Instruction to Authors

For preparing a manuscript, please follow the Instructions to Authors

The International Journal of Molecular and Physical Gastronomy ("Molecular Gastronomy") is a scientific journal published by the Inrae-AgroParisTech International Centre for Molecular Gastronomy.  

To download the latest Instructions to Authors : here

With original research articles, conjuncture notes, reviews, reports, syntheses, lecture reports, letters opinions, editorials, etc., the journal is giving informed and knowledgeable information regarding every aspect of molecular gastronomy, from scientific research to educational applications.

ISSN  2431-0859

Except specific indications, articles are open access documents under the CC BY license (

The manuscripts have to be fully in accordance with the following instructions, derived from the standards for manuscripts preparation as proposed by the International Committee of Medical Journal Editors – ICMJE (  Below, a shortened version of these instructions is given, with a full version and a checklist to be used by authors before sending the manuscripts.

1. The short version

To the authors of  manuscripts submitted to    Molecular and Physical Gastronomy

In 2014, the International Centre for Molecular Gastronomy created, on its internet site, a scientific publication displaying works of academic quality in the field of molecular and physical gastronomy;  educational and technological applications of molecular, physical and biological gastronomy are also considered.
The journal is on line, free (authors do not pay), open (free for readers), with double blind review, at:
The Editorial Board in charge is happy to  receive manuscripts at   

1.1. Which articles?

The manuscripts can be of various kinds:  
1    News Part
    •     Short News
    •     Editorials
    •     Image for thought (Section Editor : Pr José Miguel Aguilera)
    •     Book reviews and article reviews(Section Editor : Pr Clark Danderson)
2    Scientific Part
    •     Research Notes
    •     Commentaries (including Commentaries by Reviewers)
    •     Letters to the Editors (Section Editor : Pr Volker Hessel)
    •     Reports
    •     Opinions
    •     Perspectives
    •     Litterature Reviews (including Discussions of Culinary Precisions)
    •     Synthesis
    •     Debates
    •     Conference Proceedings

3  Molecular Gastronomy and Education
    •     Courses  (Section Editor : Pr Roisin Burke)
    •     How to do
    •     Practice and trends
    •     Educational Developments
    •     Educational Documents

4   "Edible Ideas" (applications on molecular and physical gastronomy to cooking)
    •     Recipes (Section Editor: Paulina Mata)
    •     Questions and answers
    •     Techniques and Tips (Section Editor : Laura Febvay)
    •     Experimental tests of culinary precisions (Section Editor : Mark Traynor)

The Editorial Board will meet regularly in order to revise these possibilities. 

1.2. Published in which context?

The publications will be made only on line (no paper). The are free and open, i.e. the authors have nothing to pay, and their articles will be freely accessible on line.
The articles have references: Authors. Year of publication. Title, Journal,  N° of publication, Pages.

1.3. The editorial preparation

Manuscripts are only accepted in English.
When received, they are immediately registered officially, and deposited in a safe, official, private directory (for later priority discussions if any).
They are given an anonymous number that will be used for all correspondence, as well as for exchanges between the editors and the reviewers, on one side, and between the editors and the authors on the other.

Each manuscript has to be proposed as two files:
- a file including the names of authors, their affiliations
- a file containing the article itself, entirely anonymous.

Each of these two files has to be given in .doc and .pdf.  
Inside the files, only one typeface should be used:  Times new roman  12, double spacing, black color. Lines should be numbered.

Further details

The first file should contain:
       - a title
       - the name of authors
       - their affiliations
       - the designation of the corresponding author (only they will be exchanging with the journal)
       - aknowledgements
       - dedication
       The second file should contain:
       - the title
       - an abstract (limited to 130 words)
       - keywords (between 3 and 6)
       -the text (Times new roman, 12, double spacing, size 12, double spacing), with no blank lines

In the text, there will be only one level of subtitles, in bold, using the same character (kind, size) as for the text, namely Times new Roman, size 12.
Footnotes are not accepted.

Names should be given in non capital letters, excepting the initial letter.
Terms in foreign language such are Latin or Greek have to be in italics.
Units will be given using the International System of Units.
Scientific names are to be in accordance with the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry (in particular the Gold Book of IUPAC:
Abreviations have to be defined the first time that they appear in the text; e.g.: triacylglycerol (TAG).

Bibliographical references, in the end of the text, will be given by alphabetical order of the name of the first author, according to the following rules:
       - books: Malecot G. 1948. Les mathématiques de l’hérédité. Masson, Paris, 428 p. (or the pages corresponding to the part of interest).
       - articles: Dupont JN, Durand A.  1992.  Molecular biology of methanogens, Annual Review of Microbiolology, 46, 165-191.
       - internet site :, last access 2019-12-23.
       DOIs are highly recommended.
       References of articles accepted for publication have to be quoted as the others, including “on press” after the name of the journal.

