Applied sciences

Archives of Environmental Protection


Archives of Environmental Protection | 2020 | vol. 46 | No 2

Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


The main goal of the present study was to examine the operating characteristics and mechanisms of membrane fouling in integrated membrane bioreactors (IMBRs) at diff erent temperatures. Two IMBRs, each with identical dimensions and confi gurations, were used in the study using synthetic domestic sewage at a low temperature (10°C) and high temperature (25°C). The results indicated that the removal effi ciency of chemical oxygen demand reached 93–96%, but the membrane contribution rate of IMBR2 (10°C) was higher than that of IMBR1 (25°C). The separation burden of the membrane on organic compounds increased at low temperature, which may have sped up the rate of membrane biofouling. The absolute rate of trans-membrane pressure build-up was faster at low temperature, leading to shorter IMBR operating times. Soluble microbial products (SMPs) and extracellular polymeric substances (EPSs) in the IMBRs signifi cantly increased at low temperature. These substances intensifi ed defl occulation, with an accompanying reduction of fl oc size and the release of EPSs at low temperature, which facilitated the formation of cake foulants on the surface, covering the entire membrane area. The protein and polysaccharide concentrations of SMPs and EPSs in the IMBRs were correlated with the concentration of C8-HSL. It was demonstrated that temperature aff ected the concentration of C8-HSL, which controlled the excretion of EPSs and SMPs and thus the membrane biofouling process.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Yaqin Yu
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


A representative group of hydrophilic fungi from the genus Trichoderma isolated from lignocellulose composts with varying degrees of maturity was analyzed for their ability to biodegrade a harmful anthraquinone dye, i.e. Remazol Brilliant Blue R (RBBR). In RBBR-containing post-culture liquids, there were determined the degree of RBBR decolorization, horseradish peroxidase-like, superoxide dismutase-like, and xylanase activities, and the concentrations of low-molecular phenolic compounds. The study results demonstrated that Trichoderma asperellum, T. harzianum, and T. lixii strains isolated from compost containing larger amounts of easily available lignocellulose fractions, i.e. grasses, exhibit higher RBBR decolorization effi ciency ranging from 0.3 to 62% than T. citrinoviride strains isolated from compost II, which contained greater quantities of hardly degradable lignocellulose. The decolorization of remazol blue R by the investigated Trichoderma strains intensified signifi cantly with the increase in peroxidase activity and it was correlated with a decline in the content of low-molecular phenolic compounds. The dynamics of changes in the horseradish peroxidase-like, superoxide dismutase, and xylanase activities in the aqueous post-culture liquids of the investigated fungal strains depended largely on the duration of the culture. Given their ability to adapt to water environments, e.g. wastewater, and to decolorize and detoxify the RBBR anthraquinone dye, Trichoderma fungi can be used for bioremediation of such environments.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Justyna Bohacz
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


Bacterial infections that are due to consumption of poor quality water are still an important threat to human health and life. The aim of the article was to investigate the bacteriological threat of water from home wells. The results of water testing from individual wells constituted research material. On their basis, the health risk of fecal streptococci, coliforms and Escherichia coli was assessed and an attempt was made to assess the impact of pollution on the health of residents. The results of water testing in private wells showed unacceptable values for bacteriological pollution. A signifi cant health risk was found for fecal streptococci, coliforms and Escherichia coli. The authors pointed out the need to take extensive actions aimed at raising environmental and health awareness of the inhabitants in terms of water quality used for living purposes, in particular for consumption.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ewa Wysowska
Kazimierz Kudlik
Alicja Kicińska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


Demonstrating the impact of time-dependent ground adsorption capacity on the change in chemical composition of groundwater is an important issue in understanding the groundwater mass transport process. Commonly used parameters characterizing ground adsorption capacity (Ra, ��xu = ux/Ra, Δ ������ C�� ) were analyzed in this work to demonstrate time-varying values of this capacity for a chosen type of ground. Analysis of values of the selected parameters showed a gradual time decline in ground adsorption capacity as well as a gradual increase of groundwater contamination. This gradual increase in groundwater contamination over time is also important in practice. It implies the necessity to use more and more advanced (expensive) methods of water treatment in groundwater intakes.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Andrzej Aniszewski
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


The paper presents an application of Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) method for the environmental evaluation of the technologies for the fertilizers production. LCA has been used because it enables the most comprehensive identifi cation, documentation and quantifi cation of the potential impacts on the environment and the evaluation and comparison of all signifi cant environmental aspects. The main objective of the study was to assess and compare two technologies for the production of phosphorus (P) fertilizers coming from primary and secondary sources. In order to calculate the potential environmental impact the IMPACT 2002+ method was used. The fi rst part of the LCA included an inventory of all the materials used and emissions released by the system under investigation. In the following step, the inventory data were analyzed and aggregated in order to calculate one index representing the total environmental burden. In the scenario 1, fertilizers were produced with use of an integrated technology for the phosphorus recovery from sewage sludge ash (SSA) and P fertilizer production. Samples of SSA collected from two Polish mono-incineration plants were evaluated (Scenario 1a and Scenario 1b). In the scenario 2, P-based fertilizer (reference fertilizer – triple superphosphate) was produced from primary sources – phosphate rock.

