茜54655 2023-07-18

Unlike downstairs, both my American academic boss and the Nobel laureates I know highly regard NAR. The classic articles of a certain Nobel laureate in recent years are all published in NAR (I don't need to mention their name, I think everyone can guess). Who studying nucleic acids wouldn't want to publish in NAR, apart from just riding on the hot topics like the Nature series? Of course, every top-tier journal inevitably has some average quality articles. This is unavoidable. How many questionable articles are there in Nature? I estimate there are far more than in NAR.

茜54655 2023-07-18

I feel like your postdoc boss is taking advantage of you. Let's forget about PLOS Bio/Gen, but you even mentioned NC. Who doesn't know that NC is the most serious forum for spamming?
Read the articles published in NAR first before commenting.

xibing 2023-07-05

How should I put it, there are still many average articles on NAR. Based on personal experience, even the postdoctoral advisor thinks that there are a lot of watered-down articles on there in the past two years. It's better to submit to NC, Development, or PLOS Bio/Gen.

David zhou 2023-02-04

Doctor for five years plus two years of postdoctoral work, the biggest job was submitting to NAR. Two days later, it was sent for review. The first review took 22 days. It was rejected. Later, it was successfully published in a smaller journal, NC. NAR is highly specialized. When going to the United States to find a postdoctoral position, having a publication in NAR is much stronger than having one in NC.

全式金 2023-02-04

Submit to Cell for review, but the reviewer rejected it. They suggested submitting to NAR instead. In the end, it was published in Cell Research. Although it wasn't submitted to Cell, it shows that the reviewers at Cell still recognize the value of NAR.

慧娜 2023-01-16

Interdisciplinary field of environment and plant biology. An article on non-coding RNA influencing photosynthesis was rejected after major revisions by Nature plants. After over a year of additional experiments, it was instantly rejected when submitted to NAR. It's truly difficult!
Submitted on January 7, 2023.
Received rejection letter on January 9, 2023.

慧娜 2023-01-16

pp, pj, np, and NAR do have intersection. For example, those who study the environment will also pay attention to NAR and journals on botany. To be honest, pp, pj, and np are all second-rate journals compared to NAR.

KKK 2023-01-13

Comparing the pp, pj, and np in the field of botany with the NAR, aren't you mixing up things that are unrelated?

qiohfdl 2023-01-05

Although I know that there are many Chinese people around me who value the influence of NAR and specifically access the water database, this one is definitely a top-tier journal in the field of nucleic acid research. It should have no problem competing with smaller journals. The classification of the Chinese Academy of Sciences is becoming increasingly unprofessional, with a bunch of mediocre journals and domestically produced journals being classified as first-tier journals. Well-known journals with good reputation are being classified into the second, third, and fourth tiers. Is it because ZZ is correct?

linxiaopitt 2022-12-27

What was said downstairs is correct. When looking for junior teaching positions in the United States, NAR is more useful than NC. NAR has been publishing for a long time and has a good reputation in the field of nucleic acids. There are basically no spam articles related to microRNA/Non-long coding, and the editors also have strict quality control. I don't know why the Chinese Academy of Sciences classified it as a second-tier journal. Even if it's not as good, it's still better than journals like Cell Death and Disease. CDD is already classified as a first-tier journal. Just take a look on PubPeer, and you will find plenty of articles with image misuse on CDD.

Yousi 2022-12-25

Congratulations to the Chinese Academy of Sciences for successfully shaming the US!

Yousi 2022-12-25

Um..............
A senior fellow used two articles from NAR (Nucleic Acids Research) and several small articles to find a teaching position at a state university ranked around 50 in the United States last year. It turns out that in the US, having two articles in a second-tier journal is enough to find a teaching position.

By the way, from my observation, NAR is at least more effective than Nature Communications for finding teaching positions in the United States.

Jasonwoon 2022-12-23

It seems that everyone's anger is unanimous!
The boss of the postdoctoral position is a NAS member. I originally planned to publish a small insignificant article last year, but the boss said I should choose a widely recognized journal in the field, such as NAR, to establish my own reputation. The boss may feel that the insignificant article is too populist and lacks prestige. So I submitted to NAR and it was accepted. The entire submission process went smoothly, and the additional experiments were ones we had thought of before but hadn't done due to a sense of luck.
I feel that the boss is right, after all, I also don't think much of the insignificant article. However, after returning to China for more than half a year, I deeply feel the erosion of NPG on the Chinese scientific research community. Even NC is considered a sub-journal of high-level specialized journals. Chaos is rampant!

