Portal de Periódicos da CAPES

The American Journal of Botany : Into the Second Century of Publication

2014; Wiley; Volume: 101; Issue: 1 Linguagem: Inglês

10.3732/ajb.1300450

1537-2197

Judith A. Jernstedt,

Botany, Ecology, and Taxonomy Studies

With this issue, Volume 101, Number 1, the American Journal of Botany (AJB) begins its second century of publication. As well as presenting a full collection of research papers, this issue also serves to launch a year-long observance of this centennial anniversary. In the coming months, we will highlight a selection of papers, topics, and authors relevant to the AJB over its history, with special attention to the current state of knowledge and possible future directions of research, in all botanical subdisciplines. Our hope and expectation is that readers now, and in another 100 years, will continue to find within the pages of the American Journal of Botany interesting, reliable, and important contributions to botany, in the broadest sense of our discipline. From the perspective of an individual human's lifespan, 100 years of continuous publication may seem like a long run. However, in the historical sweep of scientific journals and publications, the AJB is a fairly recent arrival. The case can be made that the first journal encompassing scientific topics was Le Journal des Sçavans ("sçavans," archaic for the plural of savant, knowing ones, learned ones: Oxford English Dictionary [Oxford University Press, 2013, http://www.oed.com]), first published in Paris on 5 January 1665, with Denis de Sallo as the probable editor (McKie, 1948; Brown, 1972). Scientific subjects were among several areas of scholarship included in Le Journal, which shortly ran afoul of either the French government (for lack of official permission to publish) or the Catholic Church (possibly for a disrespectful comment about the Inquisition) or both, and temporarily ceased publication on 30 March 1665 (McKie, 1948). This development coincided almost exactly with the publication of the first issue of the Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society of London on 6 March 1665. From the outset, the Philosophical Transactions consisted entirely of scientific communications and commentary, and with only a few brief interruptions, is considered to be the longest continuously published scientific journal in the world (Atkinson, 1999). Unfortunately, England was hardly more politically stable in that era than France, and in 1667, Henry [Heinrich] Oldenburg, the founding editor of the Philosophical Transactions, was accused of spying and briefly imprisoned in the Tower of London (Gross et al., 2002; Hall, 2002). However curious these historical political disruptions of scientific publication may seem to us these days, it is worth noting that political considerations even now affect our journals. A case in point is current policy from the Office of Foreign Assets Control of the U. S. Department of the Treasury, prohibiting certain "transactions" with individuals and entities of sanctioned nations (cf. http://www.treasury.gov). "Transactions" have been variously interpreted to include, or not to include, reviewing, editing, and publishing scientific papers originating in sanctioned countries. So, government policies still have direct relevance to editorial matters for many journals, including the AJB. The new and now widely adopted technique using resin-embedded tissues for light microscopy (#1 in citations, Feder and O'Brien, 1968); Media and protocols for cyanobacterial (#2, Kratz and Myers, 1955), algal (#9, Starr, 1964) and fungal culture (#4, Westergaard and Mitchell, 1947); The importance of calcium in pollen germination and pollen tube growth (#3, Brewbaker and Kwack, 1963); Genotypic diversity in clonal plants (#5, Ellstrand and Roose, 1987); The utility of chloroplast DNA for phylogenetic analysis (#7, Shaw et al., 2005); The plastochron index to quantify plant growth (#11, Erickson and Michelini, 1957); Growth from plant cell suspension cultures (#14, Steward et al., 1958); Classification of leaf architecture (#15, Hickey, 1973); Mineral nutrition and solution culture of plants (#16, Arnon, 1938); and The presence of the carbohydrate callose in plant cells (#20, Currier, 1957). These highly cited papers contrast with other early papers in AJB that presented research the significance of which was only appreciated decades later. A prime example of this is Knudson (1919), a report of cells sloughed from root caps of maize and field peas which remain alive after detachment. These are now known as "border cells" and recognized to be important in root biology and rhizosphere ecology (Curlango-Rivera et al., 2013). At the other extreme, very timely and concurrently cited papers in AJB supported the development of Neurospora crassa as a model for genetic and molecular genetic analyses, e.g., the 1945 paper of Beadle and Tatum on producing and detecting nutritional mutations (#6 in citations). Although not highly cited, McClintock's 1945 paper describing Neurospora chromosomes in the developing ascus was the basis for subsequent cytogenetic research in the species ("… A summary report is given of the results obtained from a very brief study of chromosome and nuclear behavior in Neurospora crassa. The investigations are admittedly incomplete and possibly some errors have been made. Nevertheless, they have revealed that Neurospora offers adequate and in some respects unique opportunities for cytogenetic research." [p. 677]); the paper also reported the unique synapses of extremely contracted chromosomes in N. crassa. Among other things, the 1919 Knudson and 1945 McClintock papers provide striking examples that the number of citations a paper receives does not necessarily reflect its significance—but from the point of view of authors and publishers, citations sure are nice to see. Beginning with this issue and continuing through the whole volume, the AJB will feature monthly invited AJB Centennial Review Papers as well as a special issue ("Speaking of food: Connecting basic and applied science"). Several papers will address long-standing questions in botanical and/or broad biological research, as in "The evolutionary developmental origins of multicellularity," by K. J. Niklas, in this issue. Other papers review the current status and future directions of the research covered in highly cited AJB papers, including the coming paper by J. H. Williams, M. L. Taylor, and B. C. O'Meara, "Repeated evolution of tricellular (and bicellular) pollen," based on the classic Brewbaker (1967) publication. Several of the coming contributions will address current research on topics identified with especially well-known AJB