Instructions vary according to manuscript type. Please click the links below for article-type-specific instructions. All authors should read the general guidelines. There are no submission or publication fees. It is free to submit to and publish in The Journal of Physiology.
Research Articles
Techniques for Physiology
Topical Reviews
Symposium Reviews
White Papers
Perspectives
Opinion articles
CrossTalk debates
Journal Club
Letters to the Editor
Corrigenda/Errata
Style
The Journal of Physiology supports Format Free initial submissions (FFIS). For initial submissions authors are not required to conform to journal style. However, to facilitate the reviewing process the submitted manuscript's text should be left aligned with standard margins, use standard fonts and 1.5 line spacing. Manuscripts should be submitted initially as a single file with numbered figures and tables included, preferably with the tables/figures and their legends integrated into the text at their appropriate location.
Authors
All authors must be listed on the online submission form and in the manuscript file. Please see Author contributions for more detailed information on authorship criteria.
If authorship of a manuscript changes during the submission/publication process, The Journal will require written confirmation from all authors (both added or removed) that they approve the change. Please contact the peer review team should you need to request a change.
Figures
Schematic figures
Authors should use BioRender to create/redraw schematic figures. Information on how to create an account and produce figures can be found here.
Authors are expected to use this service or provide figures of equally high quality.
Colour
When choosing colours for figures, please consider that referees and readers of The Journal may be colour blind. Advice on this can be found here.
Policies
The Journal of Physiology has strict policies regarding human and animal experiments, statistical reporting and the provision of whole, original, uncropped gels/blots. Authors must read these policies prior to initial submission to ensure they can comply with the requirements if invited for revision. Authors should also note that final acceptance of manuscripts including figures will only be granted after these figures have been checked by Wiley’s specialist image check team.
Authors may be asked to provide specific details relating to these policies by the Editor(s)/Staff at initial submission in order for their manuscripts to be fully assessed.
Submission checklist:
Preprint servers
If the manuscript has been published on a not-for-profit subject-based preprint server (e.g. bioRxiv) please state this on the submission form and as a footnote on the manuscript file with full citation using the digital object identifier (DOI). Example: This manuscript was first published as a preprint: Author AB, Author CD (2021). [Article title]. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1234/JP123456.
Transfer from bioRxiv
If the manuscript was first published on bioRxiv, authors may choose to use the automatic transfer option to The Journal of Physiology's submission system. Please refer to the bioRxiv website for more information. Please note that authors will still need to approve the submission via The Journal's submission site. Please contact the peer review team if you do not receive submission confirmation within 24 hours of making the transfer.
Companion manuscripts
If authors would like to submit two related research manuscripts for consideration at the same time, these can be submitted as 'linked' manuscripts. Authors should state in the comments section of each submission that there are two related manuscripts and they will be sent to the same Editors and Expert Referees. Once both manuscripts have been submitted, authors should send an email to the peer review team to confirm that the manuscripts are linked correctly.
Extra information for modelling papersAs in any experimental study, results from the model should add new scientific insights. The model should be based on physiological data where the parameters can be directly linked to experimental data. The model should be described in such a way that the results can be reproduced, i.e. all parameters are listed and any computation codes made available. Where possible there should be a detailed sensitivity analysis of the conclusions reached against the parameters proposed within the bounds of the data used to constrain them. Papers that develop integrative physiological models which link functions together or observations across scales would be encouraged.
Length
There are no restrictions on the length of manuscripts nor on the number of figures or tables. However, manuscripts should be written as clearly and concisely as possible and figures and tables should be kept to the minimum necessary to illustrate the hypothesis being tested and support the conclusions. As there are no restrictions on page length, The Journal does not usually accept supplemental/supporting material that cannot be included with the body of the manuscript. Please read The Journal's policy regarding Supporting Information.
Format
Revised manuscripts should be submitted as a MS Word file via the 'Submit a Revision' link in the Author Tasks section of the submission site. It is essential that the manuscript is checked carefully for errors or unwanted correction marks. The MS Word file must contain all tables, but figures should be uploaded as separate files.
The usual format for Research Articles is:
The title should contain no more than 150 characters (including spaces) and composed of approximately 15-20 words. Titles should be written in a way that will attract a broad readership. Titles should use positive language using verbs in their active form. Include the species, tissue, organ or system if this is important in the context of the findings.
The title should include the main concept of the research or frame the research question. Keywords that are likely to be used in search engines should be used at least once in the title and abstract. Non-standard abbreviations should not be used. Punctuation can be used to add clarity.
See 'Search Engine Optimization: For Authors' for suggestions on how to optimize Titles for search engines
All authors must meet strict authorship criteria.
As part of The Journal's ongoing commitment to celebrate authors of accepted Research Articles, first authors are invited to submit a 'first author profile' to showcase their research career and aspirations for their future work. First (or joint first) authors are asked to provide a short biography (no more than 100 words for one author or 150 words in total for joint first authors) and portrait photograph(s). These should be uploaded and clearly labelled with the revised version
of the manuscript. Any standard image format for the photograph is acceptable, but the resolution should be 300 dpi or higher.
The profile will be published on the first page of the article.
Guidelines
Authors are invited to consider the following questions when writing their profile:
Preprint Publication
If the manuscript has been published on a not-for-profit subject-based preprint server (e.g. bioRxiv) please state this on the submission form and as a footnote on the manuscript file with full citation using the digital object identifier (DOI). Example: This manuscript was first published as a preprint: Author AB, Author CD (2021). [Article title]. bioRxiv. https://doi.org/10.1234/JP123456
Authorship
Joint first/last authorship should be noted on the first page of the manuscript file and will be added as a footnote on the final version.
Other footnotes are not normally permitted.
Authors must provide a bullet-point list for the key points summary in their manuscript. This will be published ahead of the abstract. See Guidelines for writing a key points summary.
A good-quality abstract will help boost the Research Article's discoverability, leading to more downloads and citations. It should summarise accurately and faithfully the content of the manuscript and make clear the physiological significance of the work.