林夕 2022-12-23

Agreed, our lab boss said the new partition has made everyone extremely angry, forcing us to waste time.

林夕 2022-12-23

You're right, there are very few citations in NAR's articles. The NAR articles from the dual academic team at MAPS, with whom I collaborated, are also rarely cited. The only reason for this is that their articles may be unreadable to most researchers, including you. Truly innovative articles do not have high citation rates. High citation rates are found in articles on hot topics such as graphene, gene editing, and global warming. However, these hot topic articles have little scientific value in terms of advancement.

林夕 2022-12-23

The evaluation is very fair! NAR articles are considered as showable achievements abroad, while articles published in so-called "new phytologist," "pbj," "pp," "pj," and other plant biology tier-one journals are not regarded as landmark achievements by everyone. This is because NAR emphasizes innovation, while the latter mentioned plant biology journals can easily publish articles by following a routine.

林夕 2022-12-23

Currently, it seems that domestic experts can only submit these routine articles to Plant Physiology, Plant J, New Phy, PBJ.
According to the statistics of 2020, the proportion of Chinese publications in the journal Plant Physiology is 28.494%, ranking second.
According to the statistics of 2021, the proportion of Chinese publications in the journal Plant Journal is 38.142%, ranking first.
According to the statistics of 2021, the proportion of Chinese publications in the journal New Phytologist is 29.683%, ranking second.
In 2022, the proportion of Chinese publications in the journal Plant Biotechnology Journal is 63.27% (57.95% in 2019), ranking first.

指挥棒 2022-12-23

It is recommended to create a separate major division for plant magazines. All the plant magazines are already in one division, and now certain magazines are favored by some people and given special treatment, suppressing the classic journals. Is this really the original intention of the country? It is suggested to directly rank one division according to the preferences of the leaders, without the need for any journal impact factors. As soon as Plant Communications has an impact factor, it is immediately placed in one division, becoming more and more shameless!

林夕 2022-12-23

I also specifically registered an account to complain about the division of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. Originally, I said that I would completely give up on the impact factor, but it seems that giving up the impact factor means only looking at the relevance to interests!

It's really strange that foreign journals, which are considered reputable, are so disappointing in China. Development, a top journal in the field, ended up in the second tier of biology journals! PLoS Genetics, a prestigious indexed journal, is ranked lower than many other miscellaneous journals and is also in the second tier. Some second-tier journals like Plant Physiology, Plant Journal, New Phytologist, and PBJ (a famous water journal) are in the first tier. This can only mean that the Chinese scientific research community only knows how to publish quantity rather than quality because the number of articles published by Chinese researchers in these journals is among the highest, while the reputable journals receive only about 10% of the articles, and often they are from top research groups abroad!

The most absurd thing is that NAR is also in the second tier! I only have experience of rejection from NAR, not of publishing. I submitted twice, both times the editor rejected my submission, and then these two articles were published in so-called first-tier journals. Currently, in our nucleic acid research community, NAR is definitely a top journal that surpasses many fancy journals such as NC, SA, etc.! NAR has always been known for its rigor and lack of fancy features. Within NAR, there is a culture of not evaluating submissions based on connections, citation potential, or popularity! This is truly valuable in an era when even Nature shit can become a top journal! Please, distinguished members of the Chinese Academy of Sciences, stop fooling around like this!

luofeiyu 2022-12-23

Waterlogging magazines are all divided into sections one by one, but NAR, which has such principles and a scientific approach, is being despised.

luofeiyu 2022-12-23

Once again, I witnessed the unprofessionalism and lack of bottom line in the categorization of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. If you don't consider impact factors anymore, shouldn't NAR be firmly categorized as a first-tier journal?

felix 2022-12-22

I specifically registered this account to criticize this division of the Chinese Academy of Sciences. This year, I also happened to have a communication as the first author for a paper in NAR. My postdoc advisor is the founding editor of NAR. He mentioned in our previous conversations that the initial intention of establishing NAR was because researchers in the field of nucleic acids did not have a suitable journal to submit their work, apart from general scientific journals. Therefore, NAR was created as a specialized journal, similar to how researchers in biochemistry could submit to JBC, microbiologists could submit to JB, and cell biologists could submit to MCB. Over the years, he has been pleased to see the increasing influence of NAR, although the difficulty has also increased. I suspect that the Chinese Academy of Sciences did not consider NAR as a first-tier journal because its two annual database and software issues are not included. However, high-quality databases are very helpful for the development of the field. Additionally, as everyone says, NAR's research papers indeed prioritize scientific content and are not solely focused on hot topics. Therefore, excluding the annual special issues is a reasonable decision for it to be classified as a first-tier journal. People with submission experience naturally understand this.

