This commentary reflects on past editing practices and their implications for current authors and reviewers.
This commentary focuses on my experiences as an editor of Applied and Environmental Microbiology (AEM) from 1988 to 1996. I reflect on the challenges of the pre-internet world when all communications, including paper manuscripts, traveled by post. It was a time when editors chose the reviewers without the “benefit” of reviewers suggested by the authors. I describe the advantages and disadvantages of being an editor in those times, using seven memorable papers as examples of our efforts to advance both the field and our esteemed journal. I do so in the hope that this perspective brings relevance to present-day authors, reviewers, and editors.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kenneth Nickerson (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: