We can't find the internet
Attempting to reconnect
Something went wrong!
Hang in there while we get back on track
Why Was My Manuscript Rejected without Review? Focus on Public Health and Environmental Exposures, Ecotoxicology, and Micro/Nanoplastics
AI summary Read the abstract
This editorial from Environmental Science and Technology outlines common reasons manuscripts in the fields of public health exposures, ecotoxicology, and micro/nanoplastics are rejected without review. The authors describe the journal's expectations for scientific rigor, including appropriate experimental design, quality controls, and analytical methods. The piece serves as guidance for researchers submitting work in these rapidly growing fields to improve manuscript quality and align with publication standards.
Environmental Science & Technology (ES&T) is a high-impact, broad-reaching interdisciplinary environmental science and technology journal dedicated to investigating the depth, complexity, and sustainability of our environment and the development of new technologies to support that sustainability. The journal has a core commitment to remain a thought leader, publishing the latest advances of high novelty that significantly move the field forward in new directions and discoveries. Alongside this aim comes implicit expectations of excellence and quality, and these high standards underpin ES&T’s ability to publish the most important and impactful research advances in environmental science and technology. ES&T receives many thousands of submissions each year. Selecting which papers move through the initial assessment made by our team of expert Executive and Associate Editors and onto external peer review is based on whether the manuscript contains the basic expectations of quality for a given research field. General guidance for what ES&T is seeking in quality submissions was described in the editorial Why my Paper Was Rejected Without Review and includes fundamental expectations of appropriate scientific rigor, sound experimental setup and reporting, replicate samples, treatment groups and controls, analytical quality assurance/quality control (QA/QC), and other key considerations. However, for a given research topic within the broad umbrella of environmental science and technology there are also quality expectations unique to that particular field. This editorial provides insights into the basic quality expectations for submissions in public health and environmental exposures, ecotoxicology, and micro/nanoplastics research.
More Papers Like This
Editorial: “Unravelling micro-/nano-plastics toxicity profiling: can we link associated effects to intrinsic characteristics?”
AI summary Read the abstract
This editorial introduces a research topic on linking the intrinsic physicochemical characteristics of micro- and nanoplastics to their observed toxicity profiles, emphasizing the need for novel approaches to bridge data gaps in bioavailability, exposure scenarios, environmental transport, and fate for sound ecological risk assessment.
Micro(nano)plastic toxicity and health effects: Special issue guest editorial
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers summarized the state of microplastic and nanoplastic toxicology research, noting that while studies in animals show these particles accumulate in tissues and trigger inflammation, oxidative stress, and developmental harm, the actual health risks to humans remain largely unknown and urgently require further investigation.
Quality of nanoplastics and microplastics ecotoxicity studies: Refining quality criteria for nanomaterial studies
AI summary Read the abstract
Researchers developed refined quality criteria for evaluating the scientific rigor of nanoplastic and microplastic ecotoxicity studies. They identified gaps in existing nanomaterial assessment frameworks and proposed additional criteria specific to plastic particles, including polymer composition, source, impurities, and chemical leaching. The study provides a standardized quality checklist to help the research community produce more reliable and comparable data on microplastic toxicity.
Editorial retraction
AI summary Read the abstract
This editorial retraction removed from Science the paper by Lönnstedt and Eklöv on microplastic effects on larval perch, citing lack of ethical approval, absence of original data, and widespread lack of clarity about experimental conduct as found by Sweden's Central Ethical Review Board. The retraction highlights the critical importance of data integrity and ethical oversight in environmental toxicology research.
The environmental journey of micro- and nanoplastics: fate, transport, and toxicity
AI summary Read the abstract
This review traces the journey of micro- and nanoplastics through the environment, from their sources in textiles and personal care products to their transport through water and soil systems. The authors highlight major gaps in knowledge, including the lack of standardized detection methods for the smallest particles and insufficient long-term data on human health effects. The review calls for better risk assessment to protect food safety and human health from microplastic contamination.
Research digests by email
When a large batch of papers lands in the Atlas, we read through it and send a short write-up of what stood out.