Guidelines for Reviewers
The journal GENETICS, published by The Genetics Society of America, publishes high quality, original research presenting novel findings on a range of topics bearing on inheritance. These topics include population and evolutionary genetics, complex traits, developmental and behavioral genetics, cellular genetics, gene expression, genome integrity and transmission, and genome and systems biology. The journal also publishes Review and Perspective articles, as well as articles focused on the teaching of genetics.
GENETICS is a peer-edited journal—all editorial decisions are made by the authors–peers–with a tradition of rigorous peer-review. Full documentation of the data presented and compelling evidence for the conclusions drawn is required.
GENETICS practices single-anonymized peer review in which you will know the authors’ names but your name will not be shared.
Criteria for Publication
GENETICS considers for publication manuscripts that are of general interest to a wide range of genetics and genomics investigators or of extraordinary interest to specialists. The results presented must provide strong support for the conclusions reached. The study must also provide significant new insights into a biological process, or demonstrate novel and creative approaches to an important biological problem, or describe development of new resources, methods, technologies, or tools of interest to a wide range of geneticists.
Because the editors appreciate that competing studies often complement each other, recent publication of similar articles by others does not necessarily preclude consideration of a manuscript for publication in GENETICS.
Writing the Review
Assess how well the manuscript meets our criteria for publication. We'd like your opinion of the importance of the questions the manuscript addresses and how significant you judge the advance in the field the authors are reporting.
Specifically, please:
- Identify any major deficiencies and provide a clear description of the specific problem(s) in a way that will benefit the author; this should include any “make-or-break” issues.
- Include any suggestions on the manuscript’s writing, structure, exposition, scientific accuracy, scholarship, and length, including ways to improve the paper. There is no need to edit the entire manuscript, but please cite one or two specific examples if the exposition is poor.
- Confirm that the data in both the manuscript and the supplemental material support the authors’ conclusions and are both available and usable. Indicate if additional data or documentation are needed.
Please do not:
- Indicate whether you think the manuscript should be accepted or rejected in your comments to the Author; provide that recommendation only in your confidential comments to the Associate Editor.
- If a recommendation is made in the comments to authors section, we will remove it prior to sending your review to the authors.
- State if a manuscript would benefit from professional editing – instead, convey this to the editor in the confidential comments.
- Include statements that could be seen as derogatory or passing judgment on an author as to their geographic or institutional location, language skills, or career level.
Reviewer recommendations and comments are evaluated by the Editors and at times their decision may not be in agreement with those of the reviewers. We value your engagement with the journals and your recommendation is thoroughly considered and appreciated, even if the final decision is not in line with your review.
Most manuscripts are revised before being accepted for publication. To shorten the review process and decrease the burden on reviewers, many revised manuscripts will not be sent back to reviewers. If you feel it's important that you see a revised version, please indicate that in your comments to the Associate Editor.
Please note: The use of Large Language Models (LLMs), such as ChatGPT, to write your review is prohibited. Additionally, uploading a manuscript or associated files or manuscript information to a LLM will violate the confidentiality agreement in place for authors and the journal.
Transfers between GENETICS and G3
Post-review some GENETICS articles may be offered transfer to G3 for further review. If the authors choose to transfer their manuscript to G3 in those cases your review and identity will transfer confidentially with the article.
Transparent Peer Review
GENETICS offers Transparent Peer Review. Authors may elect to have the reviews published along with their article. Your review will remain anonymous unless you sign the review. We welcome your questions and feedback on Transparent Peer Review at GENETICS: [email protected]
Collaborating with Others
If you would like to involve a member of your lab in the review process, please inform the Associate Editor. GENETICS encourages you to include Early Career Scientists (those within 7 years of having received their PhD) in the review process. Please remember that manuscripts and the fact that they are under review are confidential and should not be shared without the knowledge of the Associate Editor. You must include the name of the person you collaborated with in the field provided on the review submission form.
Conflicts of Interest
Before accepting a review assignment, carefully consider any affiliations or relationships that may present a conflict of interest, including financial or intellectual competing interest in connection with the manuscript. Examples could include employment, funding, personal financial interest such as stocks or patents, and non-financial competing interests such as membership on committees or advisory councils, or related work under preparation or review.
Reviewing Resubmissions
Upon revision, authors will provide a Response to Reviewers along with both a clean copy of the revised manuscript and a version with significant changes highlighted or tracked. We ask that you verify that the authors have addressed the concerns documented by the editor in the decision letter; the editor may not have asked the authors to address all points. In your review, please do not include new requests (i.e., that were not listed in your initial review) for experiments and/or data analysis unless a critical error or omission is identified during re-review.
Editing Reviews
GENETICS will not edit reviewer comments to the authors except to remove recommendations regarding publication. If language in a review is deemed inappropriate for professional communication or contains sensitive information then the editorial office will request changes as necessary.
Contact Us
If you have any questions about the review process, contact the GENETICS Editorial Office at:
[email protected]
phone: 412-226-5930
fax: 412-226-5931
