The Justification for the Academy Track in mBio

Abstract

Through its academy track, mBio allows members of the Amer-ican Academy of Microbiology (AAM) to submit for consid-eration for publication one paper per year accompanied by at least two reviews solicited by the corresponding member. This track, referred to here as the AAM track, was modeled on that used for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), which allows members of the National Academy of Sciences to contribute papers directly for publication. The major difference between the AAM track and mBio regular submission track is that the latter uses blinded review. Hence, all mBio papers are peer reviewed but differ in the mechanism of peer review. AAM track papers are labeled as such, with the following footnote: “This article is a direct contribution from a Fellow of the American Academy of Microbiology.” When mBio was planned in 2009, the AAM track was con-ceived with two goals in mind. First, we hoped that it would serve

Cite this work

No public copy is stored for this record, so only the metadata is cited.

Stored only when both papers are in the corpus — 6 citations exist upstream.

Papers that cite the same references — the relational fallback while embeddings are still backfilling.