haosun 2022-12-22

NAR generally publishes solid and innovative nucleic acid articles, including the analysis of DNA and RNA structures and functions. The technical requirements and thresholds are relatively high, resulting in fewer publications from Chinese researchers. Research articles do not show obvious traces of following popular trends. It is suitable for submitting research with high innovation but not in a popular field. Seeing so many netizens expressing dissatisfaction with NAR, I will also share my three submission experiences.

In 2018, I submitted for the first time and the editor rejected it overnight, stating that the originality was not high. It was eventually rejected by Development and Cell Reports, and finally published in Genetics.

In 2020, I submitted for the second time, and NAR rejected it in the first review and did not recommend resubmission. After supplementing with experiments, it was eventually published in the EMBO Journal. But I don't think EMBO is worse than NAR, although it may seem so based on impact factor. They should be of the same level. Maybe the editors have different preferences.

In 2021, I submitted for the third time, and it was rejected immediately. After making revisions, it was finally published in Advanced Science, which is a well-known journal among Chinese researchers.

For professionals in the field of nucleic acids, being able to publish in NAR usually means showcasing their landmark work. NAR is different from many popular journals as it emphasizes solid and rigorous research, with strict requirements for technology and data. Being able to publish in NAR is a sign of entering the top circle in the nucleic acid field. I hope to succeed next year! Being categorized as a second-tier journal by the Chinese Academy of Sciences, in my and most colleagues' eyes, NAR is at the top of the first tier!

siwei huang 2022-12-22

Top Genetics Research Institute in the United States. Our submission order is as follows:

CNS > Major Journals > NAR PNAS > NC or SA > EMBO J or Plant Cell > PLOS Genetics > Plant Physiology > The Plant Journal or New Phytologist.

Further down the line, it will probably be directly SR or PLOS ONE. Generally, it is difficult to publish in major journals or regular journals, and NAR is the starting point for most submissions.

siwei huang 2022-12-22

Another possible reason is that the proportion of domestic communication units issuing documents is only about 10%.

siwei huang 2022-12-22

You replied incorrectly. Look at the comment above. I hope we can communicate more.

siwei huang 2022-12-22

I and you have the same concerns. Currently, I am doing postdoctoral research at a research center in a US university, while also having work in China. Recently, there is a manuscript on epigenetics that needs to be submitted. It is a very new discovery, but I don't think it will reach the level of a CNS (Cell, Nature, Science) publication. My lab supervisor and colleagues all recommend NAR (Nucleic Acids Research). However, it has been classified as a Q2 (second quartile) journal. Fortunately, our university does not heavily rely on the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS) journal ranking system. But I still have some concerns. The overall research environment in China is too ambiguous. Many Chinese and foreign journals of low quality have reached Q1 (first quartile). It's surprising that this top-tier journal is only Q2. Is it because of the low percentage of articles published by Chinese communication units, which is only 10%?

方建 2022-12-22

Just had a conversation with a big shot from the Chinese Academy of Sciences (CAS), and the inference drawn is that NAR (Nucleic Acids Research) articles have a special issue dedicated to databases. It's difficult to distinguish between special issues and research papers. CAS doesn't want to classify special issues into the first tier. Regarding research papers on NAR and similar topics, due to the high technical barriers, they tend to be more niche. People in China hardly read them or simply can't understand. In the European academic community, NAR research papers can be considered as articles of sub-journal level when applying for faculty positions.

方建 2022-12-22

Took some time to check the Chinese Academy of Sciences' classification of familiar magazines, can only say that the classification is rubbish!

方建 2022-12-22

Really? The new division has all been assigned to the second district? After being rejected by NAR, is it considered a gain to be accepted by NC?

What are the specific indicators of the Chinese Academy of Sciences classification? I can't understand it. I guess there is a high level of interest exchange participation. After all, many major biological journals in the first district are definitely low-quality journals, and many good journals have been assigned to the second and third districts.