Research Articles present important new research findings that represent a major advance in the field. Research Articles include an abstract, introduction, methods, results, and discussion sections, together with figures, tables, legends, and relevant citations. Research Articles are peer-reviewed.
Rapid Reports are short papers presenting important new findings that 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 should not exceed 4,000 words, including references and figure legends, and 4 figures and/or tables. Rapid Reports will be peer reviewed within 10 days. If requested, authors will be asked to submit a revision 14 days after the first decision. A final decision on first revisions will be made 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, appendixes, data sets) are not permitted.
Review Articles provide synthesis of state-of-the-art knowledge in a defined area highlighting new questions and future research directions. They include reviews of biological processes, systems, models, and technologies. The primary purpose of a Review Article is to educate readers by providing a comprehensive summary of completed works presented in a concise, unified format. The manuscript should be approximately 8,000 words, excluding references, with 4-6 figures and/or tables, and up to 100 references. The inclusion of previously published figures is permitted provided that permission is obtained from the copyright holder and the source is acknowledged. Inclusion of unpublished data is also permissible. Authors are encouraged to use figures to summarize biological processes. Typically, Review Articles are invited although presubmission enquiries to the editors are encouraged. All Review Articles are peer-reviewed.
Note: Prior to publication 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).
Mini-Reviews are concise, punchy, and up-to-the-minute summaries of important new and emerging fields. The purpose of Mini-Reviews is to introduce readers to advances and trends in physiology that are outside their own area of expertise. Mini-Reviews should provide a synthesis of new areas of biology in a manner that is accessible to nonspecialists in the field. They should focus on advances in the past 1-3 years, although some historical context is permissible. The manuscript should be approximately 3,000 words, excluding references, with 1-3 figures and/or tables, and up to 50 references. The inclusion of previously published figures is permitted provided that permission is obtained from the copyright holder and the source is acknowledged. Inclusion of unpublished data is also permissible. Authors are encouraged to use figures to summarize biological processes. Typically, Mini-Reviews are invited although presubmission enquiries to the editors are encouraged. All Mini-Reviews are peer-reviewed. Periodically, collections of Mini-Reviews that are in related areas or associated with meetings or symposia will be assembled by the editors in Themes.
Note: Prior to publication all Mini-Reviews 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).
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.
Young Investigator Perspectives
Young Investigator Perspectives are editorials written by students, postdoctoral trainees, or investigators transitioning to an independent laboratory. These brief articles (maximum 1,000 words excluding references) may address different aspects of research training, teaching, career development strategies in academia and industry, networking strategies, work-life balance, exciting new technologies, or scientific topics relevant to our field. Typically, Young Investigator Perspectives are invited although presubmission enquiries to the editors are encouraged.
Advances in physiology often require 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 physiological processes. Manuscripts will be reviewed on the basis of the following criteria:
- The novelty of the new method. Manuscripts that describe incremental improvements of established methods will not be published.
- Description of the method in sufficient detail for replication by other investigators.
- Description of the advantages and disadvantages of the new method, including its advance over established approaches.
- Demonstration that the new methodology is effective. Although an extensive study is not required, the manuscript should include a demonstration by experiment of "proof of principle."
- Manuscripts should be of the length required to meet these criteria. Extensive technical details or mathematical derivations may be included as a supplement.
Editorials provide commentary by the Editor-in-Chief, 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 by the editors.
Editorial Focus articles are commentaries on papers of unusual interest published in the Journal and selected by the Editor-in-Chief or Associate Editors to be highlighted by a brief Editorial Focus commentary. They should describe the most important conclusions of the paper and place the paper into context with the current state-of-the-art knowledge. They may highlight controversial issues, discuss strengths and weaknesses of the paper, and raise unanswered questions.
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. The Journal welcomes Letters to the Editor. Letters, including an informative title, should be short, approximately one journal column (500 words). Letters are reviewed by the editors and are subject to editing and possible abridgment. Letters to the Editor must be written 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.
Themes are collections of related Review Articles, Mini-Reviews, or Perspectives covering scientific areas of new discoveries, rapid progress, and exciting new opportunities in the field of gastrointestinal, liver and pancreatic research.
Current and past themes articles
Various article types can be published under the following Categories, or headings:
- Epithelial Biology and Secretion
- Neurogastroenterology and Motility
- Hormones, Neurotransmitters, Growth Factors, Receptors, and Signaling
- Stem Cells, Tissue Engineering, Development, and Cancer
- Liver and Biliary Tract Physiology/Pathophysiology
- Pancreatic Physiology/Pathophysiology
- Inflammation, Immunity, and Infection
- Microbiome and Host Interactions
- Nutrient Sensing, Nutrition, and Metabolism
- Systems Biology
- Translational Human Pathophysiology
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.