Figures, picture or schemes have to be given as digital files (format jpg), of printable quality, free of rights. They will be called in the text, and put in it at the place where they have to appear, with a caption (under the figure), in italics.
Tables are called in the text and referenced separately, but the number will be put before the table.
The length or the articles is at will.

When authors propose a manuscript, they can indicate preferred reviewers (if no conflict of interest) and reviewers to be avoided (because of competition).

1.4. The editorial circuit

The goal, for the Board of Editors, is to promote the publication of manuscripts that have academic quality.
In order to reach it, the editors and reviewers are invited to exchange anonymously with authors until the needed academic quality is reach, and publication can be done.
In order to reach this quality, the journal is based on the Editorial Board:  

The manuscripts will be published after the following steps:  
    • Manuscripts are sent to
    • At reception, the text is deposited officially in a private directory of the International Centre for Molecular and Physical Gastronomy; anonymity is checked, and a number is given.
    • The anonymous manuscript is sent to the secretaries of the Editorial Board
    • One member of the Editorial Board is invited to look for two specialized  reviewers
    • The reports (critical analysis including advice to authors, rather than evaluation) are transmitted from the reviewers to the editor in charge, and then for the editor to Editor secretary, who send the document to the authors
    • The authors have to answer to the reviewers and editor in the text (.doc), showing clearly the modifications made; an explanatory document can be added.  
    • The modified manuscript and the explanatory document are sent back to the editor in charge, and the process is repeated until the reviewers and the editor consider that the text can be published.
    • The accepted version is processed for layout, and proofs are sent to the author, who can make only minor changes (large changes call for a new review).

It is repeated that the reviewers are invited to make positive observations, in order to improve the quality of the manuscript. Their name is printed on the final document, if they accept. Part of their report can also be published along with the manuscript when they want (only scientific discussions, or comments).

The  Editorial Board:
In May 2023, the Editorial Board is made of:

Jose Miguel Aguilera, Emeritus Professor University Santiago, Chile, Editor in charge of the section “Image for thought”.
Imran Ahmad, Food, Agriculture and Biotechnology Innovation Lab (FABIL), Chaplin School of Hospitality, Florida International University, Miami, FL
Reine Barbar, Associate Professor in Food Engineering and Physical Chemistry, Institut Agro-Montpellier, France
Roisin Burke, Technological University Dublin, Ireland
Davide Cassi, Professor, Parma, Italy
Cleo Croze, Tipiak, Saint-Jeure-d’Andaure, France
Clark A. Danderson, Auburn, Alabama, USA
Laura Febvay, Switzerland
Maria Cruz Figueroa Espinoza, Professor, L’Institut Agro  Montpellier, Montpellier, France
Erik Fookadi, Associate Professor, Volda University College, Norway.
Volker Hessel, Professor at the University of Adelaide, Australia
Ashraf Ismail, Professor, Department of Food Science and Agricultural Chemistry, Macdonald Campus of McGill University, Canada
Alan Kelly, Professor, Hear of the School of Food and Nutritional Sciences, Cork University, Ireland
Christophe Lavelle, MNHN, France
Erik van der Linden, Wageningen University, The Netherlands
Linda Luck, Professor, State University of New York at Plattsburgh, USA
Paulina Mata, Retired Assistant Professor, having collaboration contract with Nova FCT
Francesco Noci, Doctor, Atlantic Technological University, Galway, Ireland
Lauriane Pierrot-Deseilligny, Ecole Normale Supérieure Lyon, Lyon, France.
Barbara Rega, Professor, AgroParisTech, Université Paris-Saclay, France
Sébastien Roustel, CHR-Hansen, Denmark/France
Weon-Sun Shin, Professor, Seoul University, Korea
Paulo Sobral, Professor, University of Sao Paulo, Brasil
Rohit Srivastava, India/France
Hervé This vo Kientza, INRAE-AgroParisTech International Centre of Molecular and Physical Gastronomy, Paris, France.
Mark Traynor, Professor, Auburn University, Alabama, USA
Juan Valverde, Dublin, Ireland
Thomas Vilgis, Max Planck Institute, Mainz, Germany

For sending manuscripts:


2. The comprehensive version


For any information on the ethical rules of scientific publishing, see:

For studies done on man or with animal, the authors have to ensure that their studies were done in accordance to the The Code of Ethics of the World Medical Association (Helsinki Statement) :
- for studies involving men and women:; EU Directive 2010/63/EU
- for experimentation with animals:;

The works have to be in accordance to the Helsinki Statement, and they have to have been declared, if needed, to a Consultative Committee for the Protection of Human Beings in Biomedical Research  (CCPPRB), or to a Committee of Ethics. When such an institution was consulted, the manuscript should declare it.

