Viewpoint articles are intended to present an insightful, thoroughly documented slant on a topic for which opinions are either controversial or undecided in the literature. The Viewpoint manuscript must be concise, to the point, and bring novel new insights on a specific problem. Viewpoints must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed. The determination whether a proposed Viewpoint is within scope and acceptable for publication is a matter committed to the discretion of the editors. The article must refer only to already peer-reviewed, published findings. Unpublished data should not be included. Maximum length is 1200 words, 30 references, and one single-panel figure. No abstract is required; the title of the manuscript should be as descriptive as possible of the problem and or viewpoint being presented. All manuscripts will be submitted to the usual peer review process.
The Rapid Report manuscript category is reserved for short papers presenting important new findings which could potentially have a major impact on the field. The manuscript does not need to tell a complete story, but must be compelling, innovative and novel. The manuscript may contain 4000 words including references and a total of 4 figures and/or tables. Peer reviewers will be asked to complete a review of a Rapid Report within 10 days. If encouraged to revise, authors will be asked to submit first revisions 14 days after first decision. A final decision on first revisions will be rendered by the editors within 5 days of resubmission. Authors will be encouraged to fully comply with reviewer comments and submit only one revision. All Rapid Reports accepted for publication will be highlighted in the online journal as "featured papers" and have the option for a podcast at the author's and editors' discretion.
Note: Only video files are permitted as supplemental data for Rapid Reports. Other types of supplemental files (e.g., figures, tables, appendices, data sets) are not permitted.
Research articles present important new research results including the entire contents of a research project. Research articles include an abstract, an introduction, methods and results sections, a discussion, and relevant citations. Large data sets are welcome for inclusion in the online publication. Articles are peer-reviewed.
AJP - Cell publishes a series of invited "Themes" articles on specific topics, which are Perspectives covering scientific areas of new discoveries, rapid progress, and exciting new opportunities in the field of cellular physiology research. The length of each Themes article should be <4,000 words, include 1 or 2 diagrams to illustrate key concepts, and can cite ~100 references (or less). PLEASE NOTE that Themes articles are not meant to be extensive reviews but instead, opinionated highlights of what is new, exciting, and perhaps controversial, in the field and that, in addition, will help educate readers unfamiliar with the area. Themes must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Theme articles will be reviewed by the Editor-in-Chief and/or by an Associate Editor with expertise in the specific Theme Topic in expedited fashion so as to result in their publication within 4 months after submission. Authors may enlist co-authors if they so wish.
This category of article serves as a forum in which to disseminate new and original lines of thinking in physiology. These short articles go beyond the scope of invited reviews and should present original ideas that can be derived from our current knowledge base. Some Perspectives articles may challenge current dogma and will be considered for publication based on the scientific merit of the argument presented. These Perspective articles will be subject to peer review. Some articles will be invited, but unsolicited articles are welcome. Perspectives must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed. Perspectives should not include original, unpublished data. In all cases, determining whether a proposed Perspective is within scope and acceptable for publication is a matter committed to the discretion of the editors. These articles should be about 1,500 words long, excluding references, and may include two figures.
Methods in Cell Physiology
Research in physiology depends crucially on the development of new methods of data collection and analysis. Manuscripts submitted under this category should describe new methods for the recording, collection, and/or analysis of data relevant to understanding how the physiological system works. Manuscripts will be reviewed taking into consideration the following criteria:
- The novelty of the new method. Papers should not be minor incremental improvements of old methods, but have a real new component.
- The manuscript must describe the method in sufficient detail to enable others to implement or replicate the method or procedure.
- The manuscript should carefully describe the advantages and disadvantages of the new method, with its limitations and strengths laid out clearly for the reader.
- The manuscript must illustrate the use of the method to demonstrate that it actually works. It is not necessary to use the method in an extensive study of a biological problem, but a "proof of principle" demonstration is required. Where possible, the method should be applied to real physiological data.
- Manuscripts should be of the length required to meet these criteria. Extensive technical details, mathematical derivations, etc. can be placed into an Appendix if they will interrupt the flow of the manuscript but may be additionally helpful to others wishing to implement the technique.
Review articles provide synthesis of state-of-the-art knowledge in a defined area highlighting new questions and pointing to future research directions. They encompass examination of biological processes, systems, and models, and technologies for their study. The primary purpose is to educate readers by providing a comprehensive view of completed works presented in a concise, unified format; however, appropriate inclusion of unpublished data is permissible. Utilization of figures is encouraged. Typically, reviews are invited and all are peer-reviewed. Review articles must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Please note that prior to review, all review articles will be examined for originality using CrossCheck screening software to compare the submitted text to all available literature, including previous publications from the same author(s).
Editorials provide commentary by the Editor, Associate Editors, and other scientists and experts on issues related to the Journal's mission as well as of general interest to our readers. Unsolicited editorials will be considered for publication. Acceptance will reside with the editors. Editorials must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Editorial Focus articles are commentaries invited by the Editors on articles of unusual interest that are published in the journal. Editorial Focus articles are designed to place the findings and conclusions of the highlighted article in context with the current state-of-the-art, to note strengths and (if relevant) weaknesses of the study, and to identify key questions that remain to be addressed. Editorial Focus articles must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed.
Letters to the Editor
In all cases, determining whether a proposed Letter to the Editor is acceptable for publication is a matter committed to the discretion of the editors. Letters, including an informative title, should be short, approximately one journal column (500 words). Letters are reviewed by the appropriate editor and are subject to editing and possible abridgment. Letters to the Editor must be authored by experts in the field under discussion, such expertise having been demonstrated by original research published by the author(s) in peer-reviewed journals indexed in the major services, such as PubMed. Letters to the Editor should not include original, unpublished data. If a proposed Letter is found acceptable, a copy will be sent to the author of the original article if applicable; that author will have an opportunity to provide a rebuttal with new material that will be considered for publication with the Letter. Letters to the Editor may also simply address matters of general interest to the readership.
Various article types can be published under the following Categories, or headings:
- Cellular and Mitochondrial Metabolism
- Extracellular Matrix, Cell Interactions
- Growth, Differentiation, and Apoptosis
- Methods in Cell Physiology
- Muscle Cell Biology and Cell Motility
- Nervous System Cell Biology
- Protein and Vesicle Trafficking, Cytoskeleton
- Receptors and Signal Transduction
- Vascular Biology
Calls for Papers
Calls for Papers will have headings that change depending on the topic. Manuscripts of any type may be submitted in response to an announced Call for Papers. These manuscripts are peer reviewed, and are published together under the topic heading.
Manuscripts on the history of physiology may be submitted to the Editor.
Cores of Reproducibility in Physiology (CORP) – Invited review article
Experts will be invited to write a detailed, instructional paper that represents best practice in physiology for a particular method or equipment that is in broad, common use. This series of articles is available across all APS journals and is developed in response to the challenge to improve transparency and reproducibility in published research results. To build on the value of the collective “best practices the title of the paper should start with "Cores of Reproducibility in Physiology: ............." where the specific device or method would appear after the semicolon.
The following key elements, must be included:
- A description of the method/device and its purported use(s)
- Details regarding proper use, including calibration, validation, range, sensitivity, specificity, reproducibility (addressing variance of the method itself, within-subject variance and between-subject variance)
- Particular details of practical importance that may not be widely appreciated – especially where things can go wrong.
- A critical discussion of what the method/device can do if used properly
- A critical discussion of limitations of the method/device (what it cannot do or is not intended to do)
These invited articles will be peer reviewed with standard rigor and in light of meeting the above-listed criteria, and so will be accepted at the Editors’ discretion.