The abstract should not evaluate or defend the data and must be representative of the manuscript as a whole. It should not omit anything that did not fully support the hypothesis/research question nor overstate or over-extrapolate the findings.
The abstract is the first element of the manuscript that will be seen by Editors and Expert Referees during peer review, and the portion that will determine whether someone decides to read the article in full.
The abstract must not exceed 250 words. This is to ensure the entire abstract is picked up by abstracting and indexing services such as PubMed.
Authors must revise the abstract with each revision of the manuscript.
Essential Elements
The abstract must include the following elements in this order but written as a continuous, unstructured paragraph:
Introduction | One or two sentences introducing the current knowledge on the topic. |
Research question | Brief but precise description of the main question being addressed. Why was the research performed? What was the aim of the research? |
Methods | Brief description of the research methods and study design. State key techniques but do not describe routine experiments. |
Findings | State the major finding(s) and any additional findings of importance. Numerical data should only be included if they are crucial to the understanding of the research. |
Conclusions | State the principal conclusions and describe the novelty of the findings. |
Take-home message | State what readers should understand from the research and how the research has advanced the field. |
Wider context | State the broader physiological importance and the new question(s) the results raise for future research. |
Do not:
Top tips:
See 'Search Engine Optimization: For Authors' for suggestions on how to optimize your abstract for search engines.
Abstract figures
Authors will be asked to provide an eye-catching Abstract Figure to help explain and disseminate their research if their manuscript is accepted. This, along with any other appropriate diagrams included within the manuscript, should be created/redrawn using BioRender. Prior to initial submission authors should make their figures using BioRender by creating a personal account for free, and exporting low-resolution versions for peer review. If the manuscript is potentially acceptable, information on how to access The Journal's premium BioRender account will be included in the decision letter. This will enable authors to download high-resolution versions of their figures.
The Introduction should present the context and rationale of the study and introduce what was known and unknown on the topic. This should state what question is being asked, where it came from and why it is being asked.
The Methods must conform with The Journal's policies regarding human and animal experiments and statistics.
Methods should be written in the past tense and must be detailed, complete and explain how the study was performed. There are no restrictions on length and no page charges. Describe the study design and reasons for method selection.
All in vivo and in vitro conditions must be of sufficient detail for the experiments to be repeated by others. Methods should not appear in the legends to figures and tables. To avoid plagiarism and copyright issues, do not 'cut and paste' from previously-published articles (even your own).
The Methods should start with a paragraph headed 'Ethical approval'. Research must comply with The Journal's policies regarding human and animal experiments and adherence to these policies must be stated in the manuscript.
Antibodies
All manuscripts that report the use of antibodies must provide the following information:
Tissues and cell cultures
Authors working on isolated tissues, including primary cell cultures, must state whether the donor animal was anaesthetised and/or killed, and give details of the relevant procedures. Where tissues were obtained from an abattoir or similar establishment the method of killing need not be specified unless scientifically important.
Solutions, chemicals and equipment
Precisely identify models and reagents used. State the source, including name of the company/developer/distributor and catalogue reference number and the specificity of any reagents and unique materials. The composition of solutions should be specified. Where appropriate, lists of solutions, chemicals and equipment, and an explanation of data handling procedures may be given as separate headed paragraphs.
Manuscripts are accepted on the understanding that authors are prepared to make available to other investigators any unique reagents or cell lines used in the work reported.
The Journal of Physiology supports the NIH Rigor and Transparency guidelines. To comply, we ask that authors include RRIDs for all ''Key Biological Resources'', which include antibodies, cell lines, model organisms and software tools used in the study. To help authors transparently cite resources there is a website where research resources can be found, and its citation listed. Examples:
Data Deposition/Accessibility of Sequence Data
The Journal of Physiology requires that nucleic acid and protein sequences, microarray data and data obtained using high throughput sequencing techniques, which support the results in the manuscript, should be archived in an appropriate public database (see examples) and must be accessible without restriction from the date of publication. Exceptions may be granted at the discretion of the Editor e.g. for sensitive information that might compromise the anonymity of human
subjects.
An entry name or accession number, together with a direct link, must be included within the Methods section. Microarray data should be MIAME compliant.
Examples of suitable databases:
GenBank
EMBL
DNA Data Bank of Japan
Protein Data Bank Japan
Protein Databank
Worldwide Protein Data Bank
UniProtKB/Swiss-Prot
The Results must conform with The Journal's statistics policy.
Only report results that are relevant to the manuscript's hypotheses, but do not exclude any data that don't support the hypotheses. The Results should be written in an order that guides a reader through the experiments; they do not need to be written in the order in which the experiments took place.
Data analysis
Authors must state all inclusion and exclusion criteria for both human and animal experiments. Information must be provided on whether any animals/subjects died before the experiments were concluded.
Comparing data
To report a study effect or express a difference between data sets (e.g. control group and treated group) state the mean values, the estimated difference between the measurements, and the confidence limits of this difference.
Statistical tests
Tests of significance should be specified on each occasion and in full e.g. Student's paired t test. Exact p values must be stated to three significant figures.
Data presentation
Authors must not modify images to enhance their data. This is considered unethical and is a serious offence. Authors are required to store original image data for five years following publication and to provide these files to The Journal if requested. See journal policy on Image manipulation for further information.
The Journal carries out checks to ensure that no inappropriate, unethical or misleading image manipulation has occurred.
Authors will be asked at the revised manuscript stage to submit full, complete, uncropped, labelled original blot/gel images if they are not included in the manuscript.
Each full, original blot should be labelled so that sections/lanes are clearly visible and must include a marker of migration (such as a molecular weight marker, DNA/RNA ladder and/or a scale bar) and appropriate loading controls. Authors should note that if they cannot provide the full, original gels with appropriate markers, their manuscripts will not be accepted for publication.
Any modifications to the original image must be clearly noted, applied to the whole image and faithfully represent the original image.
The original gel images should be uploaded as 'Supporting Information for review process only' during submission.