The results of the LCA showed that both processes contribute to a potential environmental impact. The overall results showed that the production process of P-based fertilizer aff ects the environment primarily through the use of the P raw materials. The specifi c results showed that the highest impact on the environment was obtained for the Scenario 2 (1.94899 Pt). Scenario 1a and 1b showed the environmental benefi ts associated with the avoiding of SSA storage and its emissions, reaching -1.3475 Pt and -3.82062 Pt, respectively. Comparing results of LCA of P-based fertilizer production from diff erent waste streams, it was indicated that the better environmental performance was achieved in the scenario 1b, in which SSA had the higher content of P (52.5%) in the precipitate. In this case the lower amount of the energy and materials, including phosphoric acid, was needed for the production of fertilizer, calculated as 1 Mg P2O5. The results of the LCA may play a strategic role for the decision-makers in the aspect of searching and selection of the production and recovery technologies. By the environmental evaluation of diff erent alternatives of P-based fertilizers it is possible to recognize and implement the most sustainable solutions.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Marzena Smol
Joanna Kulczycka
Łukasz Lelek
Katarzyna Gorazda
Zbigniew Wzorek
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


Due to the lower energy consumption and waste production compared to traditional methods, the environmental bioremediation methods based on natural processes have been gradually becoming more prevalent in environmental engineering. Biological methods are used in waste management, wastewater treatment, gas treatment or soil remediation. For the low solubility of some pollutants and lower bioavailability, the use of biological methods may be hampered. This problem might be mitigated with the use of surfactants. This paper presents the results of studies regarding the eff ect of dosing a selected surfactant from the Tween group (Tween 20) on the efficiency of toluene elimination from the air by biofi ltration. The obtained maximum biofi ltration rate was 21.2 g/m3/h and 19.8 g/m3/h for the control bed and for the bed to which the Tween 20 solution was dosed, respectively. The eff ect of Tween was neutral (the effectiveness of toluene removal was insignificantly comparable to the effectiveness of the control series), it did not affect the effectiveness or limited the development of the biofilter microflora.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Urszula Miller
Izabela Sówka
Waldemar Adamiak
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


Results of fly ashes from combustion of hard coal and co-combustion of alternative fuel (SRF) with coal in the stoker boiler WR-25 type studies have been shown. Samples of fly ashes were acquired during industrial combustion tests of hard coal and blend of coal with 10% SRF. The scope of comparative research included: chemical composition, contents of combustible parts and trace elements and also of microscopic analysis. The specific surface area SBET was established and tests of water extract were conducted. Chemical composition of mineral substance of both studied ashes is similar. Main ingredients are: SiO2, Al2O3, Fe2O3 and CaO. Fly ash from co-combustion of SRF with coal in a stoker boiler is characterized by high contents of combustible parts (on 30% level), higher than ash from hard coal combustion. Both tested ashes are characterized by specifi c surface area SBET on the level of 8–9 m2/g. In porous structure mesopores are dominant (>60%), and their volume is higher for fly ash from co-combustion of SRF with coal. Fly ash from co-combustion of waste is characterized by high contents of heavy metals. Nevertheless these metals and also other pollutants do not show leachability exceeding acceptable values for wastes different than hazardous. The microscopic structure of fly ashes from combustion of hard coal and co-combustion of alternative fuel studies showed crucial differences, especially in reference to organic material. Presented research results have shown that fly ash from co-combustion of SRF with coal in a stoker boiler can obtain the status of non-hazardous waste.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Ryszard Wasielewski
Małgorzata Wojtaszek
Agnieszka Plis
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


The article presents the results of preliminary tests obtained from the analysis of ash coming from the combustion of various types of waste in household furnaces. The aim of this work was to examine the infl uence of various types of waste burned in household furnaces on the elemental composition of the generated ash. As part of the research, analyses of ash generated from the incineration of mixed waste, plastics, wood, textiles, rubber waste and paper were made. The content of selected metal ions: Mn, Cu, Mo, Zn, Cd, Tl, Cr, Co, Ni, As, Sn, Sb, Pb, V was determined in the tested samples, according to PN-EN ISO 17294-2: 2016-11 standard. The highest concentrations of zinc were found in the large-sized waste, rubber and textile ash samples and highest concentrations of copper were found in the plastic and paper ash samples. The highest concentrations for elements such as copper, lead, cobalt and chromium were recorded for samples of rubber and large-sized waste containing e.g. varnished furniture boards. The obtained results showed that depending on the waste incinerated, the content of selected metals was signifi cantly diff erent, and the highest concentrations were noted for samples of large-sized waste, waste from segregated plastics and waste from rubbers.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Joanna Poluszyńska
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


