Editorial: The Importance of Being Nano

Today, it pays to think “nano”. Whether you are looking to gain funding for new research opportunities, marketing new clothing, sports equipment, or electronics, or investing in the financial sector, if the label “nano” is attached to the product or proposal in question, the chances of success appear to be markedly improved. Just ask one of the leading portable music manufacturers about the name of their new product. Nano sells, it’s a fact! Of course, there’s a lot more to it than just a simple word (or prefix, even). There are manifold reasons that research, development, and production in the nano-domain are currently so vibrant. One might mention nanoelectronics (e.g., the necessity for faster computer technology), nanobiotechnology and nanomedicine (e.g., the ability to target and treat cancer and other diseases), nanomaterials design (e.g., advances in materials properties, such as in waterproof clothing), and so on. The list is enormous, and is ever growing. Moreover, the focus for these advances is worldwide. Nanoscience and nanotechnology are now truly of world importance. People are becoming ever more aware of the advantages that pushing dimensions down to the nanoscale can bring, and thus “nano” is heard more and more in many circles, not just in the scientific arena, but in industry, economics, politics, and beyond. Perhaps of equal importance, the dangers and concerns surrounding nanotechnology are beginning to be addressed, as papers published in this journal, amongst others, concerning the cytotoxicity of certain nanomaterials bear testament to. The scientific community is, as is necessary, leading the way in all of these important developments. From an editorial perspective, and in particular, from the point of view of an editor of a scientific journal that deals with new research on the nanoscale, such developments are fantastic. Since the first issue of Small was published in November 2004, we have received excellent primary research and review-type manuscripts from across the scientific community, both in terms of geography and scientific discipline. At the end of 2005, we will have received over 600 articles, of which 194 have now been published (including this first issue of 2006, but not including editorials, book reviews, and those articles destined for future issues that are currently available online through Wiley InterScience). It is important to point out that these articles have not been limited to studies at the nanoscale, and this is a defining characteristic of Small, which is distinct from many other like-minded journals; to quote our Notice to Authors, in addition to research at the nanoscale, articles may describe advances “…at longer (than nanometer) length scales where miniaturization is shown to lead to novel and important properties and capabilities.”1 Some quick arithmetic will tell you that we are currently rejecting upwards of 60 % of the articles that we receive, and since a trend in increasing numbers of articles being received every month persists (see Figure 11), this percentage is likely to increase in 2006. To alleviate this somewhat, we shall be publishing more papers in 2006, with an expected increase in the number of pages this year of >30 %. Nonetheless, the high and increasing level of rejection is testimony to the quality of the articles that Small is determined to publish, articles that are being disseminated by more and more people (see Figure 22). We are very grateful to our hard-working and fair referees, who have fully embraced our new journal, and have quickly and correctly evaluated the level of quality and relevance that articles in Small should possess. We actively encourage authors and referees to continue to bear these standards in mind when either submitting manuscripts to, or evaluating articles for Small. A chart showing the number of articles submitted to Small each month since June 2004. A chart indicating the total number of Small articles downloaded in each month since October 2004. Last, but by no means least, we thank the authors of the aforementioned articles for helping to lay the foundations for this journal. You too have fully embraced the spirit of our new journal, and we thank you for the trust you have already placed in us. The challenge has now been laid down to follow our excellent first volume with an even better 2006! In addition to the exciting diversity apparent in this issue, the reader can look forward to Reviews on nanoparticle-functionalized carbon nanotubes and shape control of II–VI semiconductor nanocrystals, a Concept article looking at properties of molecular wires, and much more besides, in future issues. Ever since the Impact Factor (IF), a quotient that measures the number of times papers in a particular journal are cited in other articles, became a known quantity to the academic community, there has been an increasing trend for authors to “target” particular journals as the first place to attempt to publish their articles, based on their high IF. There have recently been a number of articles written about the relevance of IFs and their impact on publishing. I draw your attention to the points raised by my colleagues Esther Levy, in her recent Editorial “More, Better, Faster…” in Advanced Materials,1 and Peter Gölitz in “Who Is Going To Read All This?”, also published recently in Angewandte Chemie.2 In addition, a very recent article in The Chronicle of Higher Education called “The Number That’s Devouring Science” looked at how IFs now have particular influence on the funding of research groups, namely, by the offer of extra funding for publishing in high-IF journals.3 Further, the article discusses how IFs might be “engineered” to make a journal more attractive to prospective authors. IFs are clearly important, both to academics and publishers alike, but they should certainly be viewed with some caution. A hypothetical journal may publish only a very small number of papers, but these may include a seminal article that is cited prodigiously and thus provides the journal with a very high, maybe disproportionate IF. Similarly, journals that publish a large number of articles in more specialized areas or those disciplines that are currently considered by some as not being “hot” topics, which may not be well-cited per se, but which might be invaluable to a researcher requiring certain specific data, may obtain rather lower IFs. The point being made here is that a low IF does not necessarily signify a poor journal, and indeed a high IF does not guarantee that all papers contained in that journal will be of stellar quality. Clearly, there is a great responsibility on authors to submit their manuscripts to journals that are appropriate to the work presented. But where does this leave a journal like Small?1 We have been fortunate to visit a number of excellent conferences over the last two years with a view to introducing and publicizing Small to the community and to acquire excellent articles for the journal. Questions that are often asked at such meetings include: “So, what is the Impact Factor of Small?”, and, perhaps more appropriately, “What is the Impact Factor of Small going to be?” or “What Impact Factor are you aiming for?”. It should be pointed out straight away (to answer the first question) that a journal does not receive an IF until it has been published for two years, as it requires this amount of time to calculate the number of citations from Year 1’s articles to appear in Year 2. Thus, Small will not receive an IF for 2006 until the middle of 2007. The second set of questions are more interesting, and require some thought. It would be rather impetuous of us to state categorically that we expect an IF of x or y. However, we feel that the high-quality research that we are presenting should be highly cited, and thus, will contribute to a high IF. One way in which the reader can judge the progress of the journal for her/himself is to visit the ISI Web of Knowledge website and observe how the articles in the journal are currently being cited. Certainly, by comparison with journals with known Impact Factors, one can see that we have made an excellent start. But how does this affect the prospective reader or author? Is the lack of an IF a barrier to sending your excellent work to Small? The answer is, categorically, “NO”! First, if authors do not send us their work, then the fate of the IF is clear. More importantly, as mentioned earlier, the ultimate aim of the author should be to send their work to an appropriate journal, based on quality, scope, and format. Our Notice to Authors clearly lays out the appropriate format for our articles, and we hope that Volume 1 of Small provides you with a gauge to the other two factors. These are the factors that determine whether your manuscript might be suitable for publication in this journal, and we hope that many of you will see this as an opportunity to publish exciting new research, excellent Review articles, incisive Highlights, and thought-provoking Essays and Concept articles in this Volume, and beyond. One man who knew about the “importance of being nano” was Richard Smalley, a founding father of science and technology at the nanoscale, Nobel Laureate for Chemistry in 1996, and Honorary Member of the Editorial Advisory Board of Small, who sadly passed away recently. On behalf of the editorial team and the whole of the Editorial Board, I pass on my condolences to his family and colleagues. An obituary will be published in a future issue of Angewandte Chemie. PS: 2006 is an important year for Small in many ways, not least for the fact that it will now be a completely independent publication. We invite all subscribers to Advanced Materials, who have hitherto received Small as a companion to that journal, to continue to enjoy the articles in this journal by subscribing now. Please visit our website or read the information in this issue for more details.