Microscopy images
All images must contain scale bars and have the imaging conditions (such as type of microscope, magnification or light intensity) clearly stated in the legend. Authors must describe any differences there are in microscopy conditions between control and treatment group images. Authors should state in the legend how images were processed and note any changes made to the original image such as intensity or contrast. Confocal images must state what is shown (e.g. maximum projections, sum projections, individual optical sections).
The Discussion should explain what has been found in the context of the existing body of knowledge. The most important conclusions should be stated first. The Discussion should state the answer to the research question, followed up with supporting evidence. The wider significance of the results, their limitations, any assumptions made and directions for future research should be included.
Authors should provide a succinct conclusion to their work and are encouraged to express an opinion on the relevance of the results here or in an Authors' Translational Perspective.
Authors should avoid an excessive number of references, about 50 should be adequate. References must follow journal style.
Authors' Translational Perspective
Authors of potentially acceptable manuscripts are encouraged to include an Authors' Translational Perspective paragraph in their revised manuscript if they feel that their manuscript could be placed in a wider context. It should describe the wider translational implications of the work, such as relevance for researchers in other disciplines or for clinical practice. Authors may be asked to submit this by the Editor handling their manuscript, but formal invitation is not necessary. This
will be published at the end of the article, after the Additional information section.
Please use the following guidelines to prepare an Authors' Translational Perspective:
Tables should be used sparingly. They should be referred to in the text by Arabic numerals e.g. Table 3. Each table should have its own self-explanatory title. The same information should not be presented in both tabular and graphical forms. Tables will be processed as text and therefore should not be submitted as figure files. All tables must be included within the manuscript's text file.
Authors should use BioRender to create/redraw schematic figures. Information on how to create an account and produce figures can be found here.
Authors are expected to use this service or provide figures of equally high quality.
Authors will be asked to provide an eye-catching abstract figure to help explain and disseminate their research if their manuscript is accepted. This, along with any other appropriate diagrams included within the manuscript, should be created/redrawn using BioRender. Prior to initial submission authors should make their figures using BioRender by creating a personal account for free, and exporting low-resolution versions for peer review. If the manuscript is potentially acceptable, information on how to access The Journal's premium BioRender account will be included in the decision letter. This will enable authors to download high-resolution versions of their figures. An appropriate figure legend should be included in the main manuscript file, which should not exceed 150 words in length.
Colour
When choosing colours for figures, please consider that referees and readers of The Journal may be colour blind. Advice on this can be found here.
Techniques for Physiology are for authors disseminating exciting new techniques for physiological research within The Journal's scope. Articles must provide a significant advance in technology or a radical new technique that allows investigators to ask deeper questions about physiology.
Articles should follow the format of a Research Article. Sufficient physiological data to show the relevance and utility of the technique, as well as new physiological insights that may be gained, must be included. Further information, such as videos, can be shown as 'Supporting Information' in the online version.
The Journal of Physiology commissions Topical Reviews, either as stand-alone reviews or as part of a special issue on a broad topic of current interest.
Topical Reviews should provide a succinct and accessible synthesis of current information in rapidly-developing areas of physiology. Authors should be forward-looking and present new questions for future research/developments and are encouraged to express their own opinion on a subject area and may be controversial if they wish to be, as science often moves fastest when ideas are challenged. However, Topical Reviews should still present a balanced view of the topic.
The Journal is willing to consider proposals for Topical Reviews from interested authors. At least one author should be well-established in the field with a strong publication record in leading international journals. All proposals should be submitted via the 'Submit Topical Review Proposal' link from the Author Tasks area of the submission site. Proposals will be assessed by at least one member of the Editorial Board and the proposer will be informed
whether the proposal is suitable within a few weeks of submission. Prospective authors will be asked to include the proposed title, abstract, information on previous reviews in the field, a statement about the need for a new review, including information on relevant, recently-published original papers as well as a list of up to five recent papers by the proposer or their co-authors. If the proposed review should be considered for a special issue as a result of an invitation or following a
'call for papers', this should also be noted.
Full instructions can be found here.
Symposium Reviews are commissioned from speakers at symposia sponsored by or associated with The Journal of Physiology. A set of Symposium Reviews resulting from each symposium is published, along with any related articles, in the same issue.
Symposium Reviews should elaborate around and beyond the presented topic of the talk given by the speaker at the symposium, providing a succinct, readable account of the proceedings and what is new and exciting in the field. Symposium Reviews should offer those who were unable to attend (especially more junior investigators) the opportunity to be brought quickly up-to-date with what leaders in the field think. Authors are encouraged to be speculative if they wish - this is an opportunity to
put forward arguments freely in order to stimulate debate and further scientific endeavour.
Full instructions can be found here.
Length
There are no limits on the length of Reviews but they are usually between 2,000 and 4,000 words. Longer Reviews are welcomed if the scope of the topic necessitates it.
Abstract and Abstract Figure
The abstract should not exceed 250 words and should convey the major findings and conclusion of the Review (it must not use phrases like 'xxx will be discussed').
The abstract figure should be as simple as possible but designed to give readers an immediate understanding of the Review as a whole and should summarise the main conclusions. The figure should be easily 'readable' from left to right or top to bottom. It should show the physiological relevance of the Review so readers can assess its importance and content. Abstract figures should not merely recapitulate other figures in the Review. Abstract figures must be provided by authors no later than
the revised manuscript stage and should be uploaded as a separate file during online submission labelled as 'Abstract Figure'. An appropriate figure legend should be included in the main manuscript file, which should not exceed 150 words in length. All abstract figures will be sent to a professional illustrator for redrawing, so authors do not need to make the figure publication-quality upon submission. Authors will be asked to approve the redrawn figure before it is published. All costs for
this service, including colour reproduction in print, are covered by The Journal.
Authorship
Co-authorship is encouraged and can be used as an opportunity for more junior colleagues, such as senior postdocs, to raise their profile under the guidance and mentorship of a senior author. All authors should significantly contribute to the content of the Review and must approve the final submission.
Where there is one author, a short biography not exceeding 100 words and a portrait photograph should be provided.
