When you choose to publish with PLOS, your research makes an impact. Make your work accessible to all, without restrictions, and accelerate scientific discovery with options like preprints and published peer review that make your work more Open.

Journals
More Content
PLOS BLOGS PLOS Collections
Browse all PLOS Blogs
Browse all PLOS Blogs

PLOS iGEM Collection – Reviewer Instructions

PLOS Collections Biology & Life Sciences

Igemlogo_bannerSubmissions to the PLOS iGEM Collection will be posted for open review on the PLOS Collections blog and reviews will be posted as comments on the blog. For more information on the PLOS iGEM Collection please visit the collection page.

iGEM and PLOS are working together to give the student teams participating in the iGEM 2015 competition the option to publish their work in a persistent peer reviewed format. iGEM teams have the option to submit either a research article, with the intention that it will eventually be published in PLOS ONE, or an ‘iGEM report’. We created the ‘iGEM report’ as a more informal format, to accommodate works that would not meet the standards of publication in a scientific journal like PLOS ONE. The type of submission is stated in the title. Please make sure that your review is adapted to the type of submission.

All reviews must be signed; we also request you provide your institution, and state if you have any competing interests.

Reviewing iGEM Research Articles

Research articles should meet the publication criteria for PLOS ONE (http://journals.plos.org/plosone/s/criteria-for-publication).

We ask that reviewers consider the following questions when reviewing an iGEM Research Article:

  1. Does the study present the results of primary scientific research?
  2. Are the manuscript and analysis technically sound?
  3. Are the conclusions supported by the data?
  4. Does the manuscript adhere to the PLOS Data Policy?
  5. Is the manuscript presented correctly and well written?

Reviewing iGEM Reports

iGEM Reports detail projects carried out for iGEM 2015, clearly presenting the methodology and results. The format and structure of iGEM Reports is more flexible, and could consist of as little as a single figure or data set with a description of the project methodology. iGEM Reports must adhere to the PLOS Data Policy.

We ask that reviewers consider the following questions when reviewing an iGEM Report:

  1. Does the submission accurately and clearly report the experiment carried out?
  2. Does the report adhere to the PLOS Data Policy?
  3. Is the report presented correctly and well written?

Thanks in advance for your review!

Back to top