Is a substantial novel research study, with a complex story often involving several techniques or approaches. The main text excluding abstract, online methods, references and figure legends is 30 words. An introduction without heading is followed by sections headed results, discussion and online methods. The results and online methods should be divided by topical subheadings the discussion does not contain subheadings. Articles are peer reviewed, and authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication. Reports an important novel research result, but is less substantial than an article. This format begins with an introductory paragraph not abstract of approximately 150 words, summarizing the background, rationale, main results and implications.

This paragraph should be referenced, as in nature style, and should be considered part of main text, so that any subsequent introductory material avoids too much redundancy with the introductory paragraph. The text is limited to 20 words, excluding the introductory paragraph, online methods, references and figure legends. Letters are peer reviewed, and authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication. Brief communications begin with a brief unreferenced abstract 3 sentences, no more than 70 words , which will appear on medline. The main text is typically 1,0 1,500 words, including abstract, references and figure legends, and contains no headings.

Brief communications normally have no more than 2 display items, although this may be flexible at the discretion of the editor, provided the page limit is observed. Brief communications are peer reviewed, and authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication. Presents a large data set such as a comprehensive list of proteins in an organelle or tissue, a genome wide antibody library, coordinated analysis of cells or reagents by several different laboratories of broad utility, interest and significance to the community. The main text excluding abstract, online methods, references and figure legends is approximately 3,0 words. Resources are peer reviewed, and authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication.

Is a new analysis of existing data typically large genomic, transcriptomic or proteomic data sets from arrays or other high throughput platforms or describe new data obtained in a comparative analysis of technologies that lead to novel and arresting conclusions of importance to a broad audience. The main text excluding abstract, online methods, references and figure legends is approximately 3,0. Analyses are peer reviewed, and authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication. Formerly letters to the editor is a flexible format that may include anything of interest to the journal's readers, from policy debates to announcements to 'matters arising' from research papers. A correspondence may describe primary research data, but only in summary form this format is not intended for full presentation of data. Correspondence should never be more than one printed page, and usually much less. The number of references should not exceed 10 for either the correspondence or its reply, and article titles are omitted from the reference list.

Authors must submit a competing financial interests statement, which is printed only if they declare that they have competing interests. In cases where a correspondence is critical of a previous research paper, the authors are normally given the option of publishing a brief reply. Criticism of opinions or other secondary matter does not involve an automatic right of reply. Or they may focus on papers of exceptional significance that are published elsewhere. Unsolicited contributions will not normally be considered, although prospective authors are welcome to make proposals. Authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication.

Essay About My School Holiday

Is an authoritative, balanced and scholarly survey of recent developments in a research field. The requirement for balance need not prevent authors from proposing a specific viewpoint, but if there are controversies in the field, the authors must treat them in an even handed way. Citations should be selective and, in the case of particularly important studies le 10% of all the references , we encourage authors to provide short annotations explaining why these are key contributions. The scope of a review should be broad enough that it is not dominated by the work of a single laboratory, and particularly not by the authors' own work. Review authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication.

Reviews are always peer reviewed to ensure factual accuracy, appropriate citations and scholarly balance. Is a very flexible format, focusing on the scientific, commercial, ethical, legal, societal, or political issues surrounding biotechnology research. Commentary articles should be topical, readable, provocative and introduce new concepts/points of view, providing a personal perspective on a biotechnology based matter of public or scientific importance.

The main criteria are that they should be of immediate interest to a broad readership and should be written in an accessible, non technical style. Commentaries do not normally contain primary research data, although they may present 'sociological' data funding trends, demographics, bibliographic data, etc. References should be used sparingly 10 25 , and article titles are omitted from the reference list. The related format historical commentary is a journalistic treatment of the history of a particular discovery or technical development. These pieces may be a personal account by one of the participants or may present strong personal opinions. This format does not necessarily seek scholarly balance, and it should be journalistic and accessible rather than scholarly in style. Commentary authors must provide a competing financial interests statement before publication.

Is a new format for scholarly reviews and discussions of the primary research literature that are too technical for a commentary but do not meet the criteria for a review 151 either because the scope is too narrow, or because the author is advocating a controversial position or a speculative hypothesis or discussing work primarily from one group. Two reviews advocating opposite sides in a research controversy are normally published as perspectives. The related format historical perspective is a more technical account of a particular scientific development. Like other perspectives, and in contrast to historical commentary, historical perspectives are scholarly reviews, including citation of key references, aiming to present a balanced account of the historical events, not merely personal opinions or reminiscences.