Where there are two or more authors, a short biography not exceeding 150 words should be provided which can focus on the two leading authors or the authorship as a whole. This should be accompanied by either two portrait photographs of the lead authors, or a single group photograph.
The biography and photograph(s) should be uploaded and clearly labelled with the manuscript submission and are required for all Reviews invited for revision. Any standard image format for the photograph is acceptable, but the resolution should be at least 300 dpi or higher.
Style
Reviews should have a clear, easy-to-read narrative with a logical flow from the Introduction to the Discussion. Subtitles/headlines should be used to help readers' understanding.
Below are examples of good Reviews. Note that we now ask for an abstract figure to be included.
Topical Review: HIITing the brain with exercise: mechanisms, consequences and practical recommendations
Thomas A. Calverley Shigehiko Ogoh Christopher J. Marley Martin Steggall Nicola Marchi Patrice Brassard Samuel J.E. Lucas James D.Cotter Marc Roig Philip N. Ainslie Ulrik Wisløff and Damian M. Bailey
Topical Review: The mitochondrial calcium uniporter complex: molecular components, structure and physiopathological implications.
Saverio Marchi, Paolo Pinton
Topical Review: Integrative regulation of human brain blood flow
Christopher K. Willie, Yu-Chieh Tzeng, Joseph A. Fisher, Philip N Ainslie
Symposium Review: How a fly photoreceptor samples light information in time
Mikko Juusola & Zhuoyi Song
Symposium Review: Mitochondrially derived peptides as novel regulators of metabolism
Su‐Jeong Kim, Jialin Xiao, Junxiang Wan, Pinchas Cohen and Kelvin Yen
Figures and illustrations
Informative diagrams and figures are expected and usually required. They should be attractive, clear and interesting to a general readership. Figures should not include new or unpublished data.
The use of colour where these will enhance the scientific quality of the Review is also encouraged.
All schematic figures/illustrations will be sent to a professional illustrator for redrawing so authors do not need to make figures publication-quality upon submission. Authors will be asked to approve the redrawn figures before they are published. All costs for this service, including colour reproduction in print, are covered by The Journal.
Additional information section
Reviews must include an Additional information section.
Overlapping material
Reviews should be distinct and not overlap significantly with any other article either written by others or the author(s) themselves. Authors are requested to include with their submission any other review articles which they may have under consideration or in press at the time.
Data
Unpublished data should not be included in the Review. Authors who have presented new data at a symposium may refer sparingly to unpublished observations without presenting the data.
References
References should be limited to 50, with exceptions in special cases. References must follow journal style. Self-citation should be kept to a minimum.
Peer review
Each Review will usually be peer-reviewed by two members of the Editorial Board and two Expert Referees. They will be asked to comment critically on the content and on any areas or statements in the manuscript which they consider to be misleading or inaccurate. They may also suggest improvements to the writing style which they feel will maximize the impact of the published article. The Editorial Board does not guarantee acceptance of any manuscript.
White Papers report on complex physiological issues, and justify potential approaches to help solve them. These articles follow roughly the same format as Reviews, and should emphasise current understanding, consensus, controversies and the pressing issues for future investigations. While there is no fixed word count, White Papers are typically 4000-8000 words long, with an accordingly sized reference list.
Perspectives are short, invited commentaries that aim to highlight articles accepted for publication in The Journal of Physiology that report new physiological mechanisms, technical or theoretical advances, or interdisciplinary approaches to questions in physiology that are deemed to be of significance to a wider readership. Authors will be invited at the discretion of the Senior Editor handling the focus article and need not previously have been involved in the peer review of the
focus article. A Perspective should present the wider context of the focus article in a style that makes the subject accessible to a broad readership.
Perspectives will appear in the same issue of The Journal as the focus article, assuming they are submitted on time.
Full instructions can be found here.
Translational Perspectives are short, invited commentaries that aim to highlight articles accepted for publication in The Journal of Physiology that report important advances in the knowledge of physiology that can provide insights for researchers working in other areas on the boundaries of physiology and point to applications in clinical practice. Their aim is to engage research scientists in related areas and clinical practitioners with advances in knowledge of physiological
mechanisms and to indicate how the results could inform research in other fields or contribute to new or improved therapies.
Translational Perspectives articles will appear in the same issue of The Journal as the focus article, assuming they are submitted on time.
Full instructions can be found here.
Length
Perspectives should be between 600 and 900 words.
Title
The title should be attractive to readers and must include keywords relevant to the topic of the commentary and the focus article.
Figures and illustrations
One small figure/illustration may be included, but they are not required.
Data
Perspectives should not present any new data.
References
References should be limited to five. References must follow journal style.
Additional information section
Perspectives must include an Additional information section.
Peer review
Perspectives will be reviewed and edited by at least one member of the Editorial Board and sent to the authors of the focus article to confirm the accuracy of the Perspective.
Confidentiality
Authors of Perspectives should not contact the author of the article on which the Perspective is being written. All correspondence should be made via the peer review team.
The aim of Opinion articles is to enable invited authors to put forward timely, focused comments and personal views on current, emerging, and/or controversial areas relevant for physiology.
Opinions should be stimulating, ideally hypothesis-proffering, and interesting to read for the broad readership of The Journal. The Journal is always willing to consider proposals from interested authors. Please contact the Publications Office if you are interested in contributing an Opinion.
Length
Opinions should be between 2,000 and 3,000 words (approximately 2-3 journal pages).
Title
The title should be attractive to readers and must include keywords relevant to the topic. The title should not exceed 150 words.
Abstract
Opinions should not contain an abstract.
Figures and illustrations
Figures/illustrations may be included, but are not required.
Data
Opinions should not present any new data.
References
There is a limit of 20 references. References must follow journal style.
Additional information section
Opinions must include an Additional information section.
Peer review
Opinions will undergo the usual peer review process .
The aim of CrossTalk debates are to provide readers with explicit accounts of both sides of a current controversy in physiology, allowing readers to understand the arguments and arrive at an informed conclusion on the topic.
