Microbiology Independent Research Journal (MIR Journal)

Advanced search

Editorial Policies

Aim and Scope

The Microbiology Independent Research Journal (MIR Journal) is a new international resource for academic researchers and professionals in the pharmaceutical and biopharmaceutical industry. MIR Journal publishes strictly peer-reviewed papers devoted to novel aspects in microbiology including virology, bacteriology, and mycology.

Journal covers a wide range of topics including: theory and practice of new vaccine development; vaccines against new emerging viruses; development of universal vaccines (influenza) and viral vector-based vaccines; mechanisms of viral attenuation; vaccine production technology; antiviral and antimicrobial drug discovery; the study of new drug targets for viruses and bacteria; new plasmid-based vectors and their application in biotechnology; synthesis, biosynthesis, structure and function of biomolecules critical for the life cycle of prokaryotes and viruses. MIR Journal includes manuscripts on bacterial synthetic biology, bacterial mutations and antibiotic resistance as well as on new approaches and methods of antiviral and antimicrobial defense.

Infectious agents do not recognize country borders and close worldwide cooperation between scientists and medical personnel is necessary in order to prevent the spread of dangerous pathogens. The main objective of the MIR Journal is to provide broad international coverage of scientific results in microbiology and to extend the accessibility of the journal content. In order to meet this goal, all of the papers are published in the English language and available in open access format online – free of charge for the readers. One of the goals of MIR Journal is to enhance the number of publications from Russian research laboratories in English in order to include them in the context of international science. Quick, easy, and convenient access to the full text of articles makes the information about occurrence, properties, and distribution of the known and newly emerging infectious agents available immediately to the scientific community and practicing medical personnel.


Section Policies


Publication Frequency

1 issue per year


Open Access Policy

"Microbiology Independent Research Journal (MIR Journal)" is an open access journal. All articles are made freely available to readers immediatly upon publication.

Our open access policy is in accordance with the Budapest Open Access Initiative (BOAI) definition - it means that articles have free availability on the public internet, permitting any users to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of these articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose, without financial, legal, or technical barriers other than those inseparable from gaining access to the internet itself.

For more information please read BOAI statement.




  • Russian State Library (RSL)
  • National Electronic-Information Consortium (NEICON)



A single-blind peer review is mandatory for processing all scientific manuscripts submitted for publication in MIR Journal. This implies that authors do not know who are the reviewers of the manuscript while the reviewers know who the authors are.

  1. Members of the editorial board and leading experts in microbiology, invited as independent reviewers, perform peer reviews. Editor-in-chief choose reviewers for peer review. The peer review process should be finished in the period 2-4 weeks, though in some cases more time could be allocated at the reviewer’s request.
  2. Every manuscript is submitted for review to three different reviewers.
  3. Reviewer has an option to refuse from reviewing the manuscript if any conflict of interests arise that may affect perception or interpretation of the manuscript. As a result of the manuscript review process the reviewer is expected to present the editorial board with one of the following recommendations:
    - to accept the paper for publication in its present state;
    - to accept the paper for publication after the certain revision and correction;
    - to recommend the authors revision of their manuscript in order to address specific concerns before final decision is reached;
    - to recommend further review by other specialist before making the final decision;
    - to reject the manuscript outright.
  1. If the reviewer has recommended any revisions of the manuscript, the editorial staff would ask the authors either to implement the corrections, or to dispute them reasonably. Authors are kindly required to make all the revisions in 2 months and resubmit the revised manuscript within this time frame for final evaluation. The revised manuscript is submitted to reviewers for reevaluation.
  2. We politely request the authors to notify the editor verbally or in writing if the authors decide to refuse from publishing the manuscript. In case the authors fail to do so within 3 months after receiving a copy of the initial review, the editorial board takes the manuscript off the register and notifies the authors accordingly.
  3. If the author and reviewers have insoluble contradictions regarding the manuscript, the editorial board has the right to send the manuscript for additional review. In conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief at the editorial board meeting.
  4. The final decision to reject a manuscript is made by the editorial board according to reviewers’ recommendations. The authors of the manuscript are notified about this decision via e-mail in a timely manner. The editorial board does not accept previously rejected manuscripts for re-evaluation.
  5. Upon the decision to accept the manuscript for publication, the editorial staff notifies the authors of the scheduled date of publication.
  6. Kindly note that positive review does not guarantee the acceptance of the manuscript for publication, as the final decision in all cases lies within the editorial board. In all conflict situations, the decision is made by the editor-in-chief.
  7. Original reviews of submitted manuscripts are kept on file for 5 years.