The research was intended to develop a biocomposite as an alternative biodegradable material, for the production of, e.g., disposable utensils. The author’s tested thermoplastic maize starch, both without additives and with the addition of crumbled fl ax fi ber in the share of 10, 20 and 30 wt%. The plasticizer added was technical glycerin and the samples were produced by a single-screw extruder. The mechanical strength tests were performed, including the impact tensile test and three-point bending fl exural test. Afterwards, the samples were tested for biodegradability under anaerobic conditions. The methane fermentation process was carried in a laboratory bioreactor under thermophilic conditions with constant mixing of the batch. All samples proved to be highly susceptible to biodegradation during the experiment, regardless of the fl ax fi ber share. The biogas potential was about 600 ml·g-1, and the methane concentration in biogas ranged from 66.8 to 69.6%. It was found, that the biocomposites can be almost completely utilized in bioreactors during the biodegradation process. The energy recovery in the decomposition process with the generation of signifi cant amount of methane constitutes an additional benefi t.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Gabriel Borowski
Tomasz Klepka
Małgorzata Pawłowska
Maria Cristina Lavagnolo
Tomasz Oniszczuk
Agnieszka Wójtowicz
Maciej Combrzyński
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


This paper presents the results of a fi eld study on using mineral materials (fine-grained sand and medium-grained gravel) to reduce the concentration of readily soluble salts in a roadside environment. The investigated soils were Rendzic Sceletic Leptosols from an urban area characterized by a shallow humus horizon with a high content of skeletal parts, as well as a lack of homogeneity of the material in the soil profile. All soil samples were taken from five plots located along the main streets in the city of Opole (Southern Poland). It was revealed that the use of fine-grained sand and medium-grained gravel improved the structure of the surface soil layer, and thus favoured the migration of Na+ and Cl- ions into the soil profile. In comparison to control surfaces readily soluble salts were reduced with gravel and sand application. Furthermore, the mineral materials introduced on the soil surface for salinity neutralization did not affect the quality of the tested roadside calcareous soils. The results indicate that the use of mineral materials reduces soil salinity caused by NaCl. They also show the need to find new methods of salt neutralization, especially of roadside soils in order to improve and protect the quality of the environment.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Katarzyna Łuczak
Izabella Pisarek
Grzegorz Kusza
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


Non-point source pollution is a primary cause for concern globally. Various models have been developed to tackle this situation with much emphasis placed on best management practices. This practice has, however, proven to be insufficient to solve the NPS pollution situation. Existing non-point source models are watershed-based and complicated both in operation, parameter estimation and data requirements. A non-point source model is proposed using the concept of the Hybrid Cells in Series model. The model is a three-parameter model made up of three zones, which describes pure advection through time delay in a plug zone, with combined advection and dispersion occurring when the other two zones are considered as thoroughly mixed. The proposed model is tested using synthetic data and fi eld data from the Snake River, Colorado, USA, obtained from literature. Simulations were performed at four sample points; two from the tracer injection point along the Snake River before a confluence and two further downstream after the confluence. A regression analysis was carried out to determine the model’s capability to simulate pollutant transport for the four sampling points. The coefficients of determination are 0.98, 0.94, 0.84 and 0.97 while the standard error for each reach is 2.28E-2, 2.70E-2, 2.32E-2 and 9.35E-3 respectively. The results show good agreement between the measured and the simulated data. The response of the C-t profiles produced by the proposed model for both synthetic and field data demonstrates its ability to effectively simulate pollutant transport in natural rivers subject to non-point source pollution.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Joy Adu
Muthukrishna Vellaisamy Kumarasamy
Download PDF Download RIS Download Bibtex


This article presents results of research concerning the possibility of reducing the level of toxic nitric oxides (NOx) emission to the atmosphere. The research has been conducted on DKVR 20-13, PTVM-50 and DE 25-14 gas boilers. The complex character of this issue requires individual consideration regarding each boiler configuration. Each case requires consideration of characteristics and details of all elements constituting the boiler-furnace unit. The main problem was to establish the reference level to which the reduction of nitric oxides occurs. The actual maximum emission of nitric oxides was assumed as this level. It was verified with the maximum allowable emission of nitric oxides for each boiler. Three levels of the potential influence of emission on the atmosphere have been taken into account. This experimental research allowed for proposing an effective method, which led to reducing nitric oxides emission by around 30%.