For manuscripts in the fields of science of human beings or science of society, the authors have, according to the best practices of such disciplines, indicated the historiography context and recalled the researches prior to them, and differences with such works.   


Submitting a manuscript implies that this text was not proposed previously to the same journal, and that is not being reviewed in another journal. The submission has to be accepted by all authors. The authors accept that, if the manuscript is accepted and published, only the .pdf file produced by the IJMPG can be distributed (freely).
In order to check the originality of the text, the manuscript can be submitted to a checking software or aanti-plagiarism tool such as CrossCheck:


The texts have to be given as .doc or .docx files.

The manuscript is to be submitted by using the email address:

• BE AWARE: this journal is using an organization of double blind evaluation. This means that the identity of authors is not known from editors and reviewers, and vice versa.
As a consequence, different files are needed:

1. File 1: the title. A  separate .doc file should contain the title in English (compulsory); each author is designated (in this order) by: their name, the name of the institution, the postal address, the telephone number, the email address.
This separate file containing the title and the names of authors will be kept secret by the secretaries of the Editorial Board, for double anonymity, excluding personal data from the manuscript., until acceptation of the manuscript.  

2. File 2: the manuscript. This .doc file, along with a .pdf file, must contain an abstract in English and keywords, in English. The text of the article should be in English. The file has also to include bibliographical references, captions for Tables and Figures.
The file containing the manuscript should never contain information on the author(s): no name, no post or email address, no telephone number.
The text should be Times new roman, size 12, double spacing, and lines have to be numbered.

3. Files 3 and more:  figures and supplemental data. These file can include schemes, pictures in black and white or in color. The various elements have to be given as separate files, with one file by figure,  or as one compressed (zip) file.


The manuscript is to be prepared according to all following rules (when the rules are not used, the manuscript is sent back).

1. Title page
This page has to include:
- the title (in English), concise, giving in a precise way the topic of the work, should not include abbreviations;
- the first names and the family name for each author; when the authors belong to different research groups, their names are followed by number in exponent, for a numbered list of institutions, including addresses;
- the name and postal address of research institutions, laboratories, research groups ; indicate telephone number and emails of authors;
- if needed, the date and place of the meeting or event where the work was shown.

2. Abstracts and keywords
Each manuscript has to include an abstract in English, without abbreviation or reference. The maximum length is 130 words.
For scientific notes, the abstracts have to have the following structure:
- Objectives;
- Materials and Methods;
- Results;
- Discussion;
- Conclusions.
For sciences of nature, the discoveries and conclusions should be clearly given. For sciences of human beings and society, sources, methods, conclusions and proposed hypothesis should be given.
Keywords, in English should be from 3 to 6.  They will be discussed by the journal for indexing.

3. The Text
Style. The text has to be clear, concise and precise. It should be understood by a reader outside the particular scientific field of the authors. Using the first person is not traditional. Information published earlier should be avoided as much as possible, and given only in order to explain the discussed matters.  
Dividing the text into small paragraphs is not a good option. The past events should be described using past tenses. This is the case, in particular, for the Materials and Methods, but also for the Results.
When authors are quoted in the text, both are quoted if they are two; if the group includes more than two authors, only the first name is given, followed by  “et al.”.
Titles and subtitles of the same hierarchical order have to be given in the same way; they should not include references.
Expressions and abbreviations in Latin are in italics  (et al., a priori, in vitro...).
The text can be followed by acknowledgments, references, captions of figures and tables.
The lines of the manuscript should be numbered by increasing order, for making the exchange between authors and reviewers more easy.
Figures are in separate files.  

Only usual abbreviations are accepted. The whole term should be before the abbreviation, given the first time that the word appears, except for units in the International System of Units.
Using abbreviations in the title is forbidden. Abbreviations should be avoided in abstracts.

These notes are not the same as bibliographical references. They are not accepted.

Units, symbols and brand names
Symbols and units have to be given according to the international rules:
Units of length, mass, volumes are m, kg, L, or their multiples.
The brand name of a material, or a product, should be given along with the abbreviation TM and, in parentheses, the name of the producer.
In a sentence, the numbers from 0 to 10 are written entirely (zero, ten). A dot is before decimal digits. Isotopes are given with the atomic mass in exponent at the left of the symbol of the element ( 131 I).

Tables have to be given on separated pages, with their caption. They are numbered with Arabic numbers, and indexed in the text by order of appearance (number in parentheses).

