PNAS scraps special submission

A leading scientific journal has done away with a manuscript submission option that allowed members of the National Academy of Sciences to usher papers from non-members through the peer review process. The __Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences__ (__PNAS__) offered the option, called "Track I," to members of the Academy as a way to bring papers written by non-members to the journal's attention. Members were allowed to "communicate" two Track I papers per year, and were responsible fo

By | September 10, 2009

A leading scientific journal has done away with a manuscript submission option that allowed members of the National Academy of Sciences to usher papers from non-members through the peer review process. The __Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences__ (__PNAS__) offered the option, called "Track I," to members of the Academy as a way to bring papers written by non-members to the journal's attention. Members were allowed to "communicate" two Track I papers per year, and were responsible for procuring at least two reviews of the manuscript before submitting it to the __PNAS__ editorial office. Starting July 1, 2010, __PNAS__ will require non-members to submit manuscripts to the journal via the normal route, "Track II," according to linkurl:__ScienceInsider__.;http://blogs.sciencemag.org/scienceinsider/2009/09/the-academys-jo.html A paper submitted via this route is screened by a __PNAS__ editorial board member, who decides whether the paper is scientifically sound and likely to represent the top 10% of its field. If the paper passes muster, the board member hands it off to an Academy member for editing. "Since the introduction of Track II as the general route for submitted papers, many members will no longer communicate papers through Track I," wrote Alan Fersht, a __PNAS__ associate editor, in a 2005 linkurl:editorial;http://www.pnas.org/content/102/18/6241.full.pdf in the journal. But in 2009 __PNAS__ has published approximately 390 papers (about 12.5% of the total published) that were submitted using the Track I route, according to __ScienceInsider__. Researchers submitting papers to __PNAS__ will still be allowed to suggest referees and editors for their manuscripts. __Editor's Note (10th Sept.) - linkurl:Here;http://www.pnas.org/content/early/2009/09/08/0909515106.full.pdf+html?sid=b8e6becf-082b-4f07-bd96-c28143c850f3 is the __PNAS__ editorial that explains the decision to ditch Track I.__
**__Related stories:__***linkurl:Does It Pay To Know An Academy Member?;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/18006/
[13th April 1998]*linkurl:Editors' Advice To Rejected Authors: Just Try, Try Again;http://www.the-scientist.com/article/display/17713/
[15th September 1997]
Advertisement
The Scientist
The Scientist

Comments

Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 12

September 10, 2009

I wonder if this has anything to do with the recent\n\n"Caterpillars evolved from onychophorans by hybridogenesis" PNAS 0908357106\n\nThe first sentence of the abstract reads as follows:\n\n"I reject the Darwinian assumption that larvae and their adults evolved from a single common ancestor."\n\n
Avatar of: Michael Lerman

Michael Lerman

Posts: 8

September 11, 2009

When Adam was single in The Garden of Eden God first taught him how to name things
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 12

September 11, 2009

I always thought that Track I was unfair...it was a good-old-boy network type of thing...that who you knew was more important than what you wrote!
Avatar of: anonymous poster

anonymous poster

Posts: 3

September 11, 2009

The only change I can see is that the communicated m/s will need to pass the peer review process, although the prearranged editor still have the power to make the final decision.

Follow The Scientist

icon-facebook icon-linkedin icon-twitter icon-vimeo icon-youtube

Stay Connected with The Scientist

  • icon-facebook The Scientist Magazine
  • icon-facebook The Scientist Careers
  • icon-facebook Neuroscience Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Genetic Research Techniques
  • icon-facebook Cell Culture Techniques
  • icon-facebook Microbiology and Immunology
  • icon-facebook Cancer Research and Technology
  • icon-facebook Stem Cell and Regenerative Science
Advertisement
The Scientist
The Scientist
Advertisement
Life Technologies