Go to article

Authors and Affiliations

Sylwia Janta-Lipińska
Alexander Shkarovskiy

Instructions for authors

Archives of Environmental Protection
Instructions for Authors

Archives of Environmental Protection is a quarterly published jointly by the Institute of Environmental Engineering of the Polish Academy of Sciences and the Committee of Environmental Engineering of the Polish Academy of Sciences. Thanks to the cooperation with outstanding scientists from all over the world we are able to provide our readers with carefully selected, most interesting and most valuable texts, presenting the latest state of research in the field of engineering and environmental protection.

The Journal principally accepts for publication original research papers covering such topics as:
– Air quality, air pollution prevention and treatment;
– Wastewater treatment and utilization;
– Waste management;
– Hydrology and water quality, water treatment;
– Soil protection and remediation;
– Transformations and transport of organic/inorganic pollutants in the environment;
– Measurement techniques used in environmental engineering and monitoring;
– Other topics directly related to environmental engineering and environment protection.

The Journal accepts also authoritative and critical reviews of the current state of knowledge in the topic directly relating to the environment protection.

If unsure whether the article is within the scope of the Journal, please send an abstract via e-mail to:

Preparation of the manuscript
The following are the requirements for manuscripts submitted for publication:
• The manuscript (with illustrations, tables, abstract and references) should not exceed 20 pages. In case the manuscript exceeds the required number of pages, we suggest contacting the Editor.
• The manuscript should be written in good English.
• The manuscript ought to be submitted in doc or docx format in three files:
– text.doc – file containing the entire text, without title, keywords, authors names and affiliations, and without tables and figures;
– figures.doc – file containing illustrations with legends;
– tables.doc – file containing tables with legends;
• The text should be prepared in A4 format, 2.5 cm margins, 1.5 spaced, preferably using Time New Roman font, 12 point. Thetext should be divided into sections and subsections according to general rules of manuscript editing. The proposed place of tables and figures insertion should be marked in the text.
• Legends in the figures should be concise and legible, using a proper font size so as to maintain their legibility after decreasing the font size. Please avoid using descriptions in figures, these should be used in legends or in the text of the article. Figures should be placed without the box. Legends should be placed under the figure and also without box.
• Tables should always be divided into columns. When there are many results presented in the table it should also be divided into lines.
• References should be cited in the text of an article by providing the name and publication year in brackets, e.g. (Nowak 2019). When a cited paper has two authors, both surnames connected with the word “and” should be provided, e.g. (Nowak and Kowalski 2019). When a cited paper has more than two author, surname of its first author, abbreviation ‘et al.’ and publication year should be provided, e.g. (Kowalski et al. 2019). When there are more than two publications cited in one place they should be divided with a coma, e.g. (Kowalski et al. 2019, Nowak 2019, Nowak and Kowalski 2019). Internet sources should be cited like other texts – providing the name and publication year in brackets.
• The Authors should avoid extensive citations. The number of literature references must not exceed 30 including a maximum of 6 own papers. Only in review articles the number of literature references can exceed 30.
• References should be listed at the end of the article ordered alphabetically by surname of the first author. References should be made according to the following rules:

1. Journal:
Surnames and initials. (publication year). Title of the article, Journal Name, volume, number, pages, DOI.
For example:

Nowak, S.W., Smith, A.J. & Taylor, K.T. (2019). Title of the article, Archives of Environmental Protection, 10, 2, pp. 93–98. DOI: 10.24425/aep.2019.126330

If the article has been assigned DOI, it should be provided and linked with the website on which it is made available.

2. Book:
Surnames and initials. (publication year). Title, Publisher, Place and publishing year.
For example:

Kraszewski, J. & Kinecki, K. (2019). Title of book, Work & Studies, Zabrze 2019.

3. Edited book:

Surnames and initials of text authors. (publishing year). Title of cited chapter, in: Title of the book, Surnames and
initials of editor(s). (Ed.)/(Eds.). Publisher, Place, pages.
For example:

Reynor, J. & Taylor, K.T. (2019). Title of chapter, in: Title of the cited book, Kaźmierski, I. & Jasiński, C. (Eds.). Work & Studies, Zabrze, pp. 145–189.

4. Internet sources:
Surnames and initials or the name of the institution which published the text. (publication year). Title, (website address (accessed on)).
For example:

Kowalski, M. (2018). Title, ( (03.12.2018)).

5. Patents:

Orszulik, E. (2009). Palenisko fluidalne, Patent polski: nr PL20070383311 20070910 z 16 marca 2009.
Smith, I.M. (1988). U.S. Patent No. 123,445. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

6. Materials published in language other than English:
Titles of cited materials should be translated into English. Information of the language the materials were published in should be provided at the end.
For example:

Nowak, S.W. & Taylor, K.T. (2019). Title of article, Journal Name, 10, 2, pp. 93–98. DOI: 10.24425/aep.2019.126330. (in Polish)

Not more than 30 references should be cited in the original research paper.