Figures, pictures
Figures are given only under digital form (jpg).
The caption is to be given separately, with clear information on the object of the figure, and with the explanation of possible abbreviations.
They can be in black and white or in color. When the figures were previously published, the authors have to ensure that they have to right to use them, with a written authorization of the publisher and of the authors of the picture.
The Editors can refuse figures when their number is too much or when the quality is not enough, in accordance to the information given.
Figures should be given in the .jpg or .jpeg format; TIFF (.tiff), EPS (.eps), PDF (.pdf) are also accepted, as well as .doc, .ppt or .xls (respectively for writer/word, or Powerpoint, or excel).
In order to more clearly identify the figures, it is recommended to include the number of the figure in the name of the file containing the figure. For example the file« fig1.tif » could contain the first  figure, as a  TIFF format. The minimum resolution of figures should be  300 DPI for pictures, and  500 to 1000 DPI for graphs or schemes. High resolution is needed.

Supplemental materials
The journal invites the authors to submit supplemental materials. They can include tables, figures, videos, MCQ, etc. Such information is sometimes helpful (for example, when a table is too big or pictures are too many). They can give experimental details or give data.
This information (pictures, videos, audio files, archives, spreadsheets...) will be given as separate files.
Various formats are possible:
- for pictures: .gif, .tif, .jpg, .svg, .png, etc.),
- for videos: .mov, .avi, etc.
- for podcasts: .mp3, .wma, .wav
- for documents:.doc, .pdf, etc.
- for spreadsheets: .xls, .cvs, etc.
- for presentations: .ppt, .pps, etc.

They appear at the end of articles, before references. They include the description of the works for which the authorship is not required, such as thanks for technical help, material contribution, funding. In particular, they can included the description of interests for which a conflict is possible (see below).
For each author of the publication, complementary information can be given: experimental work, technical assistance, redaction...

Bibliographical References
They are selected by the authors, and their precision is to be checked before sending the manuscript. They should be accessible, and it is not recommended to quote articles from journals that don’t apply peer reviewing.
References are described in the text between parentheses including the family name of the first or the two first authors, and a date, separated by a comma. When two authors are given, their names are separated by “and”. When the quoted publication has more than two authors, the name for the first authors is to be followed by “et al.”.
At the end of the manuscript, the references are given in alphabetical order of the name of first authors.  
All references quoted in the text have to be present in the list of references at the end of the text, and vice versa.
Accepted but non published articles can be given using the journal, the year and the volume of publication, and the mention [in press]. References to personal communications, memoirs, non submitted manuscripts are to be quoted in the text only (not in the final list of references), with  special information (such as “personal communication”).
References are given according as:  

Article in a scientific journal
Dupont JN, Durand A.  1992.  Molecular biology of methanogens. Annual Review of Microbiology, 46, 165-191.

Article in a supplement of a volume
Dupont JN, Durand A.  1992.  Molecular biology of methanogens. Annual Review of Microbiology Supplement, 34–6.  

Malecot G. 1948. Les mathématiques de l’hérédité. Masson, Paris, 428 p. (or the pages quoted).

Chapter of books
This H. 2012. Gastronomie moléculaire et olfaction. In Odorat et goût (Salesse R and  Gervais R eds). Editions Quae, Paris, 439-449.
Dupont JN, Durand A.  1992.  Molecular biology of methanogens. Proceedings of the 7th Life Sciences Symposium, Oct. 29-31, Knoxville (TN), 69-78.

Valverde J. 2007. Study of the modifications induced by various culinary and industrial treatments of pigment systems from immature pods of green beans (Phaseolus vulgaris L.) ; introduction of new analytical methods for the study of such systems)  [PhD Dissertation]. University Paris VI, Paris.

Reference on line
Morse SS. 1995. Factors in the emergence of infectious diseases. Emerging Infectious Disease [serial online]., last access YY-MM-DD.

For all kind of references, DOIs are highly recommended.


The journal is following the international rules relative to conflicting interests. Any interest should be given, at the end of the text.
All authors have to declare their interests following the rules below:  
An interest is to be declared when an author or a co-author has personal or financial relationship with other persons or organizations who can influence his/her judgment  (loyalty of research). The principal interests are financial, including clinical tests for drug companies, consulting, familial...
When there are one or more interests for one or more authors, the whole list of interest should be given at the end of the manuscript, before the references.


The English version of abstracts and keywords should be grammatically excellent.

Types of articles and length
The presentation and length of manuscript (not including title, abstract, references, tables and figures) are different depending on the particular kind of articles:

1. News Part:

1.1. Short News
The articles for the News section should not include original scientific results. They are limited to giving factual information, in less than one printed page (600 words).  

1.2. Editorials
The author(s) discuss a topic or give an opinion. Editorials can discuss a current hot topic, ask fresh questions or give answers with arguments. They cannot include original scientific results. They can be proposed to the Editorial Board or be invited.

