To be remembered

A little more than 5 years ago, a publisher from WileyBlackwell requested tomeetme inmyoffice, and following my usual approach to such requests, I agreed to a 5-min meeting. The energetic publisher, Pernille Hammelsø, used the time (longer than planned) to convince me to join Pigment Cell Research in an effort tomerge themelanoma and pigment-focused fields within the existing journal. The concept was met with skepticism by all except Colin Goding, the Editor-in-Chief of PCR at the time. Two years later the content integration shifted into high gear, and I found myself at the steering wheel of the newly titled Pigment Cell & Melanoma Research. By that time, melanoma research was officially part of the journal focus and accounted for about 40% of the articles. Fast-forward 3 years, and now I have completed one of the more fascinating, albeit challenging, experiences I have had as a scientist. Indeed, an experience to be remembered. Two factors convinced me to take on this mission: the support of the publisher and the preceding Editor-in-Chief, and the recognition of an urgent need for a platform in which pigment-based research included melanoma by default (as it did in my mind). Over the past 3 years, I have been fortunate to count on the continued support of the greater pigment and melanoma communities as well as members of the editorial board. In particular, two Executive Editors, Glenn Merlino and Heinz Arnheiter, have done much of the day-to-day heavy lifting in the editorial operation. More than 1200 manuscripts were submitted during my tenure; 75% were reviewed, 85% of the reviewed papers were revised, and most of those were eventually published. The operation ran smoothly thanks to the daily (7 days a week) support of Taylor Bowen, the Editorial Assistant. The combined efforts and talents of the editorial and production teams (thanks to Louise Robb and Polly Chester) resulted in a remarkable manuscript turnaround time of 2–3 weeks, with articles being published online within 3 days of acceptance. Thank you all for maintaining your support, handling requests for rapid reviews, contributing your manuscripts, accommodating our last-minute requests, and above all, for citing PCMR in your papers. To be remembered. Beyond the increase in numbers, the quality of papers submitted to PCMR has also improved with time. The bar has been raised, and this is reflected in more frequent submissions of stronger, mechanism-driven studies. The support from both the pigment and melanoma communities is the most important contributing factor to the upward trajectory of PCMR and is to be cherished and nurtured. The life of an Editor-in-Chief is, for the most part, extremely rewarding. It has been heartwarming to feel the community appreciation for the continued development of PCMR through inclusion of new sections that improve the depth and breadth of the journal. Equally, we are encouraged to hear that you actually read the journal from cover to cover – during your lunch break, at home, or on those interminable flights to or from conferences. But then there are also moments of sadness. The fate of most manuscripts is decided by default: More than 90% receive similar review scores (granted, one needs to choose the reviewers carefully). But I am reminded of what it means to be Editor-in-Chief when handling the remaining 10% of submissions: resolving split decisions, recruiting additional reviewers, reviewing the manuscript myself, and inevitably, dealing with the few anxious and often upset authors whose papers did not make the cut. Even so, the moments of greatest sorrow occur when the editorial team is faced with apparently fraudulent submissions or with arrogant authors who somehow deserve to have their manuscript published. Notably, the incident that touched me most concerned a young co-author of a publication in PCMR. Having contributed a single experiment to the study, this young scientist was accused by his colleagues of ‘taking’ their data. Although formally cleared of the charge after proving the data were generated 4 years earlier and 4000 miles away, the scientist’s career development was sidetracked by this incident. An unexpected outcome of publishing in PCMR – to be remembered. The work of an Editor-in-Chief may take a few years to be formally appreciated. While we do the best we can during our tenure, it is you as members of the community who will ultimately decide the value (if any) of our work. As for most evaluations, metrics speak the loudest. The level of success of a scientific journal is represented by the impact factor, a measure of citations over the preceding 2 years. Therefore, the true impact of an Editor-in-Chief’s 3 years of service will be seen in the years to come. It was my distinct honor and pleasure to fulfill this mission – you will then decide whether this should be remembered. What is next for PCMR? New areas of research have emerged, including metabolomics, systems biology, and high throughput–based analyses, which are being integrated into PCMR – this will need to continue. Even a specialized journal such as PCMR will need to embrace global biology to improve our understanding of the