Submission of the manuscript
By submitting the manuscript Author(s) warrant(s) that the article has not been previously published and is not under consideration by another journal. Authors claim responsibility and liability for the submitted article.
The article is freely available and distributed under the terms of Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License (CC BY SA 4.0,, which permits use, distribution and reproduction in any medium provided the article is properly cited, is not used for commercial purposes and no modification or adaptation are made.

© 2021. The Author(s). This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International Public License (CC BY SA 4.0,, which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided that the article is properly cited, the use is non-commercial, and no modifications or adaptations are made

The manuscripts should be submitted on-line using the Editorial System available at The journal does not have article processing charges (APCs) nor article submission charges.

Review Process
All the submitted articles are assessed by the Editorial Board. If positively assessed by at least two editors, Editor in Chief, along with department editors selects two independent reviewers from recognized authorities in the discipline.
Review process usually lasts from 1 to 4 months.
Reviewers have access to PUBLONS platform which integrates into Bentus Editorial System and enables adding reviews to their personal profile.
After completion of the review process Authors are informed of the results and – if both reviews are positive – asked to correct the text according to reviewers’ comments. Next, the revised work is verified by the editorial staff for factual and editorial content.

Acceptance of the manuscript

The manuscript is accepted for publication on grounds of the opinions of independent reviewers and approval of Editorial Board. Authors are informed about the decision and also asked to pay processing charges and to send completed declaration of the transfer of copyright to the editorial office.

Proofreading and Author Correction
All articles published in the Archives of Environmental Protection go through professional proofreading process. If there are too many language errors that prevent understanding of the text, the article is sent back to Authors with a request to correct the indicated fragments or – in extreme cases – to re-translate the text.
After proofreading the manuscript is prepared for publishing. The final stage of the publishing process is Author correction. Authors receive a page proof copy of the article with a request to make final corrections.

Article publication charges

The publication fee in the Journal of an article up to 20 pages is 520 EUR/2500 zł

Payments in Polish zlotys
Bank BGK
Account no.: 20 1130 1091 0003 9111 7820 0001

Payments in Euros
Bank BGK
Account no.: 20 1130 1091 0003 9111 7820 0001
IBAN: PL 20 1130 1091 0003 9111 7820 0001

Authors are kindly requested to inform the editorial office of making payment for the publication, as well as to send all necessary data for issuing an invoice

Peer-review Procedure

The reviewing procedure for papers published in Archives of Environmental Protection

1) After accepting the paper as matching to the scope of the Journal Editor-in-Chief with Section Editors choose two independent Reviewers (authorities in the domain/discipline). The chosen Reviewers (from professors and senior academic staff members) have to guarantee:

  • autonomous opinion,
  • the lack of interests conflict – especially the lack of personal and business relations with the Authors of the paper,
  • the preservation of confidentiality about the paper content and the Reviewer opinion about the paper.

2) After the Reviewers selection, Assistant Editor send them (via e-mail) requests to review the paper. Reviewers receive the full text of the paper (without Author personal data) qualified for the reviewing process and referee form, sometimes supplemented with the additional questions connected with the article. In the e-mail Assistant Editor also determine the extent of the review and the deadline (usually a month).

3) The personal data of Reviewers are not open (double-blind review). It can be declassify only on Author’s special request and after the Reviewer agreement. It sometimes happen when the review outcome is: manuscript rejection or when the paper contain controversial issues.

4) The reviewer send the review to the Editorial Office via e-mail. After receiving the review the Assistant Editor:

  • inform Authors about it (in the case of the review without corrections or when there are only small, editorial changes needed),
  • send the reviews to Authors. Authors have to correct the paper according to Reviewers comment and prepare the reply to Reviewers,
  • send the paper corrected by Authors to Reviewers again – when Reviewer wanted to review it again.

5) The final decision about manuscript is made by the Editorial Board on the basis of the analysis of remarks contained in the review and the final version of the paper send by Authors. 6) The final version of the paper, after typesetting and text makeup is being sent to Authors, who make an author’s corrections. Afterwards the paper is ready to be printed in the specific issue.


