I believe that Omics is academically very dangerous and provides a very sly and dishonest business and publishing model. My observation is based on at least three bad experiences with several of their plant science-related journals. The latest involves JoH (Journal of Horticulture) (http://www.esciencecentral.org/journals/editorialboard-horticulture-open-access.php), which I believe is a total scam. I sent a manuscript there on March 11, 2014, and copied at least three editors that were on their board (http://esciencecentral.org/journals/editorialboard-horticulture-open-access.php). I send at least one reminder indicating that if they did not respond within 72 hours and acknowledge my manuscript, that the paper should be considered automatically withdrawn. Then, suddenly, on Saturday, June 28, 2014 11:30 PM, Editor.horticulture wrote:
“Dear Dr. Jaime Silva,
Sorry for the late response!
I would like to thank you for contributing your Article towards our Journal. This is to inform you that due to some technical issues we did not receive your valuable submission in time. As the problem has been solved today, we have received your Manuscript. We have been using another mail for our Journal as this mail has been blocked because of some technical reasons. Further proceeding of your Manuscript has been initiated and we will let you know the updated status within 24 hours. I assure that you will not have any further issues in future and we will complete the peer review process at the earliest. Kindly I request you to accept this article be published in our Journal it will be very interesting to the our readers. Hope you could understand the problem which we have faced. Once again thank you for your contribution.
Please do not hesitate for further queries
Regards,
Daniel Chris”
On July 2, I resubmitted a revised version, and indicated that I would not pay their predatory fee because they were listed on Beall’s list and because they were totally unprofessional. > 1 weeks later, not a single response, not even from the editors. I claim the following:
a) the scientists who make up this editor board are becoming as corrupted as the Omics publisher for sitting silently and not forcing the publisher to do something; the EIC is Mark A. Mikel from the University of Illinois. Why does he sit silent and not press the publisher?
b) Daniel Chris is most likely a false name, written to give a “Western” feel;
c) One of their journals messed up one of my papers really bad (Open Access Scientific Reports – Medicinal & Aromatic Plants), and it was a long and tough battle for them to clean up that mess. That process was also handled by clearly another person with a fake name “Gracia S Oliver”;
d) In about September, 2013, I had another battle with another of their plant science journals (JPBP), also handled by “Gracia Oliver”: Journal of Plant Biochemistry & Physiology (http://esciencecentral.org/journals/editorialboard-plant-biochemistry-physiology-open-access.php) and in that case this was the e-mail I received immediately after submission, without any peer review “Your article has been accepted under Open Access Scientific Reports. We will publish this article in OASR. Please give an confirmation reply to publish in OASR within 48 hours.” Imagine that, I submitted to JPBP, but then they asked me to publish in 48 hours in another journal! What a scam. The worst part was that I had e-mailed all of the editors and absolutely nothing was done, no apology was issued, and those scientists stayed silent (reinforcing my notion that scientists are being corrupted, too). Needless to say, I withdrew that paper and submitted it elsewhere.
e) In February 13, 2013, I wrote the following e-mail to the EIC of Agrotechnology, Prof. Sandra Sharry, Editor-in-Chief, as well as to the entre editor board, expressing my concerns:
“Sent: Wednesday, February 13, 2013 7:23 AM
Subject: OMICS PG queries: Agrotechnology
Dear Gedela Babu Srinu (CEO of OMICS PG)
Prof. Sandra Sharry, Editor-in-Chief
Agrotechnology editors: Drs. Ibrokhim Abdurakhmonov, Nagib Nassar, Nada Babiker Hamza, Mohit Bhardwaj, Ali Ghasemzadeh, Hu Xiyuan, Wenke Liu, some of whom are also editors of the journal:
http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/AGTimages/AGT_h.pdf
CC: authors of the first issue, including Dr. Horvath and Dr. Hume at the USDA
I am aware that you are the Guest Editors of some special issues coming up in Agrotechnology, a journal published by OMICS Publishing Group (PG):
http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/specialissueAGT.php
OMICS Group has been listed as a predatory publisher at http://scholarlyoa.com/publishers/
It has also made the top story today (and last month) about predatory conference proceedings:
http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/02/12/omics-ineptly-uses-social-media-to-promote-its-brands/#more-1310 (by Kenneth Witwer)
http://scholarlyoa.com/2013/01/25/omics-predatory-meetings/#more-1243
http://scholarlyoa.com/2012/05/05/omics-publishing-launches-new-brand-with-53-journal-titles/#more-299
http://metadata.posterous.com/83235355
As plant scientists, are you not concerned about the quality of the publisher and have you been asking the right questions before you decided to become Guest Editors?
Please note that association of your names with Predatory Publishers can damage or weaken your CV.
I am not personally suggesting that OMICS PG is predatory, but am simply providing you information so that you are aware that negative comments about this publisher exist.