1.3. Image for thought
These articles should be focused on one (only one) stunning picture with gastronomic relevance, that attracts the reader’s attention. The aim of these articles revolves around the inquisitive aspects of the image, and its scientific implications.
The title should be concise and informative.
The picture should depict a novel food ingredient, or a culinary physical and chemical phenomenon, transformation, or process (with a scale bar for dimension where applicable).
-photomicrographs of the food structure
- novel imaging technique to explore the gastronomic value
- standard image of food and beverage fermentation or a soufflé rising,
- microstructure view of food emulsion composition,
 - scanning electron microscope (SEM) images of food structure,
-chromatogram detailing the volatile compounds in foods and beverages.
The text (less than 1000 words) should
(1) include a short abstract,
(2) explain the  scientific content and discuss the culinary, chemical, physical and biological phenomenon, transformation or process in relation to the image,
(3) explain the relevance to molecular and physical gastronomy,
(4) clearly explain how the picture was produced (materials and methods have to be given),
(5) give a sufficient number of references.

1.4. Books reviews and articles reviews
As for other texts, these texts are reviewed double blind. The include a title, an abstract giving the title of the book or article reviewed, keywords, and a text with references. Pictures can be included (with captions).

2. Scientific section

2.1. Research Notes
New scientific results are published in scientific notes. They have to be given in a way allowing reproduction, as for any other scientific journal.
They include title, abstracts and keywords. The manuscripts include six sections: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion, References.
Long articles are preferably divided using short subtitles. Only one level of division is accepted.  

The Introduction justifies the work, explaining the goals and the scientific basis of the study (with references). Verbs are in the present tense.

In the Materials and Methods section, all conditions for producing results have to be given. This paragraph does not give results. It is to end with the presentation of statistical tests which were implemented. Verbs are at the past.

In the Results section, depending on their number or type, the results are given as groups, with mean and standard deviation, median (with extremal values), and probabilities with confidence internals. It is better to use figures and tables added to the description of the results in natural language. Long lists of data should be avoided.  
This paragraph is to be written using in the past tenses.  

Discussion: this paragraph is commenting on the results, but it should not give new results or repeat results previously given. The results of the study can be put in context of already published results from quoted articles. Quantitative analysis should be preferred to simple comparisons.
To be noted: Editors and Reviewers who would like to propose alternative interpretations can do it in  “Commentaries” (see this section).

Conclusion. It should be short, including answers to the question(s) given in the Introduction. It has to be clearly a consequence of the results, and should not include ideas which cannot be justified by data from the Results. It should not be a reproduction of the abstract.

2.2. Commentaries (including Commentaries by Reviewers)
In this section, reflections can be published about  articles formerly published, discussing scientific, technological or technical interpretation which were give in the commented text.
Commentaries are narrowly focused articles. They can take one of two forms.
The first form aims to highlight one or few interesting research articles formerly published in one scientific journal, to discuss specific issues within a subject area. Opinions can be expressed as long as they are factually based (references).
The second form is a commentary on a study or review that was formerly published or that is soon to be published, and that is interesting enough to warrant further comment or explanation. This type of commentary discusses specific issues within a subject area rather than the whole field, explains the implications of the article, and puts it in context. Opinions are welcome as long as they are factually based.
Commentaries appear as: “Answer to the article of “name of authors of the article”  [et al. when more than two authors] », year of publication”

2.3. Letters to the Editors
Post-publication commentaries on published research is necessary to advancing scientific knoledge. Formal post-publication commentary on published papers can involve either challenges, clarifications or in some cases, replication of the published work and may, after peer review, be published online as a letter to the Editors, usually alongside a reply from the original authors.
Letters to the Editor should ideally be based on knowledge contemporaneous with the original paper, rather than subsequent scientific developments.
If the submission serves only to identify an important error or mistake in the published paper, it will usually lead to the publication of a clarification statement (correction or retraction, for example).
The journal does not consider Letters to the Editor on papers published in other journals.
Letters to the Editor should be around 800 words, excluding references.  They should be written in a neutral tone and all comments/discussion must relate to the original published article.  All such articles considered for publication will be subject to peer review.
The Letters to the Editors are different from correspondence or commentaries (bringing new reflections or reactions induced by a publication). They can deal with the preliminary results of a study, professional or scientific information.
They can also deal with news.

2.4. Reports
A report is  an article which aims less at showing the novelty of a scientific work than showing the importance or novelty of a research.
The key difference between article writing and report writing is that article writing involves the writer's personal work whereas reports include external  factual information and evidence. In addition, articles tend to be shorter than reports. A report is detailed usually written in chapters while an article is a concise extract from a report prepared for the purpose of publication in a journal.
These articles can include the opinion of the authors for questions which are not discussed in the literature. The personal opinion of the expert, which should not be confused with professional recommendations, is the characteristic of such articles. They can include Tables, Figures.