All Reviewers in 2022

Alonso Rosa, Alwaeli Mohamed, Arora Amarpreet, Babu A., Barbieri Maurizio, Bień Jurand, Bogacki Jan, Bogumiła Pawluśkiewicz, Boutammine Hichem, Burszta-Adamiak Ewa, Cassidy Daniel, Chowaniec Józef, Czerniawski Robert, da Silva Elaine, Dąbek Lidia, Dannowski Ralf, Delgado-González Cristián Raziel, Dewil Raf, Djemli Samir, Du Rui, Egorin A. M., Fadillah‬ ‪Ganjar‬‬, Gangadharan Praveena, Garg Manoj, Gębicki Jacek, Generowicz Agnieszka, Gnida Anna, Golovatyi Sergey, Grabda Mariusz, Guo Xuetao, Gusiatin Mariusz, Han Lujia, Holnicki Piotr, Houali Karim, Iwanek Małgorzata, Janczukowicz Wojciech, Jan-Roblero J., Jarosz-Krzemińska Elżbieta, Jaspal Dipika, Jorge Dominguez, Kabała Cezary, Kalka Joanna, Karaouzas Ioannis, Khadim Hussein Jabar Khadim, Khan Moonis Ali, Kojić Ivan, Kongolo Kitala Pierre, Kozłowski Kamil, Kucharski Mariusz, Lu Fan, Łukaszewski Zenon, Majumdar Pradeep, Mannheim Viktoria, Markowska-Szczupak Agata, Mehmood Andleeb, Mol Marcos, Mrowiec Bożena, Nałęcz-Jawecki Grzegorz, Ochowiak Marek, Ogbaga Chukwuma, Oleniacz Robert, Pan Ligong, Paruch Adam, Pietras Dariusz, Piotrowska-Seget Zofia, Płaza Grażyna, Pohl Alina, Poikane Sandra, Poluszyńska Joanna, Dudzińska Marzenna, Rawtani Deepak, Rehman Khalil, Rogowska Weronika, Rzeszutek Mateusz, Saenboonruang Kiadtisak, Sebakhy Khaled, Sengupta D.K., Shao Jing, Sočo Eleonora, Sojka Mariusz, Sonesten Lars, Song Wencheng, Song ZhongXian, Spiak Zofia, Srivastav Arun, Steliga Teresa, Surmacz-Górska Joanna, Świątkowski Andrzej Symanowicz Barbara, Szklarek Sebastian, Tabina Amtul, Tang Lin, Torrent Sergi, Trafiałek Joanna, Vijay U., Vojtkova Hana, Wang Qi, Wielgosiński Grzegorz, Wilk Pawel, Wiśniewska Marta, Yin Xianqiang, Zając Grzegorz, Zalewski Maciej, Zegait Rachid, Zerafat Mohammad, Zgórska Aleksandra, Zhang Chunhui, Zhang Wenbo, Zhu Guocheng, Zwierzchowski Ryszard