I am not able to access any PDF files on the current page (are you?), but the researchers who are represented in the 2012 issue are highly respected plant scientists, mainly from the USA:
http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/ArchiveAGT/currentissueAGT.php
To be fair, I have CC’d OMICS PG to get their opinion on the blog posts. Is this classification by Jeffrey Beall of OMICS PG fair, accurate or correct? Mr. Beall’s e-mail is attached in the CC so that he can – and should- actively participate in the discussion. Mr Beall states “I strongly recommend, in the strongest terms possible, that all scholars from all countries avoid doing business in any way with the OMICS Group. Do not submit papers. Do not agree to serve on their editorial boards. Do not register for or attend their conferences.”
I take Mr. Beall’s and Kenneth Witwer’s words and allegations extremely seriously.
Some key questions are:
a) are the allegations made by Mr. Beall true, justified, quantified and valid?
b) Has anyone been cheated in any way?
c) Has the peer review process been conducted correctly?
d) Has anyone been charged for publishing and, if so, have 100% of authors been charged for publishing?
e) How were editors contacted, vetted recruited (for example were spam e-mails used?), are they aware that they are editors and what agreements have they signed?
f) What are the ethics and retraction policies of this journal and publisher which are not clearly explained?
g) What is Roger G Breeze, Bio-Security Deputy Program Director, Centaur Science Group, Washington DC, doing on the board of this journal?
h) Does OMICS PG use spam e-mails to contact new authors and candidate editors?
i) Why are Scirus, PubMed, Thomson Reuters, EBSCO, Scopus, EMBASE, Copernicus, Scientific Commons, SCERP Romeo and others listed at the bottom of the page as if they were officially associated with this journal if in fact only one journal issue only has been published to date (http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/editorialboardAGT.php)? Is this purposefully deceitful misinformation to feign quality? Incidentally, this incompatible with information on the A&I page (http://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/indexingAGT.php).
j) A gambling system is clearly in place, which is absolutely anti-academic in nature in which authors, reviewers and editors gain points which facilitate future submissions and publications, suggesting that publishing in this OMICS PG journal is based on points rather than on peer review (http://www.omicsonline.org/author-credits.php; http://www.omicsonline.org/editor-credits.php; http://www.omicsonline.org/reviewer-credits.php).
l) The company is based in India (Hyderabad) with branches in Los Angeles. If so, why does only the LA address appear? Is the publisher afraid to show its real roots?
m) If the above serious allegations about the dangerous and predatory nature of OMICS PG are so true, then why are so many of the elite in plant science lending their support to this publisher as editors and as authors? If indeed Omics PG is guilty of academic offenses, then should not any plant scientist who is directly lending support from this day forwards also supporting fraud in academics, by automatic association?
n) Should authors who have already published in this and other Omics PG journals retract their papers?
Other public negative comments about Omics PG involving rip-offs, scams, fraud, and others:
http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/predatory-open-access-publisher-omics-publishing-group-hits-new-low-in-blog-spamming/
http://dougsarchaeology.wordpress.com/2012/04/13/predatory-open-access-publisher-omics-publishing-group-now-blog-spamming/
http://www.jfdp.org/forum/forum_docs/1013jfdp1040_1_032912094346.pdf
http://occamstypewriter.org/stevecaplan/2011/02/02/there-is-peer-review-and-then-there-is-this/
http://scholarly.gmu.edu/?p=409
http://www.ripoffreport.com/seminar-programs/cancer-science-2011/cancer-science-2011-omics-pub-f1085.htm
and the follow-up: http://www.ripoffreport.com/seminar-programs/omics-group-cancer-s/omics-group-cancer-science-20-307b5.htm
http://poynder.blogspot.jp/2011/12/open-access-interviews-omics-publishing.html
http://mainsleaze.spambouncer.org/?p=1721 (confirmed official spammer by Benchmark Email)
http://phylogenomics.blogspot.jp/2012/01/scary-and-funny-functional-researcher.html and http://phylogenomics.blogspot.jp/2010/07/science-spammer-of-month-omics.html (by Jonathan Eisen at UC Davis who is also EIC of PLoS Biology)
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2013/01/19/berkeley-earth-finally-makes-peer-review/ (fake scientists)
http://milospjanic.blogspot.jp/2011/10/is-omicsonline-scientific-scam.html
http://voices.yahoo.com/avoid-scam-publishers-agents-11440.html
http://www.thehindu.com/sci-tech/technology/on-the-net-a-scam-of-a-most-scholarly-kind/article3939161.ece?homepage=true
and many others… Google and Yahoo Omics Publishing Group + keywords like fraud, complaints, scam, fake, scandal, etc
I welcome anybody’s feed-back because this issue affects all of us as plant scientists whether in Beijing, Idaho, or Tokyo.
Sincerely,
Jaime A. Teixeira da Silva
A concerned plant scientist trying to gauge the damage and effect of predatory publishing in plant science.”
And that is why we have a crisis in plant science publishing, I believe. Because we have leading scientists who are willing to continue to offer their blind support to clearly fraudulent (at least academically) publishers, all so that they can egotistically see their photos posted on the web of an editorial board. The publisher may be corrupted, but so too are many of my colleagues who sit on these boards and do nothing. They are now part of the problem and that is why I have become public enemy No. 1 for plant scientists, because I am willing to criticize their blind faith in public.
