Editorial - September 2011: Who wants to publish in NDR and on what subjects?

With New Disease Reports (NDR) well into its transformation as a stand-alone online journal there is an opportunity to make some observations about the origins and subject matter of reports submitted. The period reviewed covers the last year in which NDR was associated with Plant Pathology (2009) and the first year and a half in its new form (1 January 2010 to 30 June 2011).

Submission data presented in Table 1 has grouped countries from which reports originate into regions for summary purposes. South Asia (most submissions coming from India) has consistently accounted for the highest proportion of submissions and the proportion has increased over the period reviewed. Unfortunately, there is a very high rejection rate from this region, the rejection usually occurring on preliminary review by the Senior Editor (filter stage). The reason why most papers from India fail to enter the publication pipeline is lack of 'significant' content that is considered appropriate to interest our readers (Editorial May 2011). On the other hand, the rejection rate for India has been decreasing (a general trend as previously reported), from a high of 79 percent in 2009 to 61 percent in the first six months of 2011. Moreover, India has produced the majority of the submissions on begomoviruses with a high success rate for publication.

Looking at regions with overall more success in publication, the highest acceptance rates (33-50 percent) are for papers from Southeast Asia, sub-Saharan Africa and the Pacific but absolute numbers are low (Table 1). The acceptance rates for Europe as a whole, and pleasingly Middle East/Caucasus as a relatively new entrant into NDR, are in the range of 25-33 percent. Bearing in mind that overall submissions are down since NRI appeared as a stand-alone journal, it is worth pointing out some trends in the submission rates. Most significantly, submissions from East Asia have declined, particularly from South Korea. This may reflect the loss of the Impact Factor (IF) from the former association with Plant Pathology.

We see a different pattern in Latin America and the Caribbean, with a surge in 2009 possibly picking up authors migrating from an equivalent North American publication, but the contribution from this region subsequently declined with none so far submitted in 2011. This again may be an IF effect. On the other hand there has been a very positive trend in submissions from Africa as a whole and a consistent submission rate from the Middle East/Caucasus. As noted above, the acceptance rates for papers from these regions are very encouraging.

Next we turn to the subject matter of submissions over this period. Consistently, submissions on mycological subjects (fungi and Oomycetes) account for at least half of all submissions. Viruses and viroids regularly take second place with phytoplasmas and bacteria following. However, there was a peak of submissions on phytoplasmas and a corresponding drop in the proportion of virology papers in 2009. Subsequently, the high proportion of virology submissions was restored. As expected, the number of submissions on nematology has been low since this subject area was included in NDR, particularly as papers on Meloidogyne incognita are not likely to be accepted unless of exceptional 'significance'. Consistently Colletotrichum and Phytophthora have been the most popular genera of fungi and Oomycetes considered as a whole. As papers on Glomerella cingulata are likely to be rejected at the filter stage for lack of 'significance', papers on Phytophthora tended to fare somewhat better in terms of entry into the pipeline and eventual publication.

The institutional affiliation of submitting authors (academic, government, private sector) and the status of published reports in relation to 'official reporting' is a matter that deserves attention and will be discussed in an editorial later in the year.