Publishing Initiatives
Funder Platforms:
- Wellcome Open Research
- Gates Open Research
- F1000Research
Preprint Servers:
- arXiv (physics, mathematics, computer science)
- bioRxiv (biology)
- medRxiv (medicine)
- SSRN (social sciences)
- PsyArXiv (psychology)
Repository Networks:
- PubMed Central (biomedical research)
- Europe PMC (European biomedical research)
- Institutional repositories (university-based)
Open Infrastructure Initiatives:
- Open Library of Humanities
- SciELO (Latin America)
- Redalyc (Latin America)
- SCOAP3 (high-energy physics)
Labels:
OpenAccess
How Preprints Are Changing Publishing in Biology
What Are Preprints?
Preprints are research manuscripts shared publicly before formal peer review. In biology, they have transformed how discoveries are communicated, accelerating the exchange of ideas and enabling open scientific discussion long before traditional publication.
1. Accelerating the Pace of Discovery
Biological research moves quickly—especially in fields like infectious disease, genomics, and ecology. Preprints allow scientists to share findings immediately, without waiting months for peer review and journal publication.
-
During the COVID-19 pandemic, bioRxiv and medRxiv became vital channels for timely dissemination of results.
-
This speed helps researchers receive early feedback and avoid duplication of work.
However, because preprints are not peer reviewed, they should be interpreted cautiously, particularly for clinical or policy-sensitive topics.
2. Enhancing Visibility and Impact
Posting a preprint can increase a paper’s reach and influence:
-
Studies show that preprinted papers often receive more citations and online attention after journal publication.
-
Preprints provide open access visibility, even when the final version is published behind a paywall.
-
For early-career researchers, preprints help demonstrate productivity and impact between formal publications.
3. Establishing Priority and Transparency
Preprints create a timestamped, citable record of research, helping scientists establish precedence for their discoveries.
This transparency also supports reproducibility, as data and methods are shared openly from the start.
4. Evolving Relationship with Journals
Most major biology journals now accept submissions that began as preprints, and some actively encourage it.
-
Publishers such as PLOS, eLife, and EMBO Press support preprint posting.
-
Platforms like eLife and Peer Community In integrate open peer review directly on preprints, blending early sharing with formal evaluation.
5. Challenges and Considerations
While preprints offer many benefits, they also raise important questions.
| Challenge | Implication | Best Practice |
|---|---|---|
| Misinformation risk | Unreviewed findings can spread widely | Include clear disclaimers; communicate responsibly |
| Duplicate publication concerns | Some fear preprints may count as “prior publication” | Check journal policies on preprints (via Sherpa Romeo) |
| Unequal participation | Some researchers may hesitate to post work publicly | Promote mentoring and equitable support for open science |
6. Key Preprint Servers for Biology
| Platform | Focus | Notes |
|---|---|---|
| bioRxiv | General biology | Established, hosted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory |
| medRxiv | Health and clinical sciences | Ethical screening process |
| EcoEvoRxiv | Ecology and evolution | Community-led via the Open Science Framework |
| Research Square | Broad scientific scope | DOI assignment and optional editorial checks |
7. Strategic Use of Preprints
For biologists, preprints can:
-
Gather community feedback before journal submission
-
Increase research visibility and accessibility
-
Demonstrate progress for funding or hiring
-
Contribute to open and collaborative science
Many major funders, including the NIH, Wellcome Trust, and HHMI, now allow or even encourage citing preprints in grant applications.
The Future of Publishing in Biology
Preprints are helping biology move toward a more open, transparent, and collaborative model of publishing.
Rather than replacing journals, they complement the peer review system—bridging the gap between discovery and dissemination.
Recommended resources:
Plagiarism and Self-Plagiarism: Avoiding Common Pitfalls
Plagiarism remains the most frequently encountered issue in academic publishing, and it is a grave violation of research ethics. Fundamentally, it is the act of using another person's work, ideas, or words without proper attribution. However, researchers must also be vigilant about self-plagiarism.
Defining Plagiarism
Plagiarism occurs when a text, image, data, or idea is presented as one's own original work when it originated elsewhere. Even minor borrowing without citation constitutes plagiarism.
The core principle is: If it is not common knowledge, and it is not your original idea or data, you must cite the source.
Understanding Self-Plagiarism (Text Recycling)
Self-plagiarism, or "text recycling," refers to reusing large segments of text, data, or analysis from your own previously published work without explicit citation and, often, without permission from the original publisher (who may own the copyright).
While reusing your own methods section might seem innocuous, journal editors view it as unethical for several reasons:
Inflation of Publication Record: It creates the illusion of more new research than actually exists.
Copyright Violation: If the copyright of the previous work was transferred to the journal, reusing the text without permission is technically a copyright breach.
Redundancy: It consumes space that could be used for new information.
How to Avoid Self-Plagiarism:
Cite Yourself: If you must rephrase a previous finding or refer to a prior methodology, cite the original publication.
Use Quotes Sparingly: If quoting your own work, keep the quotation brief and cite it correctly.
Gain Permission: If reusing large sections (e.g., figures or tables) that were copyrighted by a previous publisher, you must obtain formal permission.
Write Fresh: The best practice is always to write new material for the current publication.
Tools for Integrity
Most major journals use software like Turnitin or iThenticate to screen manuscripts. If a manuscript shows a high percentage of similarity (typically above 15–20% depending on the institution/journal), it will be flagged for rejection and investigation. Always check your own manuscript before submission.
Labels:
Publishing Ethics