All Reviewers in 2021

Adamkiewicz Łukasz, Aksoy Özlem, Alwaeli Mohamed, Aneta Luczkiewicz, Anielak Anna, Antonkiewicz Jacek, Avino Pasquale, Babbar Deepakshi, Badura Marek, Bajda Tomasz, Biedka Paweł, Błaszczak Barbara, Bodzek Michał, Bogacki Jan, Burszta-Adamiak Ewa, Cheng Gan, Chojecka Agnieszka, Chrzanowski Łukasz, Chwojnowski Andrzej, Ciesielczuk Tomasz, Cimochowicz-Rybicka Małgorzata, Curren Emily, Cydzik-Kwiatkowska Agnieszka, Czajka Agnieszka, Danielewicz Jan, Dannowski Ralf, Daoud Mounir, Değermenci Gökçe, Dejan Dragan, Deluchat Véronique, Demirbaş Ahmet, Dong Shuying, Dudzińska Marzenna, Dunalska Julita, Franus Wojciech, G. Uchrin Christopher, Generowicz Agnieszka, Gębicki Jacek, Giergiczny Zbigniew, Gierszewski Piotr, Glińska-Lewczuk Katarzyna, Godłowska Jolanta, Gokalp Fulya, Gospodarek Janina, Górecki Tadeusz, Grabińska-Sota Elżbieta, Grifoni M., Gromiec Marek, Guo Xuetao, Gusiatin Zygmunt, Hartmann Peter, He Jianzhong, He Yong, Heese Tomasz, Hybská Helena, Imhoff Silvia, Iurchenko Valentina, Jabłońska-Czapla Magdalena, Janowski Mirosław, Jordanov Igor, Jóżwiakowski Krzysztof, Juśkiewicz Włodzimierz, Kabsch-Korbutowicz Małgorzata, Kalinowski Radosław, Kalka Joanna, Kapusta Paweł, Karczewska Anna, Karczmarczyk Agnieszka, Kicińska Alicja, Kiciński Jan, Kijowska-Strugała Małgorzata, Klejnowski Krzysztof, Kłosok-Bazan Iwona, Kolada Agnieszka, Konieczny Krystyna, Kostecki Maciej, Kowalczewska-Madura Katarzyna, Kowalczuk Marek, Kozielska Barbara, Kozłowski Kamil, Krzemień Alicja, Kulig Andrzej, Kwaśny Justyna, Kyzioł-Komosińska Joanna, Ledakowicz Stanislaw, Leites Luchese Claudia, Leszczyńska-Sejda Katarzyna, Li Mingyang, Liu Chao, Mahmood Khalid, Majewska-Nowak Katarzyna, Makisha Nikolay, Malina Grzegorz, Markowska-Szczupak Agata, Mocek Andrzej, Mokrzycki Eugeniusz, Molenda Tadeusz, Molkenthin Frank, Mosquera Corral Anuska, Muhmood Atif, Myrta Anna, Narayanasamy Selvaraju, Nzila Alexis, OIkuski Tadeusz, Oleniacz Robert, Pacyna Jozef, Pająk Tadeusz, Pal Subodh Chandra, Panagopoulos Argyris, Paruch Adam, Paszkowski Waldemar, Pawęska Katarzyna, Paz-Ferreiro Jorge, Paździor Katarzyna, Pempkowiak Janusz, Piątkiewicz Wojciech, Piechowicz Janusz, Piotrowska-Seget Zofia, Pisoni E., Piwowar Arkadiusz, Pleban Dariusz, Policht-Latawiec Agnieszka, Polkowska Żaneta, Poluszyńska Joanna, Rajca Mariola, Reizer Magdalena, Riesgo Fernández Pedro, Rith Monorom, Rybicki Stanisław, Rydzkowski Tomasz, Rzepa Grzegorz, Rzeźnik Wojciech, Rzętała Mariusz, Sabovljevic Marko, Scudiero Rosaria, Sekret Robert, Sheng Yanqing, Sławomir Stelmach, Słowik Leszek, Sočo Eleonora, Sojka Mariusz, Sophonrat Nanta, Sówka Izabela, Spiak Zofia, Stachowski Piotr, Stańczyk-Mazanek Ewa, Stebel Adam, Sulieman Magboul, Surmacz-Górska Joanna, Szalinska van Overdijk Ewa, Szczerbowski Radosław, Szetela Ryszard, Szopińska Kinga, Szymański Kazimierz, Ślipko Katarzyna, Tepe Yalçin, Tórz Agnieszka, Tyagi Uplabdhi, Uliasz-Bocheńczyk Alicja, Urošević Mira, Uzarowicz Łukasz, Vakili Mohammadtaghi, Van Harreveld A.P., Voutchkova Denitza, Wang Gang, Wang X.K., Werbińska-Wojciechowska Sylwia, Wiatkowski Mirosław, Wielgosiński Grzegorz, Wilk Pawel, Willner Joanna, Wisniewski Jacek, Wiśniowska Ewa, Włodarczyk-Makuła Maria, Wojciechowska Ewa, Wojnowska-Baryła Irena, Wolska Małgorzata, Wszołek Tadeusz, Wu Yonghua, Yusuf Mohammad, Zuberi Amina, Zuwała Jarosław, Zwoździak Jerzy.

