《分析化學》,你不知道的那些事——訪Analytical Chemistry主編...

　　美國化學會出版的Analytical Chemistry(以下簡稱為AC)於1929年創刊， 是化學領域中一流的計量科學雜誌，刊載分析化學原理與應用方面的優秀論文，側重於新測量方法的發展和環境、藥物、生物技術以及材料科學方面實際應用的探討。目前，AC的影響因子是5.86。

　　2012年9月14-15日，AC雜誌主編Jonathan Sweedler 教授應邀來京參加第二屆中美分析化學研討會，會議期間，儀器信息網編輯(以下簡稱為Instrument)就分析化學發展趨勢和AC自身以及學術類期刊的發展等問題對Jonathan Sweedler 教授進行了專訪。

Analytical Chemistry主編Jonathan Sweedler博士

　　一、AC及學術類期刊將如何發展?

　　Instrument：就全球來說，分析化學方面的雜誌有很多，您覺得AC有哪些獨特之處，為什麼能夠保持行業內領先地位?未來，AC又會怎樣發展?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：正如你所說，AC是老牌的分析類雜誌之一，有著悠久的傳統，另一方面，AC也有著廣泛的覆蓋範圍。它涵蓋了分析化學的全部領域，其中很多論題所涉及的儀器也都能在貴公司網站找到。對那些新的發展領域來說，它們顯然希望能夠出現在AC上以吸引更多人的關注。同時，我們也鼓勵中國、印度以及世界各地的發展中國家像發達國家一樣積極地發表論文。此外，我覺得AC採用的模式也十分有效，即我們聘用的、和我們一起工作的都是我們能找到的分析化學各分支最好的專業人士，由他們負責審查審稿過程和評價學術論文。這些編輯來自世界各地，在12位編輯中至少有5位成員來自美國以外的其他國家，1人來自亞洲，其餘來自歐洲。並且，還有其他國家的編輯在陸續加入，可以預見，我們的編輯團隊將會越來越國際化。

　　未來，秉承我們的優良傳統和有效模式，我相信AC仍將保持發行類綜合化學期刊的領先地位。作為科學刊物，我們屬於非營利性質，我們的目標就是為分析化學行業服務，因此，AC一直積極努力成為全世界化學領域最好的代表。

　　Instrument：目前中國有些關於影響因子的爭論，請問您如何看待影響因子?AC近些年的影響因子不斷在提高，對於雜誌如何提高影響因子，您有沒有什麼方法或建議?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：作為一個分析化學家，我喜歡用數據評價工作。影響因子指的是一個期刊過去兩年內發表文章被引用次數與發表文章總數的比值。因此，首先它是一個很短時間的窗口，只能考察2年的期刊情況。在分析化學領域，顯然很多好文章的引用時限更長。有趣的是，我們文章的引用半衰期(衡量期刊文章老化速度)是5年，而其他一些期刊的引用半衰期卻很短。因此，就引用頻率而言，AC上的文章可能比一些影響因子更高的期刊還要高。另一方面，影響因子僅是每篇文章的一個平均值。一些非常優秀的雜誌，比如說我喜歡的雜誌之一，Nature Methods，它每年出版文章120篇，還不到我們出版量的十分之一。因此，AC的引用率要高出Nature Methods.很多倍。如果就單篇文章的影響，Nature Methods的引用平均數更高，如果談到期刊的影響，則AC擁有更高的引用率。我們期刊每年總的引用數量超過1000，這是一個很高的數字，這也是AC影響很大的原因。因此，要看你具體怎樣衡量，就像每種分析儀器有不同的測量指標，哪個更重要?檢測限、動態範圍、成像能力?沒有一個統一的答案，同樣地影響因子也不是衡量期刊的唯一指標。

　　談到我們的影響因子，相對於一些其他的分析化學期刊，我認為還是相當令人印象深刻的。我們增加了出版文章的數量，這一舉措也讓我們的影響因子有所上升，但你需要考慮怎樣去選擇文章。好的文章會使影響因子上升，但是對文章質量的過高要求會使發表文章的數量減少。而實際上，很難在出版大量文章的同時保證影響因子上升，這也是我們在過去的10年一直努力的方向。問題的關鍵是要在質量和數量之間保持一個平衡。

