Science of the Total Environment Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

STOTEN is one of the Elsevier environmental journals that requires a fully structured abstract. This is different from many other Elsevier titles that use unstructured abstracts.

• Word limit: 300 words maximum
• Structure: Structured with labeled sections
• Required sections: Background, Objectives, Methods, Results, Discussion (or Conclusions)
• Citations: Not allowed in the abstract

The structured format means your abstract should look like this:

Background: 1-2 sentences on the problem context.

Objectives: 1-2 sentences on what the study aimed to do.

Methods: 2-3 sentences on the approach.

Results: 3-4 sentences on the key quantitative findings.

Discussion: 1-2 sentences on broader implications.

The Results section should contain actual numbers. "We found significant differences between treatment groups" isn't enough. "Removal efficiency increased from 45% to 92% when pH was raised from 6.0 to 8.5" is what STOTEN editors expect.

Don't confuse STOTEN's structured abstract format with the more rigid formats used by medical journals. STOTEN allows some flexibility in section naming (e.g., "Conclusions" instead of "Discussion"), but the sections themselves must be present and labeled.

STOTEN doesn't specify a strict maximum figure count, but the general expectation for research articles is 6-8 figures and 3-4 tables. The editorial office will question manuscripts with significantly more display items unless the content justifies it.

Figure specifications:

Graphical abstract: Optional but recommended. If you include one, use the Elsevier standard dimensions of 531 x 1328 pixels minimum. The graphical abstract should visually summarize the study's main concept or finding in a single, clear image.

Table formatting rules:

• Use editable tables (Word or LaTeX), not images
• Header row required for every column
• Horizontal rules at top, below header, and at bottom only
• No vertical rules
• Footnotes below the table using superscript lowercase letters
• Table title above the table, not below

Color in STOTEN is free for both online and print. This changed several years ago, and some formatting guides still incorrectly state that print color has a fee. It doesn't.

STOTEN uses the standard Elsevier numbered reference system, which is consistent across most Elsevier journals.

In-text citations: Square brackets with numbers, e.g., [1], [2,3], [4-7]. Numbers are assigned in order of first appearance in the text.

Reference list format:

[1] A.B. Author, C.D. Author, Title of article, J. Abbrev. Name Volume (Year) Pages. https://doi.org/xxxxx

Key formatting details:

• Author names: Initials before last name (e.g., J.K. Smith)
• All authors listed up to a journal-specific cutoff (typically 6, then "et al.")
• Journal titles abbreviated per ISO 4
• Volume in bold
• DOIs included at the end of each reference
• For web references: include URL and date accessed

There's no formal reference cap for STOTEN research articles. Published papers typically cite 40-80 references. Environmental science papers often need more citations because they draw on multiple disciplines (chemistry, ecology, toxicology, engineering), so the editorial team is generally lenient on reference count.

STOTEN's Elsevier style files are available for EndNote, Mendeley, and Zotero. Use them. Manual formatting of 50+ references in Elsevier numbered style is error-prone and wastes time.

STOTEN uses Elsevier's standard electronic supplementary material system. Supplementary content is hosted on ScienceDirect alongside the article.

What goes in supplementary material at STOTEN:

• Extended methods (detailed analytical procedures, sampling protocols)
• Additional figures and tables (site maps, additional time series, raw spectra)
• Datasets in tabular format (Excel, CSV)
• Calculation spreadsheets or model input files
• Questionnaires or survey instruments used in social-environmental studies

File requirements:

• Self-contained with own captions and numbering (Figure S1, Table S1, etc.)
• Maximum 50 MB per file
• PDF, Word, Excel, TIFF, JPEG, MP4, or AVI format
• Number supplementary items sequentially and reference them in the main text

STOTEN reviewers have access to supplementary material during review. They'll sometimes ask you to move content from the supplement into the main text or vice versa. Be prepared for this request, especially if your core results depend on supplementary figures.

A practical consideration for STOTEN submissions: given the 8,000-word limit, many authors push detailed site descriptions, extended statistical analyses, and method validation data into the supplement. This is acceptable and expected. The supplement for a typical STOTEN paper is often 10-20 pages long.

STOTEN requires several components beyond the manuscript itself.

Cover letter: Mandatory. Should include:

• Article type being submitted
• Statement of novelty (what's new about this work)
• Confirmation that the work isn't under consideration elsewhere
• Suggested and opposed reviewers (3-5 suggestions recommended)
• Any relevant Special Issue information if you're targeting one

Highlights: Mandatory for research articles. 3-5 bullet points, each capped at 85 characters including spaces. These appear on ScienceDirect and in search results, so write them to attract clicks, not just to summarize.

Keywords: 4-6 keywords. Avoid repeating terms already in the title. STOTEN covers a broad environmental scope, so use keywords specific enough to reach your target audience. "Water quality" is too generic. "Microplastic fragmentation in estuarine sediments" is more useful.

CRediT author statement: Required. List each author's contributions using the 14 standard CRediT roles.

Data availability statement: Required. Select from Elsevier's templates or write a custom statement.

Declaration of competing interests: Mandatory for all submissions.

These are the details that regular STOTEN submitters know from experience:

Highlights are strictly enforced. STOTEN won't process your submission without highlights. The system may let you skip them, but the editorial assistant will return the manuscript. Write them before you start the submission process.

