untitled

comprehensive titles and abstracts make the

editor’s job more difficult.

Help guide the editor to the most appro-

priate members of the editorial board and ref-

erees. Do not assume that an editor is famil-

iar with all research areas covered in his/her

journal. A short list of expert board members

and referees is an essential part of a good

introductory letter. Potential conflicts of

interest should be mentioned, but a long list

of referees to be excluded (or even all experts

from a particular country!) alerts the editor to

potential problems with a submission.

Advice to a Monitoring Editor

Not-for-profit journals usually employ busy

academics to serve as monitoring editors

whose charge is to establish whether a manu-

script is appropriate for the journal, to select

expert referees, and to render a final editorial

decision on the fate of the work. Some papers

are rejected without review when the moni-

toring editor decides that the work is not

within the scope of a journal or if it seems

unlikely that a manuscript will pass muster

with critical referees. Many journals, includ-

ing Molecular Biology of the Cell, have the pol-

icy of not publishing work that describes a

gene or protein in no greater depth than pre-

viously published work on an ortholog from

another organism. Similarly, many journals

will not publish the modification of an exist-

ing technique if the application does not

reach a novel conclusion. Obviously, for the

most competitive journals, the criteria

become quite subjective. Prospective authors

should consult an editor in advance of sub-

mitting a manuscript to such a journal to

establish if the work has a chance of success.

It is the monitoring editor’s responsibility to

spare the author and potential reviewers

wasted time and effort in considering a man-

uscript that is inappropriate for the journal.

Referees also have day jobs, and it is the

monitoring editor’s role to identify appropri-

ate and responsible reviewers. Most col-

leagues are honest and fair and can be count-

ed on for a timely return of a constructive cri-

tique. Editors will often cultivate groups of

such cooperative reviewers who are appropri-

ate for the areas for which the editor is respon-

sible. Unfortunately, some colleagues cannot

be counted on for fair and impartial judg-

ments. Typical antisocial behaviors include

excessive delays in returning critiques, vague

and judgmental decisions, impossible and

excessively detailed demands, and even the

occasional breach of confidentiality where the

162 CAREER ADVICE FOR LIFE SCIENTISTS II

A short list of expert board

members and referees is an

essential part of a good

introductory letter.

An editor will almost always

rely on the title and abstract

of a manuscript to make a

preliminary decision about the

appropriateness of the work for

the journal in question and to

choose referees.

Some of the most competitive

journals have the unfortunate

habit of consulting far too many

referees.