CrossTalk debates are usually commissioned by the CrossTalk Editors, but suggestions for new topics can be submitted here.
Articles in this debate series are subject to peer-review by a CrossTalk Editor, Reviewing Editor and Expert Referee(s), and acceptance is not guaranteed.
Authors are asked to provide an author profile.
CrossTalk debates and any accompanying material will be made freely accessible online.
Should you have any questions about this process, please contact the peer review team.
Two experts (with or without co-authors) holding opposing views agree a debatable statement, usually in the form of "X does/does not affect Y", and are invited to write their short (1,200 word) viewpoints. These must include supporting reference to recent physiological data/evidence as presented in prior peer-reviewed publications. Up to 30 references may be cited. References must follow journal style. One small
figure/illustration may be included, but they are not required.
An Additional information section must be included.
When both viewpoints have been accepted, each corresponding author is sent their opponent's viewpoint and given seven days to submit a rebuttal containing up to 400 words and 10 references. The rebuttal should reference the original viewpoint that is being refuted. The rebuttal should consist of counter-arguments to the points advanced by the opponent in their primary viewpoint. When the rebuttal is submitted, authors will be asked to provide the names and email addresses for eight to 10
investigators who they think should be invited to comment on the debate because of their expertise on the subject.
An Additional information section must be included.
When the four elements of the debate are published, there will be an opportunity for readers to comment via a Call for Comments. The Publications Office will contact the names provided by the authors as suitable commentators, as well as other appropriate experts. All comments are moderated prior to acceptance and should not exceed 250 words in length. This feature is available for six weeks post online publication of the CrossTalk debate. The Comments will appear as Supporting Information to the original debate articles. Please contact the Publications Office if you would like to write a comment on a recent debate and have not been contacted directly. All comments must have a title and include a statement on competing interests and funding. Comments will appear online-only and will not appear in an issue of The Journal.
Once the Call for Comments has closed, the authors of the debate articles will each be invited to submit a Last Word. This allows the authors to close the discussion, taking into account points raised in the readers' comments. Authors will be asked to provide their Last Word (no more than 250 words) directly to the Publications Office within seven days. Once these have been received, the comments and the authors' Last Words will be collated and will appear as Supporting Information to the original debate articles. Last Words will appear online-only and will not appear in an issue of The Journal.
The Journal of Physiology encourages the submission, by graduate students, postdoctoral fellows and other training-level scientists, of short reviews focusing on a Research Article that has been published in The Journal of Physiology. The Research Article should have an issue publication date within the last three months. Please note that Journal Club articles on papers that are published in other journals are not considered.
These reviews can be the result of formal laboratory journal club discussions or informal discussions among interested parties. Multiple authorship is encouraged. It is expected that senior investigators will provide assistance in the preparation of Journal Club articles and it is appropriate to acknowledge such assistance. However, as the Journal Club is a forum for students and postdoctoral fellows, co-authorship by senior authors is not allowed.
Articles should provide a frank, honest review that is neither hyper-critical nor hyper-complimentary. Journal Clubs should consist of a brief background, a brief presentation of the data of interest and a very brief discussion of the significance of the article. Journal Club articles should not exceed 1,500 words and contain no more than five references in journal style. No abstract is allowed. One figure may be
included.
Journal Club articles will be reviewed by at least one member of the Editorial Board (usually the Senior Editor who handled the focus article) and sent to the authors of the focus article to confirm the accuracy of the Journal Club. Submissions that necessitate more than minor revisions will not be accepted for publication.
The Journal of Physiology is now pleased to offer a prize for the best Journal Club article published each calendar year, which is judged by selected members of the Editorial Board. Further information about the prize can be found here.
If authors wish to submit a Journal Club article, they must contact the peer review team for approval prior to submission.
Only one Journal Club will be considered on a focus paper at any one time.
If a Journal Club article has already been agreed for the focus article, approval will only be granted after either the previous Journal Club authors have missed the deadline for submission, the previous Journal Club is rejected, or the Journal Club has been published online.
In the latter case, where a Journal Club has already been published, the proposed new Journal Club must offer a significantly different interpretation of the focus article.
Once it has been confirmed that the focus article is available to receive a Journal Club, authors are given two weeks to submit their article online. After this date, the Research Article will become available for other authors who wish to write a Journal Club on the paper. If authors cannot meet the deadline, they must inform the peer review team who will assess whether the delay is acceptable.
Please note that The Journal reserves the right to refuse a Journal Club submission if the authors of the Journal Club are part of the same research group as those of the focus article. If authors from the same research group are interested in submitting a Journal Club, this should be noted to journal staff when seeking permission to submit. The Journal also reserves the right not to consider more than one Journal Club article per year from the same author(s).
An Additional information section must be included.
Letters should address significant scientific points, such as interpretation of data or methodology, arising from a recent publication in The Journal of Physiology. The content should be objective, and there should be no wording of a personal or derogatory nature to the original authors or their colleagues. Authors of the publication to which the Letter refers are given a right of reply, to be published with the original Letter. No new data may be
introduced into a Letter, but may be included in the Reply. If some authors of the focus article do not wish to contribute to the Reply, this should be stated in the author contributions section.
Letters should be submitted online and should not exceed 1,000 words. The Letter will be sent to a member of the Editorial Board for a decision on acceptability. An Editor may decide not to publish a Letter based on lack of scientific relevance or if the subject matter of the Letter is too insignificant to be relevant to the readership. If the Letter is accepted, a Reply is invited. The Journal reserves the right to publish the Letter without a Reply.
An Additional information section must be included for both Letters and Replies.
If authors or readers discover errors in published papers, either their own or work done by others, they should contact the Publications Office with the information and if a correction is considered to be appropriate they may be asked to submit this online. If the correction affects the conclusions of the article it will be sent to an Editor for approval. The convention of The Journal of Physiology is to designate author errors as Corrigenda and errors introduced during the publishing process as Errata. The correction will be published in the next available issue and, in the online version of The Journal, linked to the primary article.