The 8,000-word limit is real. Some Elsevier journals treat word limits as suggestions. STOTEN doesn't. The editorial office counts, and they return manuscripts that exceed the limit. Plan accordingly.

Section structure is prescribed. STOTEN expects: Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, Discussion (or Results and Discussion combined), Conclusions. You can add subsections, but don't rename the main sections or add creative headings. "Environmental implications" can be a subsection of Discussion, not a standalone section.

Conclusions must be a separate section. Don't end your paper with the Discussion. STOTEN requires a distinct Conclusions section that summarizes the main findings and their implications. This should be 150-250 words, not a single paragraph repeating the abstract.

Units and chemical notation. Use SI units throughout. Chemical formulas should use subscripts (CO₂, not CO2). Species names in italics. These seem minor, but the production team will flag every instance.

Special Issue submissions. STOTEN runs many Special Issues. If you're submitting to one, select the correct Special Issue during submission. Papers submitted to the wrong SI or to the regular track by mistake can be delayed by weeks.

Ethical statements for field studies. If your research involves field sampling, STOTEN increasingly requires a statement about permits, institutional approvals, or confirmation that no protected species or habitats were affected. Include this in the Methods section.

Even experienced STOTEN authors get tripped up by these:

1. Line numbers. Continuous line numbers are required for the review version. Don't use per-page numbering, and don't skip them entirely.

1. Double spacing. Required for review submission. Single-spaced manuscripts will be returned.

1. Highlights character count. The 85-character limit per highlight catches people off guard. Write them early and count carefully. Spaces count.

1. Structured abstract labels. The abstract must have section labels (Background, Objectives, Methods, Results, Discussion). An unstructured paragraph, even at 300 words or fewer, will be sent back.

1. Supplementary material referencing. Every supplementary figure or table must be cited in the main text. Orphaned supplementary items will be flagged during production.

In our pre-submission review work on STOTEN-targeted manuscripts, three patterns consistently predict formatting desk-screen failure at Science of The Total Environment. The patterns below are the same ones Damia Barcelo and outside reviewers flag at first-pass triage.

Scope-fit ambiguity in the abstract. STOTEN editors move fastest on manuscripts whose contribution is obviously aligned with environmental science research with quantified pollutant-level data and policy-relevant implications. The named failure pattern: papers without quantified pollutant concentrations and detection limits get extended revision. Check whether your abstract reads to STOTEN's scope

Methods package incomplete for the journal's reviewer pool. STOTEN reviewers expect specific methodological detail. Case-study papers without policy-relevant implications extend reviewer assignment. Check if your methods package is reviewer-complete

Reference-list and clean-citation failure mode. Editorial team at Science of The Total Environment screens reference lists for retracted-paper inclusion. Recent retractions in the STOTEN corpus we audit include 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156243, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150289, and 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166512. Citing any of these without a retraction-notice acknowledgment is an automatic desk-screen flag. Check whether your reference list is clean against Crossref + Retraction Watch

Manusights submission-corpus signal for Science of The Total Environment. Of the manuscripts our team screened before submission to STOTEN and peer venues in 2025, the editorial-culture mismatch most consistent across the cohort is stoten reviewers expect quantified pollutant concentrations with explicit detection limits; qualitative environmental-impact framing extends revision rounds. In our analysis of anonymized STOTEN-targeted submissions, Recent retractions in the STOTEN corpus include 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.156243, 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2021.150289, and 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2023.166512.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Science of the Total Environment, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

Highlights not submitted or exceeding the 85-character limit. As an Elsevier journal, STOTEN requires 3 to 5 Highlights, each under 85 characters including spaces, submitted as a separate file. This is a mandatory requirement for all article types. Manuscripts without a Highlights file, or where individual highlights exceed the character limit, are corrected before peer review begins. Authors frequently undercount characters when drafting highlights, particularly when including commas, spaces, and colons.

Risk or policy relevance of environmental findings not addressed. STOTEN's scope encompasses the environment as a system, including human health impacts and policy implications. Peer reviewers evaluate whether the environmental findings are contextualized within a risk, exposure, or policy framework. Manuscripts that report environmental contamination concentrations or pollutant distributions without connecting the findings to health risk thresholds, regulatory standards, or policy implications are asked to add this context. A measured concentration that exceeds a WHO or EU guideline should be explicitly identified as such.

Spatial and temporal coverage of the study area not documented with sufficient detail. STOTEN reviewers assess whether the spatial scale and sampling design are appropriate for the environmental conclusions being drawn. Manuscripts that generalize from a limited number of sampling sites (fewer than 5 for spatial mapping studies) without justifying the representativeness, or that measure environmental conditions at a single time point and claim temporal trends, are flagged for sampling design insufficiency.

Statistical analysis section missing or insufficient for environmental data. STOTEN manuscripts frequently involve multi-parameter environmental datasets with spatial and temporal components. Reviewers expect that the statistical analysis section specifies the tests used, justifies their suitability for the data distribution, accounts for spatial autocorrelation where relevant, and provides effect sizes alongside p-values. Manuscripts that report only p-values without effect sizes or confidence intervals, or that apply parametric tests to non-normally distributed environmental data without transformation, are asked to revise.

A Science of the Total Environment formatting and readiness check evaluates manuscript structure, highlights compliance, and environmental risk framing against these desk-rejection patterns before you submit.