appeals can be considered in the event of a disagreement with the final editorial decision provided that there are grounds for complaint. The editor reserves the right to accept or reject consideration of the appeal. Please note that the journal will consider only one appeal.

Statement of Informed Consent

Patients have a right to privacy that should not be infringed without informed consent. Identifying information, including patients' names, initials, or hospital numbers, should not be published in written descriptions, photographs, and pedigrees unless the information is essential for scientific purposes and the patient (or parent or guardian) gives written informed consent for publication. Informed consent for this purpose requires that a patient who is identifiable be shown the manuscript to be published.

Identifying details should be omitted if they are not essential. Complete anonymity is difficult to achieve, however, and informed consent should be obtained if there is any doubt. For example, masking the eye region in photographs of patients is inadequate protection of anonymity. If identifying characteristics are altered to protect anonymity, such as in genetic pedigrees, authors should provide assurance that alterations do not distort scientific meaning and editors should so note, authors should identify Individuals who provide writing assistance and disclose the funding source for this assistance.

Statement of Human and Animal Rights

When reporting experiments on human subjects, authors should indicate whether the procedures followed were in accordance with the ethical standards of the responsible committee on human experimentation (institutional and national). If doubt exists whether the research was conducted in accordance with the ethical standards, the authors must explain the rationale for their approach, and demonstrate that the institutional review body explicitly approved the doubtful aspects of the study. When reporting experiments on animals, authors should be asked to indicate whether the institutional and national guide for the care and use of laboratory animals was followed.