2.5. Opinions
Opinions are like Editorials, but they are different because they express personal ideas and do not correspond to the ideas of the Editors. They are longer and structured, with subtitles and conclusion. References are very important.
In the Opinion section are published point of view" articles (understood as expert, citizen, scientist, technologist, technician, whatever the field covered within the limit give above) that present and discuss the authors' point of view on the strengths and weaknesses of a scientific hypothesis or theory, of a technical, technological or scientific practice, of an implemented policy or of technical, technological or scientific programs.
These articles encourage a debate that challenges the current state of knowledge or practice in  particular field.
These articles are critically reviewed by peers on a double-anonymity basis, but of course the reviewers can only check the factual validity of the information on which the opinions are based, and are not allowed to reject the manuscript when they have a different opinon.
Opinion articles should not be research notes in disguise, with unpublished or original data not reviewed.  Similarly, Molecular Gastronomy does not accept articles that tout specific products.
In contrast, the journal does accept manuscripts written :
- by authors of technical, technological, or scientific journal articles (both the natural and
human/social sciences) that explain their findings to a non-specialist audience,
- or by people from industry who discuss trends in the fields in which they operate
- or by administrators or managers in charge of public policy issues.
For these articles, authors are asked to disclose any potential interests they may have in relation to the theme of the article.
It is good practice for articles of this type to include constructive criticism and to be supported by evidence.
Opinons articles are typically relatively short (2000-2500 words), and this is useful, as often
a succinct argument is more effective when it is free of excessive documentation (which can
make a "Report").

2.6. Perspectives
Perspective articles point to recent and noteworthy work, whether technical, technological or scientific, but authors should not focus on their own work.  Such articles may contextualize recent results, show their intrinsic importance, or point out their relevance to other disciplines. These papers should be novel and not simply summarize published work. They can be requested by the editors, or submitted spontaneously.  These articles inform a wide readership of exciting scientific developments in the authors' area of expertise. Other appropriate topics include discussions of methods, books, or meeting highlights (see corresponding sections).
A Perspective article, presenting the author's views and ideas about current research or other topics of interest to scientists, should be concise, and well show a new and original view of existing problems, fundamental concepts, or current notions, propose and support a new hypothesis, or discuss the implications of a recently implemented innovation. Perspective articles may focus on current advances and future directions on a topic, and may include original data as well as personal opinion. Note that the same writing guidelines as for "Opinions" apply to these pieces.
These papers should include a short title (in English or French), an abstract (less than 150 words), references and may be accompanied by figures and tables.  They are subject to the same editorial treatment as all other articles (double anonymous critical analysis, in order to produce texts of academic quality).

2.7. Reviews of the literature
Such texts are making updates of the knowledge on particular topics. They can discuss the data of the literature and possible controversies. They are critical syntheses of published works, and should lead to useful proposals. A review article is not an original study, presenting non already published results. It examines previous studies and compiles their data and evidence.
They are subjected to peer reviewing.

2.8. Synthesis
A synthesis is a written discussion incorporating support from several sources of differing views.
In order to write a successful synthesis essay, one must gather research on a chosen topic, discover meaningful connections throughout the research, and develop a distinctive and interesting argument or perspective. A synthesis is not a summary.
The goal of these mini reviews, signed by a maximum of three authors, is to give a very short and focused reports of literature, through an important article of the discipline; this article should have been published within the last year, and should have an impact on practices.  
The content is a short introduction, an abstract of two to five articles and a conclusion.
The number of references should be less than six. The number of words should be less than 1,000.  

2.9. Debates
The goal is to give the divergent opinions of two or three authors, on a particular topic. The arguments are to be given under a concise, but discussed and referenced format.
The goal of this column is to show different perspectives. The topic is given under the form of a  question (« Can we... ? Should we ... ? Is it interesting to ... ? »), closed question for which there are two or perhaps three possible answers. Each author has to demonstrate (“why?” - “because”) the hypothesis he/she proposed, in view of a conclusion (perhaps not definitive).
A Debate article is different from a Review, as the goal is not to show knowledge and practices, but on the contrary to discuss such knowledge and  practices, in relationship with the current development of a field.
The text includes a title, keywords, but no abstract.
Before publication, each of the authors gets the article of his/her opponent, with the possibility to change some aspects of his own text, if necessary.

