Plant Cell Development - Reviewer Guidelines
Guidance for effective and ethical peer review.
Plant Cell Development - Reviewer Guidelines
Guidance for effective and ethical peer review.
Reviewer Responsibilities
Reviewers assess methodological rigor, data integrity, and clarity of conclusions in plant cell research.
Reviewers assess methodological soundness, data quality, and clarity of conclusions.
Explain how imaging parameters were calibrated for microscopy assays.
Clarify how developmental stages were defined and verified.
Report software versions and pipelines for bioinformatics analyses.
Describe quality assurance steps for phenotyping workflows.
Discuss limitations related to tissue specificity or developmental stage.
Include details on controls for stress or nutrient treatments.
Describe replicate structure and experimental randomization.
Review Flow
Assess Methods
Check sampling and developmental controls.
Validate Evidence
Confirm assays and outcomes.
Weigh Impact
Consider translational relevance.
Document Feedback
Provide clear, actionable guidance.
Confidentiality and conflict of interest policies must be respected.
Summaries connecting cellular mechanisms to crop outcomes strengthen impact.
Describe controls for hormone treatments and concentration gradients.
Describe batch effects and correction methods in imaging or sequencing data.
Explain how sample sizes were determined for developmental assays.
Clarify whether findings generalize across species or cultivars.
Document imaging time points and resolution settings.
Clarify cell cycle staging methods and validation.
Evaluation Focus
- Sound experimental design and controls
- Transparent reporting of cell development methods
- Relevance to plant development practice
- Statistical validity and reproducibility
Clear reporting of cell lineage methods improves reproducibility across plant models.
Report statistical thresholds used for gene expression or omics analysis.
Provide uncertainty measures for key developmental outcomes.
Clarify temperature and light regimes for growth experiments.
Report statistical corrections for multiple testing in omics data.
Explain how missing data were handled in longitudinal growth studies.
Explain how phenotype scoring was validated.
Confidentiality
Reviewer confidentiality and conflict of interest policies must be respected.
Document growth conditions and photoperiods to contextualize cellular responses.
Include details on sample preparation and tissue handling to avoid bias.
Explain how confounders were handled in observational plant studies.
Include references to standards or plant nomenclature guidance.
Provide a rationale for selected markers or reporter lines.
Report effect sizes relative to developmental benchmarks.
Provide context for translational relevance to crop improvement.