Publishing Ethics

The Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal MIR Journal are based on the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) Code of Conduct guidelines available at,  and requirements for peer-reviewed journals developed by the Elsevier Publishing House (according to the international ethical rules for scientific publications)

  1. Introduction

1.1. Publishing science papers in peer-reviewed journals is a significant contribution to the development of the relevant field of science, and also is an easy way of scientific communication. Therefore, it is important to establish standards for the future ethical conduct of all parties involved in the publication process, namely: the author, the journal editor, the peer reviewer, the publisher and the sponsor for the journal: MIR Journal.

1.2. Publisher has a supporting, investing and nurturing role in the scholarly communication process but is also ultimately responsible for ensuring that best practice is followed in the journal’s publications.

1.3. The publisher is committed to the strict control of scientific materials and recognizes responsibility in all policies especially from the ethical guidelines point of view that are adopted here.


  1. Duties of Editors

2.1. Publication decision – The Editor of the scientific journal MIR Journal is solely and independently responsible for decision to publish or decline the publication of the submitted manuscript. The credibility of the reviewed manuscript and its scientific relevance should determine the decision on acceptance of the manuscript for the publication. Editors may be bound by the policies of the Editorial Board of MIR Journal, limited by current legal requirements in relation to defamation, copyright, legality and plagiarism. The editor may confer with other editors or reviewers in making this decision.

2.2. Decency – An editor should evaluate manuscripts for their intellectual content without regard to race, gender, sexual orientation, religious belief, ethnic origin, citizenship, or political views of the authors.

2.3. Confidentiality – The editor and any editorial staff of MIR Journal should not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, unless it is required by law.

2.4. Disclosure and Conflicts of interest

2.4.1. Unpublished data disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in an editor’s own research without the written consent of the author. Privileged information or ideas obtained during the peer review process should be kept confidential and could not be 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 reviewing the 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) other institutions connected to the manuscripts.

2.5. Control of the publications quality – If an editor has convincing evidence that the statements or conclusions in a published paper are erroneous he/she should coordinate with the publisher to promote the prompt publication of a correction, retraction of the paper, expression of concern, or another note, as appropriate.

2.6. Involvement and cooperation in investigations – The Editor together with the Publisher take appropriate action in the event of ethical claims regarding reviewed manuscripts or published materials. Such measures include interaction with the аuthors of the manuscript and the reasoning of the corresponding complaint or request, but may also involve interaction with relevant third-party organizations and research centers.


  1. Duties of Reviewers

3.1. Contribution to Editorial Board Decisions – Peer review process helps the editor to make editorial decisions and may also assist the author in improving the quality of the manuscript through the communications with the editor. Peer review is a cornerstone of the scientific method and an essential component of formal scholarly communication. The 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 reviewer who feels that he/she is unqualified to review the manuscript or knows that could not accomplish it in the certain time frame should notify the editor of MIR Journal and excuse himself/herself from the review process.

3.3. Confidentiality – Any manuscripts received for review should be treated as confidential documents. They should 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 authors is inappropriate. Reviewers should express their views clearly with supporting arguments.

3.5. Acknowledgement of Sources – Reviewers should identify relevant published papers that have not been cited by the authors. Any previously published statement, observation, derivation, or argument should be accompanied by the corresponding citation. The Reviewer should also draw the editor's attention to any significant similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other published work within the scope of the reviewer's scientific competence.