Manuscripts must be written in fluent English. If English is not the first language of the authors or the authors are not confident that the scientific message of the article is absolutely clear, they should seek the assistance of a native English-speaking colleague or use a professional translation or language editing service before submission. Wiley offers an English Language Editing Service (ELES) for authors, more information can be found here.
In order to improve the reporting clarity of methods, data and statistics, and thereby increase reproducibility, The Journal imposes a strict policy on statistics, data and graphical presentation. Information about the need for this policy can be found here. As of July 2023, The Journal no longer requires authors to complete a statistical summary document as a condition of acceptance. Authors will be permitted to submit important statistical information that does not fit into tables/figures as supplemental files.
The final paragraph of the Methods section should provide full details of the statistical treatment of the data.
Figure presentation
If n≤30, all data points must be plotted in the figure in a way that reveals their range and distribution. A bar graph with data points overlaid, a box and whisker plot or a violin plot (the latter two also preferably with data points included) are examples of acceptable formats. Note exceptions: 1) If each subject has numerous data points associated with it (e.g. time course data), we would treat 'n' as being each data point, not the number of subjects, and there can be flexibility in the format of presentation. 2) If n>30, data points do not need to be plotted in the figure, but box whisker or violin plots should be used to illustrate distribution of the data.
If subject data points cannot be plotted (exceptions 1 and 2 above), the raw dataset must be uploaded either as 'Supporting Information for online publication' (which will be published online with the article) or hosted on a not-for-profit repository e.g. FigShare, with access details provided in the manuscript.
The most appropriate summary statistic (e.g. mean and standard deviation) must be plotted.
Authors should read the Editorials: 'Show the data, don't conceal them' and 'Visualizing data in research articles' for best practice information on how to present data.
Data summary
Data summaries should be presented as mean (SD) with a clear statement of n; and presented in the main text, figures and their legends and tables. Standard Deviation (SD) without '±' must be used instead of Standard Error of the Mean (SEM), unless the use of SEM is fully justified and reported alongside confidence intervals.
'n' values
All 'n' values must be clearly stated main text, figures and their legends or tables with 'n' clearly defined (e.g. x cells from y slices in z animals) in each location. Authors should be mindful of how 'n' is defined to avoid pseudoreplication.
P value for statistical tests
For a given conclusion to be assessed, the exact p values must be stated to three significant figures (not decimal places) even when 'no statistical significance' is being reported (i.e. for anything >0.001, please report to 3 significant figures, e.g. 0.00236 or 0.523, etc.). These should be stated in the main text, figures and their legends and tables. The only exception to this is if p is less than 0.001, in which case '<' is permitted. Trend statements are not permitted (i.e. 'x increased, but was not significant'). Where there are many comparisons, a table of p values is requested. Asterisks alone should not be used to denote significance within figures.
UK English spelling and terminology should be used (e.g. colour, fibre, noradrenaline). All accepted articles will undergo copyediting to conform to journal style. Authors should carefully check their proofs to ensure errors are not introduced during copyediting.
Tips for writing scientific manuscripts can be found here.
Authors should not make any claims as to the primacy of their research. This includes phrases such as, but not limited to: “to our knowledge, this is the first…”, “this is the only study…” etc.
A figure must be able to fit on a printed page: 17cm x 23cm. Figures should be prepared as either a full-width (17cm) or half-width (8.5cm).
Vector images/files are preferred to ensure no loss of quality during figure resizing.
If vector files aren't available, images should be 600 dpi or higher.
All labelling should be in a sans serif font (e.g. Arial) such that the final size will be 8pt.
Use A, B, C etc. for panel labels and a, b, c, etc. for subpanel labels. Avoid panel headings unless essential for clarification.
Scale bars in photographs must be included, with the value added to the figure or in the figure legend.
Decimal points, not commas, should be used e.g. 0.35 and not 0,35.
When choosing colours for figures, please consider that referees and readers of The Journal may be colour blind. No information should be conveyed by colour only. Where this is not possible (e.g. gene expression heat maps), opacity and contrast should be carefully considered. People with colour deficiencies are usually unable to tell the difference between red and green. Some will also struggle to distinguish between blue and green and yellow and red/purple. As such, The
Journal of Physiology strongly recommends that authors re-colour figures to ensure colours are chosen for their widest accessibility. Accessible colour combinations such as green and magenta or yellow and blue are suggested.
Further recommendations:
For more details on the prevalence of colour blindness, and accessible alternatives to presenting scientific information, please read this article.
If a manuscript contains colour figures authors are asked to state during submission whether they would like to pay for the figures to be in colour in print. No charge is made for colour figures online. Authors wishing to have figures in colour online but black and white in print must submit both colour and black and white versions of the figures for review. A single legend must apply to both the colour and black and white figures. Colour charges are £200 for the first figure and £60 for all
subsequent figures. During production, Corresponding Authors will receive an email inviting them to pay for colour figures via RightsLink and will be able to either pay directly using a credit or debit card or request an invoice. Costs are waived for invited articles.
Prior to initial submission authors should make their figures using BioRender by creating a personal account for free, and exporting low-resolution versions for peer review. If the manuscript is potentially acceptable, information on how to access The Journal's premium BioRender account will be included in the decision letter. This will enable Authors to download high-resolution versions of their figures.
BioRender is a web-based program that helps you create scientific figures faster than traditional tools. The tool combines a library of over 50,000 scientifically accurate, expert-validated life science icons and templates with intuitive drag-and-drop functionality.
The Journal's reference style can be downloaded using various citation/reference manager formats.
The format for references to journal articles and books, and to chapters in books, and articles in press is as follows:
Marwick, K.F.M., Hansen, K.B., Skehel, P.A., Hardingham, G.E. & Wyllie, D.J.A. (2019). Functional assessment of triheteromeric NMDA receptors containing a human variant associated with epilepsy. J Physiol 597, 1691-1704.
Adrian, E.D. (1932). The Mechanism of Nervous Action. Humphrey Milford, London.