　　Instrument：作為科學雜誌，AC已經歷經了84個年頭，請問AC是如何經營、處理收支問題的?在中國和其他很多國家，學術類期刊都面臨經濟困境，請問您有沒有什麼好的解決方法或建議?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：我認為，無論對我們還是對其他雜誌，最大的挑戰是快速變化的出版形式。我們不再是印刷期刊，轉而用網際網路發表文章，因此很明顯，在過去的10-20年間收入和分配模式發生了很大的變化。AC屬於美國化學會，目前後者已發行超過40份化學類期刊。作為AC的主編，我在出版內容方面擁有100%的決定權，將要發表的文章，學術部分都由我控制，但是商業運營方面則由隸屬於美國化學會的另一個不同的部門來操作。也就是說，學術和財務各自獨立，這就是美國化學會的運作方式，這種方式也讓我有效地運用身邊資源從而更好地對雜誌內容進行管理。

　　怎樣保持一個期刊的財務的正常運轉?顯然，圖書館訂閱十分重要。另外，我們也受益於協會良好的出版基礎。當然，我也必須要說到我們優秀的外聘審稿專家，雖然屬於免費服務，但他們為雜誌做出了很多貢獻。

　　二、AC如何看待分析化學的研究熱點及其在中國的發展?

　　Instrument：作為權威雜誌，AC一定收到了全球專業人士的大量投稿，請問各個國家和地區的投稿情況如何?哪些國家佔得比例較多?中國稿件的比例又如何?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：AC確實收到了來自世界各地的投稿。去年，我們收到了3600篇文章，發表了1300篇，佔到總稿件的三分之一，我覺得其中15-20%的文章來自中國。截至今年7月份，我們已經發表了160篇來自中國的文章，按此趨勢發展，2012年，來自中國的文章總數會超過200篇，佔到出版文章的18%，這也將是有史以來發表中國文章最多的一年。但毫無疑問的，投稿最多的國家是美國，約佔總投稿量的40%，這可能和我們隸屬於美國化學會有關。當然，來自歐洲的文章數量也不少，因為歐洲包括了很多國家。但這也和領域有關，部分領域我們收到的文章就很少。

　　讓我們再回到中國，大約20年前，只有2%的投稿來自中國，我們可以很清楚的知道到現在這個投稿量已經漲了7倍，並且仍在增加。必須承認，分析化學在中國發展地相當迅猛。

　　Instrument：從投稿情況看，您覺得目前分析化學研究的熱點是什麼?各地區的研究熱點有何差別?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：這是個好問題，我曾經專門關注過分析化學不同領域的影響因子。生物傳感器、單分子研究、單個細胞研究、納米技術、代謝物組學等都是關注的熱點，而和這些領域相關文章的影響因子明顯高於分析化學的平均影響因子。

　　但我對不同地區關注的熱點則不是很清楚。我會確定每篇投稿所屬的領域然後把它發給相關的編輯進行審核，比如，有一篇來自美國的有關納米技術的文章，我會把它發給負責納米技術的日本科學家Yoshinobu Baba，我們只是根據學科來分配文章和編輯，而不會根據地區進行統計。

　　Instrument：從投稿來看，您覺得各個國家和地區分析化學的發展情況如何?哪些中國的科研機構和科學家實力比較突出，給您留下了深刻印象?今後的發展前景如何?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：當我審核稿件時，我看到了來自很多國家的高質量的文章，美國的水平自不必說，許多歐洲國家比較出眾，中國和日本也同樣突出。中國處於蛋白質組學和代謝組學研究的前沿，還有著高端的儀器和出色的培養計劃。因此，有很多優秀的論文來自中國並不讓人感到奇怪。

　　至於優秀的中國科研工作者，我寧願不給出個人的名字，因為一旦我說出一些突出的研究人員，很可能遺漏很多優秀人士。這次到訪中國，我參觀了幾個科研機構，它們的研究進展和培養計劃都很出色，給我留下了深刻印象。我看到中國的很多研究機構，比如北大和中科院化學研究所的規模絲毫不亞於美國同類的機構。但我相信一定還有很多地方是我還沒有去過、沒有看到的。我可以這樣說，中國的分析化學正在不斷壯大和發展。

　　我認為，中國分析化學的未來是光明的，並會一直持續發展，因為中國正在做的工作都十分有意義：培養一流的分析化學研究人員、開展精彩的前沿研究並發表一些頂級的分析化學論文。只有一件事我覺得做的還不夠，那就是中國製造的儀器設備。我預計這將在未來的10-20年有所改變並出現完全由中國製造的創新型的分析化學儀器。在這個意義上，我相信將有更多中國公司的產品不僅在中國暢銷，更能推向全世界。如果你覺得目前在質譜、色譜和某些領域，有一些中國公司正在努力擴大國內市場，我覺得未來隨著傑出研究和學術成果的推進，這些儀器公司最終將走向世界。

　　三、AC對投稿者有何建議?