All Reviewers in 2020

Adamiec Ewa, Adamkiewicz Łukasz, Ahammed M. Mansoor, Akcicek Ekrem, Ameur Houari, Anielak Anna, Antonkiewicz Jacek, Avino Pasquale, Badura Marek, Barabasz Wiesław, Barthakur Manoj, Battegazzore Daniele, Biedka Paweł, Bilek Maciej, Bisschop Lieselot, Błaszczak Barbara, Błażejewski Ryszard, Bochoidze Inga, Bodzek Michał, Bogacki Jan, Borella Paola, Borowiak Klaudia, Borralho Teresa, Boyacioglu Hülya, Bunjongsiri Kultida, Burszta-Adamiak Ewa, Calderon Raul, Chatveera Burachat Chatveera, Cheng Gan, Chiwa Masaaki, Chojnicki Józef, Chrzanowski Łukasz, Ciesielczuk Tomasz, Czajka Agnieszka, Czaplicka Marianna, Daoud Mounir, Dąbek Lidia, Değermenci Gökçe, Dejan Dragan, Deluchat Véronique, Dereszewska Alina, Dębowski Marcin, Dong Shuying, Dudzińska Marzenna, Dunalska Julita, Dymaczewski Zbysław, El-Maradny Amr, Farfan-Cabrera Leonardo, Filizok Işık, Franus Wojciech, García-Ávila Fernando, Gariglio N.F., Gaya M.S, Gebicki Jacek, Giergiczny Zbigniew, Glińska-Lewczuk Katarzyna, Gnida Anna, Gospodarek Janina, Grabińska-Sota Elżbieta, Gusiatin Zygmunt, Harnisz Monika, Hartmann Peter, Hawrot-Paw Małgorzata, He Jianzhong, Hirabayashi Satoshi, Hulisz Piotr, Imhoff Silvia, Iurchenko Valentina, Jabłońska-Czapla Magdalena, Jacukowicz-Sobala Irena, Jeż-Walkowiak Joanna, Jordanov Igor, Jóżwiakowski Krzysztof, Kabsch-Korbutowicz Małgorzata, Kajda-Szcześniak Małgorzata, Kalinowski Radosław, Kalka Joanna, Karczewska Anna, Karwowska Ewa, Kim Ki-Hyun, Klejnowski Krzysztof, Klojzy-Karczmarczyk Beata, Korniłłowicz-Kowalska Teresa, Korus Irena, Kostecki Maciej, Koszelnik Piotr, Koter Stanisław, Kowalska Beata, Kowalski Zygmunt, Kozielska Barbara, Krzyżyńska Renata, Kulig Andrzej, Kwarciak-Kozłowska Anna, Kyzioł-Komosińska Joanna, Lagzdins Ainis, Ledakowicz Stanislaw, Ligęza Sławomir, Liu Xingpo, Loga Małgorzata, Łebkowska Maria, Macherzyński Mariusz, Makisha Nikolay, Makowska Małgorzata, Masłoń Adam, Mazur Zbigniew, Michel Monika, Miechówka Anna, Miksch Korneliusz, Mnuchin Nathan, Mokrzycki Eugeniusz, Molkenthin Frank, Mosquera Corral Anuska, Muhmood Atif, Muntean Edward, Myrta Anna, Nahorski Zbigniew, Narayanasamy Selvaraju, Naumczyk Jeremi, Nawalany Marek, Noubactep C., Nowakowski Piotr, Obarska-Pempkowiak Hanna, Orge C.A., Paul Lothar, Pawęska Katarzyna, Paździor Katarzyna, Pempkowiak Janusz, Peña A., Pietr Stanisław, Piotrowska-Seget Zofia, Pisoni E., Płaza Grażyna, Polkowska Żaneta, Reizer Magdalena, Renman Gunno, Rith Monorom, Romanovski Valentin, Rybicki Stanisław, Rydzkowski Tomasz, Rzętała Mariusz, Sadeghi Mahdi, Sakakibara Yutaka, Scudiero Rosaria, Semaan Mary, Seredyński Franciszek, Sergienko Ruslan, Shen Yujun, Sheng Yanqing, Sidełko Robert, Sočo Eleonora, Sojka Mariusz, Sówka Izabela, Spiak Zofia, Stegenta-Dąbrowska Sylwia, Steliga Teresa, Sulieman Magboul, Surmacz-Górska Joanna, Suryadevara Nagaraja, Suska-Malawska Małgorzata, Szalinska van Overdijk Ewa, Szczerbowski Radosław, Szetela Ryszard, Szpyrka Ewa, Szulczyński Bartosz, Szwast Maciej, Szyszlak-Bargłowicz Joanna, Ślipko Katarzyna, Świetlik Ryszard, Tabernacka Agnieszka, Tepe Yalçin, Tobiszewski Marek, Treichel Wiktor, Tyagi Uplabdhi, Uliasz-Bocheńczyk Alicja, Uzarowicz Łukasz, Van Harreveld A.P., Wang X. K., Wasielewski Ryszard, Wiatkowski Mirosław, Wielgosiński Grzegorz, Willner Joanna, Wisniewski Jacek, Witczak Joanna, Witkiewicz Zygfryd, Włodarczyk Małgorzata, Włodarczyk-Makuła Maria, Wojciechowska Ewa, Wojtkowska Małgorzata, Xinhui Duan, Yang Chunping, Yaqian Zhao Yaqian, Załęska-Radziwiłł Monika, Zamorska Justyna, Zasina Damian, Zawadzki Jarosław, Zdeb Monika M., Zheng Guodi, Zhu Ivan X., Ziułkiewicz Maciej, Zuberi Amina, Zwoździak Jerzy, Żabczyński Sebastian, Żukowski Witold, Żygadło Maria.

Plagiarism Policy

Anti-plagiarism policy

In accordance with AEP requirements, the authors of all articles submitted to the Editorial Office declare that the paper is an original work. Articles that have been approved by the Editorial Board for further processing are checked for originality using the program and iThenticate. As plagiarism, the Editorial Board (according to the definition of plagiarism/anti-plagiarism) recognizes:

• claiming someone else's work or parts of it as your own;
• copying someone else's or your own (self-plagiarism) fragments of articles without reference to the publication (title of the work, names of authors) from which it was taken
• inserting fragments of other works into the article, changing only the order of the sentence or introducing only minor changes to it
• an article in which the copied fragments, despite citing their sources, constitute a significant/major part of the article.

In case of plagiarism/self-plagiarism, further work on this article is stopped and it is removed from the Editorial System. The authors of the article (via the corresponding author) submitted to the Editorial Office of the AEP are informed about the reasons for removing the article.

This page uses 'cookies'. Learn more