Buchan, A.M.J., Bryant, M.G., Polak, J.M., Gregor, M., Ghatei, M.A. & Bloom, S.R. (1981). Development of regulatory peptides in the human fetal intestine. In Gut Hormones, 2nd edn, ed. Bloom SR & Polak JM, pp. 119-124. Churchill Livingstone, Edinburgh.
Lipp, P., Egger, M. & Niggli, E. (2002). Spatial characteristics of sarcoplasmic reticulum Ca2+ release events triggered by L-type Ca2+ current and Na+ current in guinea-pig cardiac myocytes. J Physiol. Advance online publication. https://doi.org/10.1113/jphysiol.2001.013382
References with more than 20 authors
For a work with up to 20 authors, include all of the names in the reference. When the work has 21 or more authors, include only the first 19 names, an ellipsis, and the final name (with no ampersand).
Example of reference with two to 20 authors
Beers, S.R., & De Bellis, M.D. (2002). Neurophysiological function in children with maltreatment-related posttraumatic stress disorder. The American Journal of Psychiatry, 159, 483-486. https://doi:10.1176/appi.ajp.159.3.483
Ramus, F., Rosen, S., Dakin, S.C., Day, B.L., Castellote, J.M., White, S., & Frith, U. (2003). Theories of developmental dyslexia: Insights from a multiple case study of dyslexic adults. Brain, 126(4), 841-865. https://doi:10.1093/brain/awg076
Example of reference with more than 20 authors
Wiskunde, B., Arslan, M., Fischer, P., Nowak, L., Van den Berg, O., Coetzee, L., Juárez, U., Riyaziyyat, E., Wang, C., Zhang, I., Li, P., Yang, R., Kumar, B., Xu, A., Martinez, R., McIntosh, V., Ibáñez, L. M., Mäkinen, G., Virtanen, E., . . . Kovács, A. (2019). Indie pop rocks mathematics: Twenty One Pilots, Nicolas Bourbaki, and the empty set. Journal of Improbable Mathematics, 27(1), 1935-1968. https://doi.org/10.0000/3mp7y-537
Attention to punctuation is required.
Use only established abbreviated journal titles. See PubMed journals database for correct NLM Title Abbreviations.
In the text, references should be made by giving the author and the year of publication in parentheses e.g. (Lamb, 1986), except when the author's name is part of the sentence e.g. 'Lamb (1986) showed that . . . '. Where several references are given together, they should be in chronological order, separated by semicolons.
When a source written by two authors is cited, both names should be given; for three or more authors only the first name is given, followed by 'et al.'.
References with the same first author and year
For works that have the same first author year, the second author should also be listed, followed by the year of publication.
'Smith, Brown et al., 2022; Smith, Grey et al., 2022'
Unpublished material may be referred to sparingly in the text, by giving the authors' initials and names followed by 'unpublished observations' or 'personal communication'; such citations should not appear in the list of references.
Authors are allowed to cite preprint articles that appear on a not-for-profit subject-based preprint server (e.g. bioRxiv) as long as the source is stated clearly. Such references should be kept to a minimum.
Preprints should be cited using their digital object identifier (DOI). Example: Author AB, Author CD. 2021. Article title. bioRxiv DOI: 10.1234/123456
Links to websites may be included in manuscripts, but these links must terminate on a permanent data repository, such as those of the host platforms used by journals. Links to private web pages/sites are not permitted. The text accompanying links should be constructed so that in the event of link failure the text can be used in a search engine to locate the website.
All article types must include an Additional information section containing information on data availability, competing interests, author contributions, funding and acknowledgements, as applicable.
Authors must provide a Data Availability Statement for all article types in which new data are reported.
It is a requirement of The Journal that all original 'raw' data (e.g. recordings, blots, micrographs) from which graphical and/or tabular summary data is generated is archived and fully available to The Journal upon reasonable request.
All data supporting the results presented in the manuscript should be included in the manuscript figures if n≤30, as per the statistics policy. All other data (n>30) must be available either in an appropriate public repository or as Supporting Information published with the article online. The Data Availability Statement should describe the availability of these data and state whether they are included within the
figure(s) or as Supporting Information or in a repository.
Authors must include in their Statement a link to the repository they have used, if applicable, reference the data in the appropriate sections(s) of their manuscript and cite the data they have shared in the references section. Whenever possible, the scripts and other artefacts used to generate the analyses presented in the manuscript should also be publicly available/archived.
If sharing data compromises ethical standards or legal requirements then authors are not expected to share them but should note this in their Statement.
All authors should disclose any competing interests/conflicts of interest in accordance with journal policy. If there are no competing interests a statement to this effect must be included.
This section must state the laboratory where the experiments were performed and list the contribution (in words) of each author (using their initials) to aspects of the study.
All authors must have contributed to:
EITHER
OR
AND
This section must also confirm that all authors:
Contributors who do not meet the above criteria for authorship should not be listed as authors, but have their contribution (e.g. acquisition of funding, general supervision of a research group, administrative support, writing assistance, technical editing, language editing, or proofreading) listed in the Acknowledgements.
Authors are encouraged to use the CRediT 'Contributor Roles Taxonomy' to detail authors' contributions. CRediT is a high-level taxonomy, including 14 roles, that can be used to represent the roles typically played by contributors to scientific scholarly output.
Additional information such as 'X and Y have contributed equally to this work' may be added as a footnote on the title page.
The Journal of Physiology requires authors to fully disclose the use of any generative artificial intelligence tools in the preparation of their manuscript, as per Wiley’s policy. This disclosure should be placed in the Methods or Acknowledgements section, and must be transparent and detailed. Authors are responsible for both the accuracy of information provided by these tools, and for correctly referencing any supporting work on which that information depends. Tools that are solely used to improve spelling, grammar and general editing are not included in the scope of this policy.
AIGC tools cannot be named as authors.
Reviewers are prohibited from using such tools, to prevent infringement upon the intellectual property and confidentiality rights of submitting authors.