3.6. Disclosure and Conflict of Interest

3.6.1. Any and all unpublished data that is disclosed in a submitted manuscript should not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the written consent of the authors. All information and/or ideas obtained through the peer review process should be kept confidential and should not be used for personal advantage.

3.6.2. Reviewers should not be involved in the peer review process of the  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 manuscripts.


  1. Duties of Authors

4.1. Requirements for manuscripts

4.1.1. Authors of manuscripts describing original research should provide credible results of their research as well as an objective discussion of its significance. All the essential and supplemental data should be presented accurately. The manuscript should contain sufficient experimental details and bibliographic references for the successful reproduction of the results. False or knowingly wrong statements are perceived as unethical behavior and are unacceptable.

4.1.2. Reviews and scientific articles should also be accurate and objective; editor’s point of view in editorial papers should be clearly indicated.

4.2. Data Access and Storage – Authors may be asked to provide the raw data in connection with a manuscript 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 possible, 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 submitted an entirely original manuscript, and if the authors have used data and/or statements published elsewhere, they have been appropriately cited and/or quoted.

4.3.2. Plagiarism takes many forms, from “passing off” paper written by other scientists as the author’s own paper, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another paper (without the corresponding 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 Publications

4.4.1. In general an author should not publish manuscripts describing essentially the same research as original publications in more than one journal. Submitting the same manuscript to more than one journal concurrently constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable.

4.4.2. In general, an author should not submit a previously published paper for consideration in another journal.

4.4.3. Publication of certain types of articles (e.g., clinical guidelines, translations) in more than one journal is sometimes acceptable, provided that certain conditions are met. The authors and editors of the journals involved should agree on the secondary publication, which should present the same data and interpretation as in the original publication. The secondary publication should have the reference on the original publication. Further detail on acceptable forms of secondary publications can be found at

4.5. Acknowledgement of Sources

The contributions of others should always be recognized. Authors should cite publications that are relevant to the research presented in the manuscript. Data obtained privately, for example, in the course of conversation, correspondence or in the course of discussion with third parties, should not be used or presented without the explicit written permission of the original source. Information obtained from confidential sources e.g. in the course of evaluating manuscripts or awarding grants, should not be used without the clear written permission of authors related to confidential sources.

4.6. Authorship of the Paper

4.6.1. Authorship should be limited to those who have made a significant contribution to the development of the conception, design, execution, or interpretation of results of the research study described in the manuscript. All those who have made significant contributions should be listed as co-authors. In cases where other participants have made a significant contribution in a particular direction of a research project, they should be listed in Acknowledgement section as persons who have contributed to this research project.

4.6.2. The corresponding author should ensure that all those who have made a significant contribution to the project are included as co-authors in the manuscript and that there are no co-authors who did not make a significant contribution to the project; 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 and Human or Animal Subjects

4.7.1. If the research project involves the use of chemicals, procedures or equipment that present any unusual hazards, the author must clearly identify these hazards in the manuscript.

4.7.2. If the research project involves the use of animal or human subjects, the author/authors should ensure that the manuscript contains a statement that all procedures were performed in compliance with corresponding laws and institutional guidelines and that the appropriate institutional committee(s) have approved them. The manuscript should contain a statement that informed consent has been obtained from all the humans who are the subjects of research. The privacy rights of human beings must always be respected.

4.8. Disclosure and Conflicts of Interest

4.8.1. All authors should disclose in the manuscript any financial or other conflicts of interest that might influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the project should be disclosed.

4.8.2. Examples of potential conflicts of interest which 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. Significant errors in published papers – When an author discovers a significant error or inaccuracy in a published paper, it is the author’s obligation to promptly notify the editor of MIR Journal and cooperate with publisher to retract or correct the paper. If the editor or the publisher learn from a third party that a published paper contains a significant error, they communicate it to the author, and it is the obligation of the author to promptly retract or correct the paper.


  1. Duties of the Publisher

5.1. Publisher should adopt policies and procedures that support editors, reviewers and authors of MIR Journal in performing their duties according to the ethics guidelines disclosed in the Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement of the journal MIR Journal. The publisher should ensure that the potential revenue from advertising or reprints has no impact or influence on editorial decisions.