2.9. Conference and Workshop proceedings
Proceedings of conferences or workshops with topics within the scope of the International Journals of Molecular and Physical Gastronomy are welcome.
Manuscripts from oral presentations or texts discussing posters follow in general the advices for research papers, but should be named as “proceedings” and indicate the name of the conference. The organizers are invited to define scope and topics of the workshop/conference by an introduction. Important and substantial questions, answers and discussions after the presentations can be added as an appendix after the manuscript to encourage further ideas and thoughts. Submissions will be peer-reviewed as well.
These are written texts, not just quick notes. They should be structured like reviews or

3. Molecular Gastronomy and Education

3.1. Courses
These courses can be given at any level, from primary school to continuous education. They can deal with teaching molecular gastronomy, or using molecular gastronomy for teaching.
An introduction is needed for explaining the context in which the course is given.
These texts should not be simply copies of slides used for teaching, but should include the full explanations of topics taught.
The reviewing process cannot reproach to the authors of teaching a matter that is discussed elsewhere, but they will consider the originality of the education treatment proposed and propose improvements (with no obligation for the authors to accept them). They judge the coherence of the course, in view of the context given in the introduction of the manuscript.

3.2. How to do
The How to do articles describe a process for making a special technical procedure easier. For a “how to do”, a bibliography is not needed, but it is appropriate when it describes a new version of an already published process (two references maximum).
For indexing, a title  and key-words are necessary. Table, schemes, figures can be proposed. Also authors can give videos or other technical material as supplemental materials, on line.
The various possibilities are:
• a review of the literature on a fresh or controversial topic, based on bibliography
• a technical procedure
For the general structure of such texts, see the instructions of the original articles and reviews.
Such articles are submitted to the same reviewing rules as for other original articles.

3.3. Practices and Trends
Such articles are for continuous education. They give a review of what is waited for new scientific or technical practices.

3.4. Educational Developments
New instructional methods, and pedagogies can be discussed.
To be considered for publication, a manuscript must:
- demonstrate scientific and scholarly rigor, supported by up-to-date citations to relevant literature and guided by a rationale for how the work fits into existing knowledge;
- exhibit novelty through original scholarship or a creative or innovative practice.
- have pedagogical content and educational relevance and insight that demonstrate a positive impact on teaching and learning while articulating audience level, use with students, and details for adopting and adapting the material, if applicable;
- be useful to readers by showing a connection to teaching and learning within the context of curricula or coursework.
- present well-developed ideas in a comprehensive, organized discussion written in clear, concise English and making effective use of display elements (figures, schemes, tables, etc.).

3.5. Educational documents
In this section, material used for teaching can be published, i.e., presentation of videos, protocols for practical experiments, etc.

4. Edible ideas (applications of molecular and physical gastronomy to cooking)
The sections in this part of the journal deal with the culinary applications of molecular and physical gastronomy, such as molecular cooking (techniques), molecular cuisine (recipes), synthetic cooking, note by note cooing, etc.

4.1. Recipes
These texts have to include:
- an introduction explaining the context of the recipe
- a picture of the dish
- the design of the dish (parts, relation between them)
- the list of ingredients
- the steps for processing
- comment about  the social, art and technique aspect of the dish
- conclusion.

4.2. Questions and answers
Often, chefs, students and the public have questions whose answers can be useful for the whole community. Such texts can be short or long, but they should always include references for the answers.

4.4. Techniques and tips
These articles explain how to get some special culinary products, such as making a hollow sphere of ice cream, foaming oil, etc.
A thorough discussion of the needed ingredients has to be made.

4.5.  Experimental tests of culinary precisions
Articles of this section should include references of the document or circumstances in which the culinary precisions were given.
The Materials and Methods section of the manuscript is important, and it should be enough for reproduction by the readers.



The principle is to promote the publication of manuscripts, by organizing exchanges between authors and reviewers, so that finally academic quality is reached.
In order to get this result, the journal is run by an Editorial Board, and the following process is applied:  

    • manuscripts are sent to
    • the anonymous text is transmitted to the secretaries of the board, who check if the manuscript is indeed within the scope of the journal
    • one qualified member of the Editorial Board is invited to organize the reviewing process, with two reviewers or more
    • observations from reviewers are transmitted blind to the author(s)
    • the authors have to answer directly in the .doc document given by the Editor, using a clear display of changes; it can refuse to do some changes, but the Editor is the last judge in case of disagreement ; the author can also make an answer remark after remark, and submit a modified version, showing the modifications
    • the process of evaluation is repeated until the manuscript is accepted
    • the manuscript is then processed and  proofs are sent to the corresponding authors. No major changes are then allowed, unless a new processing review is organized.

With this process, the goal is that the reviewers contribute positively to the quality of the publication.
When major modifications are asked to the authors, this does not mean that the article will be published. The final decision is taken on the last version.