Authors may now include their personal pronouns in the author by-lines of their published articles and on Wiley Online Library. This is optional, and not a requirement. Authors can include their pronouns in their manuscript upon submission and can add, edit, or remove their pronouns at any stage upon request. Submitting/corresponding authors should never add, edit, or remove a co-author’s pronouns without that co-author’s consent. Where post-publication changes to pronouns are required, these can be made without a correction notice to the paper, in accordance with Wiley’s Name Change Policy, to protect the author’s privacy. Terms which fall outside of the scope of personal pronouns, e.g., proper or improper nouns, are currently not supported.
Authors must indicate all sources of funding, including grant numbers and must adhere to funder requirements in terms of how this should be acknowledged. If no funding was received a statement to this effect must be included.
Acknowledgements should be the minimum consistent with courtesy. Acknowledgements should be limited to scientific assistance or advice given during the preparation of the manuscript or during the research and the wording must have been seen and approved by the person(s) concerned. This section should not include details of funding.
Material such as figures, tables, text (e.g. expanded/detailed methods or results), equations, and other material, if essential for the complete understanding of the manuscript and can fit on a printed page or pages, must be incorporated into the manuscript itself as part of the text or as standard figures or tables and not supplied as supporting information.
Ancillary/negative/complementary data collected during the same experiment(s) that are of interest to the research question, but not essential to the complete understanding of the manuscript, may be included as supporting information.
Non-essential supporting information may be provided for submission and review purposes only and not for final publication. All files should be clearly designated with short descriptive text.
Supporting Information which increases the importance of the research, enhances the understanding of the manuscript and benefits readers is encouraged. Examples are video and audio files, 3D structures and program codes.
If the supporting information conforms with journal policy, it must be submitted online and each file should be clearly referred to by a brief description in the relevant section of the main text from where it should link to the supporting file. Authors should also add a 'Supporting Information' section at the end of their manuscript (after the 'Additional information' section), that briefly describes the supporting
information files available online. Legends should be included within the supporting information file, not within the main manuscript text. A separate file should be supplied for each piece of supporting information. All files should be clearly labelled with short descriptive text.
Supporting information will be published as submitted and will not be corrected or checked for scientific content, typographical errors or functionality. The responsibility for scientific accuracy and file functionality remains entirely with the authors.
Any queries regarding supporting information can be directed to the peer review team.
In partnership with the non-profit Center for Open Science (COS), The Journal of Physiology offers authors who share their data an Open Science Badge recognizing their adherence to data sharing.
The Open Data Badge recognizes researchers who make their data publicly available, providing sufficient description of the data to allow researchers to reproduce research findings of published research studies. Data must be available on a qualifying public, open-access repository which is committed to preserving data, materials, and/or registered analysis plans and keeping them publicly accessible via the internet in perpetuity. Examples include the Open Science Framework (OSF) and the various Dataverse networks. Hundreds of other qualifying data/material repositories are available through the Registry of Research Data Repositories (http://www.re3data.org). Personal websites and most departmental websites do not qualify as repositories.
Authors will have an opportunity at the time of manuscript revision to declare whether they wish to participate. Applying and qualifying for an Open Science Badge is not a requirement for publishing with The Journal of Physiology but should act as an incentive for authors to participate in the Open Science movement and thus to increase the visibility and transparency of their research.
More information about the Open Practices badges is available from the OSF wiki.
There are circumstances in which it is not possible or advisable to share any or all data. In these circumstances, authors should include an explanation and/or provide links to any data or materials they have made available, even if not under conditions eligible to earn a badge, in their Data Availability Statement.
Authors of potentially acceptable manuscripts are encouraged to submit figures for possible use on the cover although there is no guarantee that they will be selected. The image(s) need not necessarily appear in the manuscript but should be related to it. The figure must not have appeared or been submitted elsewhere and should be provided with a caption. These should be high resolution TIFF files. They should be included with the revision as clearly labelled 'Potential Cover Art' and mentioned in the Comments box during submission. For help uploading large files please contact the peer review team. The Journal may alter/manipulate images in order to create the cover file.
A video abstract can be a quick way to make the message of research accessible to a large audience. Wiley offers a service of professionally-produced video abstracts, available to authors of accepted manuscripts. More information can be found here. Questions should be directed to videoabstracts@wiley.com.
The Journal of Physiology may also be able to assist authors wishing to produce a video. Please email the Publications Office if you are interested in doing this.
The Journal also invites authors of selected papers to summarise their Research Article in a short video. These 'Physiology Shorts' videos can be used by authors to talk about their recently-published article and the implications of their findings for future research in their respective field. If authors wish to supply an accompanying video, please contact the Publications Office. Previous videos can be found here.
Authors wishing to reproduce material that has already been published must request permission to do so from the relevant copyright holder at the earliest possible stage to avoid publication delays. This includes figures that have been modified. Copies of permissions granted should be uploaded as 'Supporting Information for review process only' during submission. If accepted, the manuscript will not be published until the permissions are received. It is the responsibility of the author(s)
to gain the required permission(s) prior to publication in The Journal of Physiology.
Authors wishing to reproduce material from their own previous publications should consult the original publisher's terms of agreement about copyright ownership and conditions relating to reproducing the material in future publications. Authors do not normally need to seek formal permission to re-use their own work, but this must be checked and appropriately cited.
It is the author's responsibility to make sure that reproduced material has been acknowledged as requested by the copyright owner. Authors should ensure that the primary source articles are cited in the References section and that appropriate acknowledgement of the primary source is given in the text. Plagiarism detection software is used to check submitted manuscripts for overlap with previously-published material.
Authors should also indicate clearly in the comments box during submission if permission is needed to reproduce any text or figures contained in the article and confirm that this has been received or requested, giving the names of the journals/publications involved and the references to the articles.
Authors do not need to seek permission from The Journal in order to re-use content published in a previous issue of The Journal. However, prior publication in The Journal of Physiology should be stated and referenced accordingly.
Permission to re-use content published in The Journal in other publications must be sort via Rightslink or by contacting Wiley. More information can be found here.
Authors are required to sign an appropriate license agreement once their manuscript has been accepted. More information can be found here. Please contact the Publications Office should you have any queries.