5.2. The publisher should support MIR Journal editors in the review of complaints concerning the ethical issues connected with published papers and help editors in communications with other journals and/or publishers if necessary.

5.3. The publisher should promote best research practice and implement industry standards in order to improve ethical guidelines, retirement procedures for published papers and error correction.

5.4. The publisher should provide appropriate specialized legal support if necessary.



The Founder and Publisher of the MIR Journal is LLC Doctrine (St. Petersburg, Russia).
State registration number: 1137847162001
The Journal is published on the publishing platform ELPUB.
Contact e-mail:


Author fees

Publication in MIR Journal is free of charge for all the authors.

The journal doesn't have any Article processing charges.

The journal doesn't have any Article submission charges.


Human Rights Policy

The journal MIR Journal relies on the principles of the World Medical Association's (WMA) policy statement - the Declaration of Helsinki - a statement of Ethical Principles for Medical Research Involving Human Subjects) and endeavours to ensure compliance with ethical and data collection standards for research involving human subjects. Before beginning research, the researchers should familiarise themselves with the principles of the Helsinki Declaration on informed consent and carry out the research in strict accordance with those principles as set forth below (Articles 25-32 of the Helsinki Declaration are given):

  1. Participation by individuals capable of giving informed consent as subjects in medical research must be voluntary. Although, it may be appropriate to consult family members or community leaders, no individual capable of giving informed consent may be enrolled in a research study unless he/she freely agrees.
  2. In medical research involving human subjects capable of giving informed consent, each potential subject must be adequately informed of the aims, methods, sources of funding, any possible conflicts of interest, institutional affiliations of the researcher, the anticipated benefits and potential risks of the study and the discomfort it may entail, post-study provisions and any other relevant aspects of the study.  The potential subject must be informed of his right to refuse to participate in the study or to withdraw his consent to participate at any time without reprisal. Special attention should be given to the specific information needs of individual potential subjects as well as the methods used to deliver the information.

After ensuring that the potential subject has understood the information, the physician or another appropriately qualified individual must then seek the potential subject's freely-given informed consent, preferably in writing.  If the consent cannot be expressed in writing, verbal consent must be formally documented and witnessed.

All medical subjects should be given the option of being informed about the general outcome and results of the study.

  1. When seeking informed consent for participation in a research study, the physician must be particularly cautious when the potential subject is in a dependent relationship with the physician or may consent under duress. In such situations, the informed consent must be sought by an appropriately qualified individual who is completely independent of this relationship.
  2. For a potential research subject who is incapable of giving informed consent, the physician must seek informed consent from his legally authorised representative. These individuals must not be included in a research study that has no likelihood of benefit for them unless it is intended to promote the health of the group represented by the potential subject, the research cannot instead be performed with persons capable of providing informed consent, and the research entails minimal risk and burden.
  3. When a potential research subject who is deemed incapable of giving informed consent is able to give assent to decisions about participation in research, the physician must seek that assent in addition to the consent of the legally authorised representative. The potential subject's dissent should be respected.
  4. Research involving subjects who are physically or mentally incapable of giving consent, for example, unconscious patients, may be done only if the physical or mental condition that prevents giving informed consent is a necessary characteristic of the research group. In such circumstances the physician must seek informed consent from the legally authorised representative. If no such representative is available and if the research cannot be delayed, the study may proceed without informed consent provided that the specific reasons for involving subjects with a condition that renders them unable to give informed consent have been stated in the research protocol and the study has been approved by a research ethics committee. Consent to remain in the research must be obtained as soon as possible from the subject or a legally authorised representative.
  5. The physician must fully inform the patient which aspects of their care are related to the research. The refusal of a patient to participate in a study or the patient's decision to withdraw from the study should never adversely affect the patient-physician relationship.
  6. For medical research using identifiable human material or data, such as research on material or data contained in biobanks or similar repositories, physicians must seek informed consent for its collection, storage and/or reuse. There may be exceptions where consent would be impossible or impractical to obtain for such research. In such situations, the research may be done only after consideration and approval of a research ethics committee.