　　Instrument：AC審核稿件的程序是怎樣的?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：在說具體審核流程前，我想先說明這些審批程序只有一個目地，那就是出版我們收到的最好的文章。下面，我就簡單介紹一下文章投稿後的審核過程。當有人通過我們的網絡界面投稿後，我們的期刊管理人員會首先查看文章的完整度，如果不夠完整或者存在其他問題，比如長度過長，我們會直接退回，否則就會進入下一步驟，通知我安排審核該文章。我會通讀文章以確定它是否符合AC的涉及範圍和質量要求。做此決定有時僅花費幾分鐘，有時則超過45分鐘，還可能需要和副主編進行討論。就我估計，仍有15%提交的文章會因為寫作範圍、質量和一些其他問題被專業編輯退回。

　　我覺得可以接收後，會將文章交給相關專業的優秀編輯審查。他們會仔細閱讀文章，並參考我的意見，他們可以決定該文章是否適合AC和是否進入下一步的外部審核。如果適合，編輯會選擇適合的評委並負責審核過程的全部細節。根據評委意見，文章或者錄用，或者發回作者通知修改或拒稿。當修改後被我們再次接收時，文章很可能被錄用。

　　隨後，文章會進入排版發表步驟，我們出版部門人員效率非常高，幾天之內就可完成排版，在接到最終校稿的24小時內就可在網站上顯示。用時方面，雖然排版、發表則只需要幾天，但外審過程卻可能花費幾星期到一個月的時間。

　　Instrument：您對準備投稿AC的研究人員有何建議?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：首先，我假設作者已經完成了一些出色的研究課題，他們需要考慮他們的目標讀者以確定最適合發表他們研究成果的刊物。我的意思是，最好根據目標讀者、研究的質量和作者的預期目標來進行選擇。接下來，閱讀期刊投稿須知然後仔細加工文章(我希望，作者在進行課題研究的同時已經有了文章的提綱)。在作者完成寫作和修改之後，可請同事閱讀並給出他們的意見。在一篇文章發表前，可能要進行一系列的修改，產生一打甚至更多的草稿。

　　我覺得一些中國和美國作者認為審稿是隨機抽獎。因此，為什麼不投到JAAS或AC試試，看是否能被選中出版?相反，我強烈建議作者先看看自己的文章是否符合雜誌的投稿範圍，如果是就儘可能符合該期刊的寫作風格，這樣文章被錄用的可能性將會更大。說明一點，我們雜誌的網站設有專門版塊，為作者提供資源以幫助他們更好的完成寫作;和研究一樣，寫作也是種技能，可以不斷提高。

　　最後，希望中國的科研人員把最好的分析研究成果發到AC，我期待能夠有幸閱讀!

採訪編輯：劉立洋

　　以下為採訪稿英文：

　　Instrument：There are a lot of journals about analytical chemistry. What are the unique features of Analytical Chemistry and what allows Analytical Chemistry to maintain a leading position among academic journals? Please talk about the development of Analytical Chemistry in the future.

　　Jonathan Sweedler：As you know, Analytical Chemistry is one of the older analytical journals so it has a long tradition. Another aspect is its broad coverage. It covers the entire field of analytical chemistry, and so covers topics related to most of the instruments that are on your website. As new fields develop, they are obviously going to appear in Analytical Chemistry. And we certainly encourage papers from China, from India, from developing as well as developed nations around the world. In addition, Analytical Chemistry has a model that I think is very effective. We hire, we work with, we appoint the best associate editors possible from all the subfields of analytical chemistry and they are the ones that control the review process and evaluate the scientific papers. In addition, our associate editors come from around the world; we currently have five of twelve editors who are not living in America: 1 is from Asia, quite a few from Europe. So we are becoming more geographically diverse and we are sure that number will increase as new editors are added.

　　In the future, as we have a good model and a good tradition, Analytical Chemistry will continue to be the best general analytical journal published. We are non-profit; our goal is to serve the field of analytical chemistry. So the journal of Analytical Chemistry is actively trying to represent the best of our field of science to the world.

　　Instrument：Now, there are some debate about the impact factor (IF), could you tell us what do you think of the impact factor? In recent years, Analytical Chemistry’s impact factor continues to improve, if you have some methods or experience on how to improve the academic level?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：As an analytical chemist, I like measures that work. And the impact factor measures the number of citations to a journal over two year period divided by the number of articles. This is a very short window, it is only two years. Many good articles have a longer cited period, and this is field specific. I find it interesting that our cited half-life is longer than 5 years, which means after 5 years, the average article has received less than half of the citations it will eventually receive. However, some other journals have a much shorter half-life. So our articles in analytical chemistry may get more citations on average than the journals with a higher impact factor.