Refusals of manuscripts (never occurs)

All manuscripts are accepted for publication when all changes proposed by the reviewers and editors are made, or when sufficient explanation is given. However the fact that these explanations are given is a demonstration that changes including these explanations are to be made in the manuscript.


The proofs are sent to the corresponding author by email  (format pdf) after the final acceptation of the manuscript.
The corrections should only deal with typography, spelling or grammar. No change can concern scientific facts.
The authors cannot ask changes of the layout.
No addition to the manuscript can be made. The corresponding author has to give the corrected proof with a “OK for publication” letter.


Checklist that authors should use before submission

Does the title of the article suits its content?
Is the length of the title all right?
Does the title correctly inform the reader of the content?
Is the title  in English?


Are the key works suitable, in accordance with the text?
Are they less than   6 keywords?
Are the keywords given  in English?

Does the abstract correspond to the content of the text?
Is the Abstract (for an original article) structured as: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion, Conclusion?
Is the abstract precise enough to explain the content of the text?
Is the Abstract given in English?
Is the abstract corrected by a Native English Speaker?

Does the Introduction deal with known and unknown elements in relationship with the topic of the study?
Does the  introduction end with the goal of the article?

Materials and Methods
Does this section include enough information  in order to understand and reproduce how the work was done?
Was the study evaluated by an Ethics committee?
Was special equipments used for this study? If yes, avoid pictures showing the commercial names.

Did you check that there is no error when giving data (in Figures, Tables, etc.)?
Did you check that there is no redundancy in the presentation of data (graphs and tables showing the same data, text giving the same data as graphs, etc.)?
Did you check that the results are synthesized?
Did you check that no assumption was used in showing the results (this should be done in the Discussion part, except for implementing complementary experiments)?
Are statistical tests enough and appropriate?

Do you show the major consequences of the results?
Are the strength and weaknesses of the work shown?
Are the limits of the study discussed?
Are the weaknesses of the Materials and Methods section discussed, in relationship with other publications?
Are the explanatory hypotheses related to the results shown?
Are the open questions exposed?

Aknowledgments and funding
Did you get the written agreement of the people that you thank?
If the work was funded, did you quote the funding organization?Did you get a written acceptance of these persons?

Contribution of the authors
Is the role of each author of the article given?

Declaration of interests
Are all interests declared for each author ?

Are the references written according to the Instructions to authors?
Were the references all checked?
Are all references quoted in the text given in the list of references?
Are the references ranked in alphabetical order?
Are the references selected according to pertinence?

Did you mention all Tables in the text?
Did you give an explicit title to all tables?
Are all abbreviations given in tables described in the caption of the table?
Are the line of the tables ranked in a coherent way?
Are the important data selected?
If data from a previously source is given, did you get permission, and get, the agreement of the publisher (copyright) ?
Are the tables listed by order of appearance?
Are all table necessary?

Are all figures mentioned in the text?
Does any figure have an explicit caption?
Are the important figures given?
If data is taken from a previously published source, did you ask the permission of reproduction (copyright) ?
Are the figures given in the right order?
Is the resolution of the figure enough?
Did you remove all personal or confidential information from the figures?

Format and content
Is the length according to the Instruction of authors?
Did you respect all recommendations of the Instructions to Authors
Are all the text files in .doc?
Did you check the spelling and grammar?
Is the text clear?
Was it checked that no parts of the manuscript were duplicated or plagiarized?
Did you check that the article contains no insultant or defamatory sentence?

Process of revision when returning the manuscript after the reviewing

If you submit a revised version, did you answer to all commentaries of the reviewers, either in the article (.doc) or in a separate letter?
Do all modified parts  appear clearly (color, information in the accompanying letter)?
Did you answer to all queries of the reviewers?
Did you avoid introducing new mistakes in the revised part?
Did you answer to the reviewers in a polite, ethical and professional way?

Sending files
Is there a .doc AND a .pdf file for the manuscript ?
Are all figures in separate files?


DISCLAIMER: By offering this general informational resource, the INRAE-AgroParisTech International Centre of Molecular and Physical Gastronomy  (hereinafter ICMPG) does not intend to provide its members or other users with legal advice regarding the application of copyright law. Rather, this information is intended for educational purposes only as a benefit and service in furtherance of ICMPG's nonprofit and tax-exempt status. ICMPG makes no representations about the suitability of this information for any purpose. In no event shall ICMPG be liable for any special, indirect, consequential damages and/or any damages whatsoever resulting from the use of any of the information posted on this site. ICMPG recommends that parties in need of copyright protection seek the advice of an information specialist at the U.S. Copyright Office or consult with an attorney who specializes in this area of the law.

Date de modification : 25 mai 2024 | Date de création : 20 septembre 2022 | Rédaction : H. This