NUCLEIC ACIDS RESEARCH

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!

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!