　　Another aspect is that impact factor is a per article average. There are some good journals, let me pick one by name that I like to read, Nature Methods, that publish about 120 articles a year. We publish more than 10 times that number. So the number of citations to Analytical Chemistry is many times higher than Nature Methods. The average citations for a Nature Methods article is higher than ours. If you want to think about the impact of a journal, our journal has many more citations. In fact, the total number of citations to our journal reached nearly 100,000 last year. I would say that the impact of our journal is high! So, it really depends on what you are going to measure.

　　Just like there is more than one figure of merit for an analytical instrument, there is for a journal. Ask yourself which is more important: Detection limit? Dynamic range? Imaging capability? Well, there are multiple correct answers depending on your measurement need. Similarly you shouldn't use the impact factor is the only figure of merit of a journal.

　　Getting back to our impact factor, I think it is impressive that we increased the number of articles we published and our impact factor continued to go up. While the easier approach is to publish fewer carefully selected articles, it is actually hard to publish more articles and have your impact factor increase. And that is what we have been doing over the last 10 years. You should keep a balance between quantity and quality, and this has been our goal.

　　Instrument：As an Academic Journal, Analytical Chemistry have a history of 84 years, I would like to ask you that how to operate it and keep balance between income and expenditure? In China and other countries, some academic journals are facing financial difficulties, would you have any suggestions?

　　Jonathan Sweedler: I think the biggest challenge of our journal, or of other journals, is rapidly changing publishing landscape. We are no longer a print journal, and use internet to deliver our content. Thus, the income models and the distribution models have changed over the last 20 years. Analytical Chemistry belongs to the American Chemical Society, which publishes more than 40 journals related to the chemical sciences. As the editor-in-chief of Analytical Chemistry, I have complete control of the science that is published. The research articles and the science are under my control. However, the business model is actually managed by a different group within the American Chemical Society. In one sense, the scientific and financial aspects are separate. This is the American Chemical Society’s operating model and it is effective in allowing me to have the resources I need to run the journal effectively.

　　How do you keep a journal financially viable? Obviously library subscriptions are important. We have benefit of the publishing infrastructure of our parent society. Of course, I have to acknowledge the efforts of our outstanding reviewers who provide their service for free.

　　Instrument：As a leading journal of analytical chemistry, you receive articles from the entire world; could you give us an introduction about the proportion of the articles from specific countries? Which countries occupy a higher proportion? What has been the Chinese ratio recently?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：Analytical Chemistry does get articles all over the world. Last year, we had about 3600 articles submitted with about 1300 published. So one third of the submissions get published. I think between 15%-20% are from China; this year by July we had almost 160 articles from China published. So that means we are on track to have over 200 from China in 2012, which would be the highest number from China we have ever published. This will represent about 18% of all published articles. We also have a large number of articles from Europe (although Europe includes many countries). There are other areas that we have fewer articles and are under-represented. There is no doubt the largest fraction of articles are from the United States. These articles make up about 40% or so of our submitted articles. That's partly historical as we started out as an American Chemistry Society journal.

　　Getting back to China, about 20 years ago, only 2% of the articles were from China. So it is gone up 7-fold, and is still increasing. I should say analytical chemistry in China is absolutely fantastic.

　　Instrument：From the submitted manuscripts, at present, what do you think is the analytical chemistry research hot spot? And moreover, what’s the difference among different countries and regions?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：These are excellent questions. I have looked at impact factor by field of analytical science. Topics related to biosensors, single molecules, single cells, nanoscience, and metabolomics are popular. And the impact factor of articles related to these fields is higher than the average for analytical chemistry.

　　But I have no idea of geographical hot spots. I determine the scientific area of each article and send it to the associate editor that makes the most scientific sense. If there is an article related to nanoscience that comes from US, I may send it Yoshinobu Baba in Japan, for example. We assign editors based on science.

　　Instrument：According to manuscript, how about the development of analytical chemistry in various countries and regions, you think? Which research institutions, groups or scientists give you a deep impression in China? And how about the future?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：When I look at the submitted manuscripts, I certainly see high quality papers coming from a number of countries; obviously America is very good, and many European countries also have outstanding science. So do China and Japan. China has cutting edge proteomics and metabolomics research, having high end instrumentation and excellent training. It is not surprising that we see excellent papers from China.

　　As far as exemplary Chinese researchers, I』d rather not name individuals as if I start naming productive researchers, I will leave others out. On this trip I have visited only a few institutions. These few have deeply impressed me. The research and the training here has been outstanding. There are probably many other locations which I have not been and haven’t yet seen. The scale and size of some of the groups I have seen in China are as big as if not bigger than those in America, such as those at PKU and Institute of Chemistry. As far as I can tell, analytical chemistry is strong and vibrant in China.

