As Matt Welch concludes his tenure as Editor-in-Chief of Molecular Biology of the Cell (MBoC), we reflect on his impactful leadership and the journal’s evolution during his time at the helm. In this Q&A, Matt shares insights into the rewarding aspects of his role, key initiatives he spearheaded, and the enduring strengths of MBoC in advancing cell biology. His reflections highlight a deep commitment to fostering scientific communication, inclusivity, and innovation in the field.
Q: Looking back at your time with MBoC, what have been some of the most rewarding aspects of serving as Editor-in-Chief?
A: The most rewarding aspect of serving as MBoC Editor-in-Chief was the opportunity to engage with the broader scientific community. I particularly enjoyed serving authors through handling their manuscripts and helping them communicate the impact of their work. I also enjoyed working with the amazing group of MBoC editors, who devote significant time and effort towards giving authors constructive editorial feedback, enabling authors to quickly and effectively communicate their research findings.
What I did not anticipate I would enjoy so much were the interactions I had with scientists in the publishing community. Through our relationships with EMBO Press, the Journal of Cell Biology, the Journal of Cell Science, Review Commons, bioRxiv, ASAPbio, the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, and DORA, I had the privilege of working with people who are thinking deeply about the future of scientific communication and its role in the scientific enterprise.
Q: Are there any particular achievements or initiatives during your tenure that you’re especially proud of?
A: There are two achievements of which I am especially proud. In my first year as Editor-in-Chief, we applied for and received a grant from the Wellcome Trust and Howard Hughes Medical Institute to establish an innovative preprint curation initiative. This allowed us to appoint a board of Early-Career Editors (ECEs), the first such group at MBoC, with the goal of curating the preprint literature. The ECEs identified preprints of interest, wrote short Significance Statements describing the main conclusions and significance, and applied Badges that highlight attributes of the research. This initiative proved valuable for both readers and authors. Moreover, the creation of the ECE role broadened participation in MBoC’s editorial board by diverse early-career researchers across the world. Although the curation initiative was difficult to sustain financially, the tools that we developed, including Badges and Significance Statements, have become unique and defining feature of MBoC papers.
Next, in the last year of my tenure as Editor-in-Chief, we implemented a guaranteed peer review policy for research manuscripts submitted by ASCB members. This has proven successful at engaging ASCB members with MBoC and increasing member submissions to the journal. Given the increasing market share of journals run by for-profit enterprises, it is notable that MBoC was able to capture a larger number of submissions by offering a benefit associated with ASCB membership.
Q: How did MBoC evolve during your time as Editor-in-Chief, and what trends or changes excited you most in the field?
A: One way that MBoC evolved is through increasing representation on the editorial board from early-career scientists, scientist from historically excluded groups, and international scientists. This brought positive change by including a diversity of perspectives. The journal began publishing more manuscript types including full-length Review articles, Methods and Resources papers, and Voices essays. A third area of evolution was the publication of more special issues. Thanks to a dedicated group of special issue editors, we expanded our special issues from two to more than ten, enhancing engagement with authors doing research in a broader array of topic areas. Notable new successes have been special issues on the Cell Biology of the Nervous System, Cell Biology of Bacteria and Archaea, Cell Biology of Organelles in Unicellular Parasites, Cell Biology of the Lysosome, and Biomolecular Condensates.
Regarding exciting trends, I was very pleased to attend the MBoC-sponsored special interest subgroup session on “the future of cell biology” at Cell Bio 2024. It was gratifying to see the talks on a range of emerging topics from artificial intelligence to protein structure and design, new imaging technologies, and appreciating phylogenetic and phenotypic diversity. I’m hopeful that MBoC can continue to lead in communicating thinking and research in these exciting emerging areas.
Q: What aspects of the MBoC community, from the reviewers to the authors and readers, made your role especially meaningful?
A: What made this role particularly meaningful was the opportunity to serve our authors and readers and implement new ways to communicate the impact of our author’s research to a broad community. I am a visual person and a big fan of the visual arts. When I started as Editor-in-Chief, we implemented a type of video abstract called a Science Sketch that is drawn and narrated by authors. These videos are fun to watch and really help the viewer appreciate the impact of the science from the perspective of the authors. We also initiated a collaboration between artists and authors to conceive of and compose art for the cover of the journal. I hope these initiatives help to broaden the overall impact of cell biology research beyond the immediate cell biology community.
Q: What would you say are some unique strengths of MBoC in advancing the field of cell biology, and how did you work to emphasize or expand these?
A: The most compelling strength of MBoC is its connection with the ASCB. However, the journal was not effectively capitalizing on the ASCB connection, with many members not publishing with the journal. We have worked to forge stronger connections, for example, by organizing the special interest subgroup meeting on “the future of cell biology” and by implementing the guaranteed peer review policy.
Another key strength of MBoC is the focus on publishing quality rather than flashy science. This principle was established by founding Editor-in-Chief David Botstein, who wrote “Our view is that the judgments of reviewers and editors should be limited to questions of scientific merit and basic biological significance. Whether a paper is ‘exceptional’ or of ‘general interest’ should be left to posterity to decide.” Based on this ethos and because editorial decisions at MBoC are made by practicing scientists, our editors and reviewers can concentrate on giving constructive feedback that facilitates publication. Our guaranteed peer review policy is consistent with this philosophy and the fundamental role that MBoC plays in our community, which is to peer-review and publish quality work rather than focusing on perceived impact.
About the Author:
Matthew Welch, Ph.D. is the Editor-in-Chief of Molecular Biology of the Cell (MBoC) journal and a Professor at the University of California, Berkeley.
