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.

(0) 讚！ | 林夕

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.

(0) 讚！ | 林夕

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!

(0) 讚！ | 指挥棒

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!

(116) 讚！ | 林夕

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

(0) 讚！ | luofeiyu

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?

(71) 讚！ | luofeiyu

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.

(53) 讚！ | felix

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!

(2) 讚！ | haosun

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.

(0) 讚！ | siwei huang

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

(0) 讚！ | siwei huang

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

(0) 讚！ | siwei huang

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%?

(2) 讚！ | siwei huang

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.

(0) 讚！ | 方建

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

(0) 讚！ | 方建

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.

(89) 讚！ | 方建

Most of the biomedical articles in recent years have reached or even exceeded the level of top-tier journals. The difference between them and the top-tier journals is that NAR does not discriminate against non-hot topics. I have published two articles on the impact of lncRNA on insect development during my five-year postdoctoral research. One of them was in-depth but did not touch on hot topics, so it was accepted by NAR. The other one was not as in-depth but touched on immunology and interspecies transmission, so it was accepted by a top-tier journal (not a small NC). NAR is a good journal! My supervisor and colleagues in the field clearly value articles accepted by NAR more. The CNS series values trendy research, but there is a high probability that trendy research and the best research do not overlap. Ideal scientists should focus on doing the best research, not the trendiest research.

(13) 讚！ | 安迪.孟菲斯

There is a question, and I work with plant RNA. Should I choose to submit to this Journal Impact Factor 19 journal NAR or the Journal Impact Factor 13 journal pbj? I don't think anyone would choose pbj. Currently, NAR is considered more prestigious than PNAS in my circle. Who cares about pbj? I have to Google it to even know it exists.

So, what is the significance of the Chinese Academy of Sciences' subject classification? Should I waste my time submitting to pbj instead of NAR? Isn't that disgusting?

(5) 讚！ | song

I attempted to submit an article in the 21st year, but my boss said the target was set too high. As expected, it was rejected within two days. I then submitted it to mbio for minor revisions. This year, another article from our lab was rejected instantly, and we are currently revising it for submission to NC. Overall, the requirements are very high...

Is it a trick to put the upgraded version in the second tier?

(4) 讚！ | luofeiyu

Didn't win, haha, frustrated

(0) 讚！ | 霹雳鸿光

Review Speed: 2.0 | Submission Acceptance Rate: 25.0
Sharing Experience: The journal is a good one, but it's fortunate to encounter a good editor for your article to have a chance. Most of the tumor basic research articles are rejected because they are not suitable for publication in this journal

(0) 讚！ | 辉夜一莹

Received! Wishing you good luck!

(0) 讚！ | 星熊雅秀

Hey, do you have any news now? Wish everyone good luck

(0) 讚！ | 八卦灵珊

There should be news soon, hopefully we can receive good news at the same time

(0) 讚！ | 星熊雅秀

The results should be available in two to three weeks

(0) 讚！ | 八卦灵珊

Don't worry, it has been 24 days since Little Xiu went back

(0) 讚！ | 星熊雅秀