　　I think China’s future in terms of analytical chemistry is bright and I predict this will continue because China is doing such a good job of training really first class analytical chemists, doing wonderful cutting edge research, and publishing some top analytical chemistry articles. The one thing I haven’t seen as much of is instruments made in China. I predict that this will change in the next 10 to 20 years and that there will be innovative analytical instruments that are completely home grown in China. In that sense, we will have more companies that are Chinese that are not only sold in China but also in the rest of the world. So I think if you think in terms of mass spectrometry, chromatography and other fields, there are certainly Chinese companies and they tend to be selling most in China. I think this will change, as the excellence of research and academics moves to instruments companies, I expect the Chinese instruments companies will do well throughout the world.

　　Instrument：How about the process of going over a manuscript?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：Before going over the steps that occur when we receive a manuscript, let me say the process has as its goal a simple one: to publish the best science we receive. Now let me briefly go over the steps after submission, When somebody submits an article to us using our web interface, our journal administrator looks at it to make sure it is complete. If it is not, or if it has other issues such as being too long, it is returned; otherwise, it moves forward. I receive a notification that an article is available to assign; I will look at it to make sure it scientifically fits the journal scope and it seems to be of the right quality; I sometimes spend a few minutes, sometimes more than 45 minutes to make this decision, and oftentimes consult with an associate editor. And I would estimate about 15% of the articles submitted are rejected using the expertise of the editors because of scope, quality and other issues.

　　Next I assign it to one of our outstanding associate editors to handle. They also look over the article and often based on my comments to them or their own careful reading, they may decide it does not fit the journal and it does not go for external review. Otherwise, the associate editor selects the reviewers and they handle the details of the review process. Based on the reviews, the article is either accepted, or sent back to the authors to modify, or rejected. When we receive it again, it may be accepted.

　　After we accept it, it goes to journal production; our production staff are amazing and generate the proofs within a few days and it appears on our web site within 24 hours after the final proofs are received. While the review process can take weeks to a month or so, the production is measured in a few days.

　　Instrument：Do you have any suggestions to a writer when he begins to write an article?

　　Jonathan Sweedler：First, let me assume that the writer already has completed some outstanding research. They need to consider the target audience they want to reach and use this to decide the best place to publish their research. I mean best based on the targeted audience, the quality of science, and what they are hoping to accomplish. Next read the instructions to authors and carefully craft the article (although hopefully, they have been outlining the article while they worked on the research). After they have finished writing and revising the manuscript, let colleagues read it over and consider their comments. After writing an article, it can take me a dozen or more drafts before I find it ready to submit.

　　I think some people in China (and America) think reviewing as a random lottery. So why not submit to JAAS or Analytical Chemistry and see if they will publish the work? Instead I suggest you strongly looking at your article and see if this is the right audience and if so, then target that journal. And if you do that, and try to match the writing style of the journal, your article will have a better chance to do well. As a final point: our journal web site has a wonderful section with resources to help you write better manuscripts. Just like research, writing is a skill that can be improved.

　　And please send your best analytical research to Analytical Chemistry. I look forward to reading it!

　　附錄：Jonathan V. Sweedler教授簡歷

　　Jonathan Sweedler received his Ph.D. degree in Chemistry from the University of Arizona in 1988 and spent three years at Stanford before moving to the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign. He currently holds the James Eiszner Family Chair in Chemistry, and has just become the director of the School of Chemical Sciences at the University of Illinois. His research themes are two-fold and involve both analytical chemistry and neurochemistry. Specific areas of analytical technology development include small-volume peptidomics and metabolomics approaches. These involve single cell mass spectrometry, mass spectrometry imaging, capillary electrophoresis separation methods, laser-based detection methods, nanoliter volume NMR and microfluidic sampling. His second research theme applies these technologies to the study of the distribution and dynamic release of neuropeptides and classical transmitters, as well as their metabolism, in a cell-specific manner. Sweedler has authored or coauthored over 300 peer-reviewed manuscripts and has delivered over 350 invited lectures. Acknowledging the impact of his research, Sweedler has received numerous awards including the Ralph N. Adams Award from the Pittsburgh Conference, the Fields Award from the Eastern Analytical Symposium, and the Instrumentation Award from the Analytical Division of the ACS. He is currently the Editor-in-Chief of Analytical Chemistry. See http://www.scs.illinois.edu/sweedler/

　　Analytical Chemistry網站

　　http://pubs.acs.org/journal/ancham