authors. In "The nature of serpentine endemism," B. Anacker will reflect on the contributions of A. Kruckeberg and update readers on recent and ongoing research into local adaptation, competition and speciation on this distinctive substrate. The fourth category for Centennial Review Papers is selected important topics in plant growth and development, such as plant cell walls and auxin biology. The final category of Centennial Review Papers is consideration of the outgrowth or applications of basic science research from the pages of AJB. For example, it is noteworthy that key AJB papers provided the foundation for modern biotechnology. For something completely different, a coming issue will include a history of the founding of the AJB, "The voice of American botanists: The founding and establishment of the American Journal of Botany, 'American Botany,' and the Great War (1906–1935)," by V. B. Smocovitis. As well as a current appraisal of their topics, and specifically for our centennial observance, authors of these special papers were requested to adopt a "look back–look forward" approach to their respective subjects. The result is a number of thoughtful and stimulating analyses of these diverse areas of research. The hope is that as these special papers appear, there will be something for everyone and, especially, that many of these contributions will find their way into the classroom. To facilitate the latter, these special review papers and the supporting AJB articles will be open access online. In the 100 years since the first issue of the AJB was published (Fig. 1), many changes have occurred in the mechanics of journal production, in the usual steps of manuscript preparation, submission, review, copyediting, typesetting, proofing, and final publication. Within the careers of colleagues currently publishing in AJB, manuscripts were typed in triplicate (possibly even by a secretary!), and the original typescript and two carbon copies were packaged and mailed to the regularly migrating AJB Editorial Office. The advent of photocopiers improved the situation considerably, and carbon paper disappeared permanently from the process. Some of us were more fortunate in our timing professionally, as word processing had become available to prepare our first manuscripts—although operation of the desk-sized machine was restricted to specially trained departmental clerk-typists. Submissions continued to be by mail (unless the Editor-in-Chief was down the corridor and the packet could be slid under his—always his—door), and except for postcards acknowledging receipt of manuscripts, it was then as if the manuscript had fallen into a black hole. Reviewers were contacted by mail to see if they were willing to perform this duty; their responses to the requests were mailed back. Sometimes manuscripts were included along with the invitation; not everyone appreciated that, but it did save time. Occasionally, in emergency situations, it was necessary to resort to long-distance telephone calls to get things moving. It was routine for a month or more to pass before two reviewers were identified and a manuscript could finally be mailed to the willing reviewers. When the reviews returned, further rounds of mailing of revisions, copy-edited manuscripts, and page proofs ensued. The only step that seemed to be urgent and rapid was checking the page proofs which, for at least 35 years now, have been requested to be returned within 24–48 hours—or at least put into the mail by then. Scanned version of original cover of the American Journal of Botany, volume 1, number 1. A, front cover; B, inside cover. Courtesy Mann Library, Cornell University. The advent of electronic (= paperless) manuscript submission and handling systems is among the most striking changes in scientific publishing over the past generation. The rapid adoption of electronic publication has been at least as dramatic and promises to continue to revolutionize scientific journals and communication. Databases and search engines have altered scientific research and use of the published literature. Expectations and roles of authors, readers, compilers, copyeditors, typesetters, publishers, and librarians are rapidly and constantly changing (Society for Scholarly Publishing, 2013: http://scholarlykitchen.sspnet.org). The AJB expects to be in the thick of all these developments, to continue to provide our authors with access to the most up-to-date technologies and services for scientific communication and our readers with the most timely, reliable, and significant papers. When one considers that by 1800 there were about 100 scientific journals, by 1900 around 10000 (Schmidt et al., 2006), and, depending on the database and how the set is defined, more than 64000 active academic science journals in late 2013 (Ulrichs Global Serials Directory [Serial Solutions, 2013]), the goal of every publisher remains to enable its authors to contribute to scientific progress in a distinctive and distinguished journal. Some publishers also expect to (and do) make a tidy profit, but for most society-based publishers (e.g., the AJB is published by the Botanical Society of America), the goal is to cover the costs of production, provide the shortest possible time to publication while maintaining the highest possible quality, and sustain the society. In spite of the burgeoning selection of journals appearing now, the lifespan of scientific journals over the years is surprisingly brief (Goldstein, in press). So, it is no wonder that journal publishers devote much thought and effort to enhancing and adding value to scientific communication through the formalized processes of review and editing journals employ. The AJB is no different. The AJB is still in existence after 100 years because the Journal has demonstrated that it is worth the Society's and individuals' investment, that it is worthy of authors submitting papers to it, that it deserves reading, and that it continues to be important in the dissemination of botanical research (Pellack, 2004). Science and scientific communication will change in unimaginable ways over the decades of the AJB's second century. What won't change is that the AJB will always be moving forward and constantly striving to fulfill its role in botanical publication, with the charge of the first Editor-in-Chief, F. C. Newcombe (1914, p. 2), as the guide: to "…be as wide as the whole science, … to serve the interests of organizations whose members come from all quarters." We as supporters, authors, and readers of the AJB should reflect with satisfaction on its past successes and enthusiastically commit ourselves to working for a bright future for our journal, the American Journal of Botany.