Dr Marc Yeste is an Associate Professor at the University of Girona (Spain), he joined the Editorial board of Scientific Reports in 2016 and is a Senior Editorial Board Member.
His research focuses on reproductive biology in mammals (encompassing humans, pigs, cattle, horses, donkeys, sheep, mice, cats and dogs); sperm physiology (including sperm capacitation), interactions of sperm with epithelial cells from different reproductive tissues (epididymis and fallopian tube/oviduct), presence and growth of microbes in semen and implications for its preservation, sperm cryopreservation, cryopreservation of oocytes and embryos, genetics of infertility, oocyte activation deficiency, effects of aging on reproductive health, in vitro maturation of oocytes, and fertility preservation.
***
We recently invited Dr Yeste for a Q&A where they answered questions about their research and what it is to work as an Editorial Board Member at Scientific Reports. Some of the questions they answered are below:
- What do you like most about being an Editorial Board Member for Scientific Reports?
I have now served on the Editorial Board for almost a decade, and I want to highlight three aspects of serving on the Editorial Board that I enjoy. First, I like the fact that manuscripts are assessed on technical soundness rather than novelty or perceived impact. The second positive aspect is that Scientific Reports is multidisciplinary and opens contributions from all areas of science. I think that this is a good experience, as it provides the opportunity to gather experts from different backgrounds. The third positive thing is the support of the Editorial Office, with In-house Editors and other Editorial Staff always ready and kind to help.
- What do you like most about handling manuscripts at Scientific Reports?
Thus far, the manuscripts that I have handled at Scientific Reports have all been of good quality, so it has been quite unusual for a manuscript to be rejected without peer review. It has also been relatively uncommon to receive manuscripts that omitted relevant parts and whose writing quality made them challenging to follow. I would say, and this is actually one of the things that I like about handling manuscripts at Scientific Reports, that the rigorous quality check that is conducted at the Editorial Office upon receipt of a manuscript is beneficial to handling Editors, as it serves to ensure that all manuscripts that are assigned to an Editor fulfil minimum requirements, such as enough methodological details to ensure repeatability, data availability aligned with the FAIR policy, transparency in terms of conflict of interest, and strict observation of ethical policies and guidelines.
- If you were to give advice to other Editors, what would that be?
Finding reviewers is undoubtedly one of the most challenging parts of being an Editor. I would say that in recent years, there has been significant progress in the tools Editors use to find and assign reviewers. In this regard, the implementation of the SNAPP system has made it easier and quicker to find suitable reviewers. That being said, on many occasions, not only do I use the system to find reviewers, but I also look for similar research articles in PubMed to identify the most suitable reviewers. While this certainly takes time and means the handling Editor makes significantly more effort to find reviewers via PubMed, this usually yields a higher percentage of researchers who agree to review and produce higher-quality reviews.
Furthermore, I would advise to always read the entire paper and the reviewers’ reports carefully, so that the reviewers influence the decision, but the Editor provides their input and effectively makes the decision. Finally, I would also recommend humanising the reviewing process (always keeping in mind that behind a submission are human beings), and when a rejection decision must be made, I would urge Editors to be constructive, offering feedback that helps the author improve their work.
- How important is reproducibility in research? As an Editor, what do you look for in a manuscript?
I think reproducibility is essential in research because it allows others to trust the work and build on what has been demonstrated before. This is essential for science and for the continuous improvement in our disciplines. Also, it ensures that the time and efforts spent on research will provide the basis for future research. As an Editor, I review the methods section thoroughly, ensuring that protocols are sufficiently described and that enough details are provided when needed. It is also essential to include a data availability statement, rigorous statistical analyses, and confirmation that all relevant ethical information is included. In my opinion, at Scientific Reports, the Journal guidelines place special emphasis on reproducibility and provide authors with the guidance they need.
- What would you like to share with your fellow researchers on publishing in an inclusive journal?
I think that, in recent years, publishers have become more aware of how important it is to conduct and publish inclusive research. Inclusive journals are those which ensure that publication is a fair process and, thus, that who you are (including origin, gender, and ethnicity) and where research is conducted should not unfairly limit the opportunity to publish. All journals should be inclusive, and they should have transparent policies against discrimination, and active efforts to welcome under‑represented groups, countries, institutions, and career stages. This can be achieved, at least partially, with double-blind review, meaning reviewers do not know the authors’ identities (yet this has a limitation: the authors may have cited themselves in the paper, and the reviewer can find out). It is also vital to encourage authors to use inclusive language.
- How do you think Scientific Reports supports UN's sustainable development goals? Do you think we could do more here and how?
I do think that Scientific Reports supports the United Nation’s (UN) Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), as the research published in the journal covers relevant topics such as climate, biodiversity, food systems, and the circular economy—all central to the UN's SDGs. Furthermore, the fact that Scientific Reports is an open-access journal provides a suitable means for disseminating research in these fields, while also allowing it to reach policymakers and practitioners globally.
Homepage: https://www.udg.edu/en/directori/pagina-personal?ID=2001711