Human Rights Policy

When presenting the results of experimental research involving human subjects, the authors should indicate whether the procedures performed adhered to the ethical standards prescribed in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the study was conducted without adherence to the principles of the Declaration, the authors should justify the chosen approach to the study and guarantee that the ethics committee of the organisation in which the study was conducted approved the chosen approach.


Plagiarism detection

MIR Journal uses Ithenticate software to screen the submitted manuscripts for plagiarism. If plagiarism is identified, the COPE guidelines on plagiarism will be followed.


Preprint and postprint Policy

The editorial board of the MIR Journal allows authors to post the manuscript as a preprint on preprint servers and in disciplinary and institutional repositories before submission for review and to archive independently their accepted for publication articles in disciplinary and institutional repositories as well as to disseminate through a personal website or blog.



The editorial board of the MIR Journal encourages uploading preprints of the submitted manuscripts on preprint servers. The Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE) defines a preprint as “a scholarly manuscript posted by the author(s) in an openly accessible platform, usually before or in parallel with the peer review process.” 

A preprint publication should not be considered a duplicate publication nor shall it influence the editor's decision to publish the manuscript in the MIR Journal.

The author should notify the editorial board of the MIR Journal about the posted preprint at submission of the manuscript for review, furnishing a link to the preprint with its DOI identifier and the dissemination terms and conditions.

It is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published manuscript in the preprint record. The link must contain the DOI and the URL of the article published on the journal's website. The original preprint should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The preprint should not be replaced with the text of the published article. The preprint text should not be deleted.


Manuscripts Accepted for Publication

The authors can independently archive their manuscripts that have been reviewed and are accepted for publication in MIR Journal.

 This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

  • personal website or blog;
  • institutional repository;
  • disciplinary repository;
  • direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

The text of the manuscript should contain the author’s clarifications about its status and information about the planned publication.

Example: The article “TITLE” has been reviewed, accepted for publication, and will be published in 2021 (3) of the MIR Journal.

Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The text of the posted manuscript should not be replaced or deleted. 


Final Versions of Manuscripts

The editorial board of MIR Journal allows for the independent archival of the manuscripts that have been peer-reviewed, accepted for publication, edited and ready for publication (proofread and typeset). This version of the manuscript may be disseminated through:

  • personal website or blog;
  • institutional repository;
  • disciplinary repository;
  • direct interactions with faculty or students by providing this version of the manuscript for personal use.

Once the final version of the manuscript is published, it is the author’s responsibility to add a link to the published article to the publication record. The posted text should not be modified based on the reviewer’s and editor’s comments. The text of the posted manuscript should not be replaced or deleted.


Data sharing policy

Authors are encouraged to make available the research data that support their publications but are not required to do so. The consent or refusal of the authors to provide access to research data should not affect the decision on the article publication.


Definition of research data

This policy applies to the research data that would be required to verify the results of research reported in articles published in the MIR Journal. Research data include the data produced by the authors (“primary data”) and the data from other sources that are analyzed by authors in their study (“secondary data”). Research data includes any recorded factual material that is used to produce the results in digital and non-digital form. This includes tabular data, code, images, audio, documents, video, maps, raw and/or processed data.


Definition of exceptions

The data that are not a subject to public disclosure may be delivered as follows: deposited in science data repositories with limited access or preliminary anonymized. An author can also publicly disclose metadata and/or description of the access method to the data as requested by other scholars.


Data repositories

The preferred method for sharing research data is via data repositories. Please visit website for help in finding research data repositories.


Data citation

The Editorial Board of MIR Journal welcomes access to research data under the Creative Commons Licenses. Editorial Board of MIR Journal does not insist on the mandatory use of Creative Commons License in cases when the data are deposited in the repository of the third party. The Publisher of the MIR Journal does not assert any copyrights for the data submitted by the authors together with the article.  

Questions and compliance letters regarding the data citation and licensing should be directed to the MIR Journal (