Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
  • Submit
  • About
    • Editorial Board
    • PNAS Staff
    • FAQ
    • Accessibility Statement
    • Rights and Permissions
    • Site Map
  • Contact
  • Journal Club
  • Subscribe
    • Subscription Rates
    • Subscriptions FAQ
    • Open Access
    • Recommend PNAS to Your Librarian

User menu

  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
Home
Home
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Articles
    • Current
    • Special Feature Articles - Most Recent
    • Special Features
    • Colloquia
    • Collected Articles
    • PNAS Classics
    • List of Issues
  • Front Matter
    • Front Matter Portal
    • Journal Club
  • News
    • For the Press
    • This Week In PNAS
    • PNAS in the News
  • Podcasts
  • Authors
    • Information for Authors
    • Editorial and Journal Policies
    • Submission Procedures
    • Fees and Licenses
  • Submit
QNAS

QnAs with Randy Schekman

Nick Zagorski

See allHide authors and affiliations

PNAS December 12, 2006 103 (50) 18881; https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0609700103
Nick Zagorski
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

On November 1, 2006, Randy Schekman became the new editor-in-chief of PNAS. Schekman, professor in the Department of Molecular and Cell Biology at the University of California (Berkeley, CA) and a Howard Hughes Medical Investigator, is ready and eager to build on former Editor-in-Chief Nicholas R. Cozzarelli's successes in restoring the allure of the journal. Schekman began developing strategies the moment he received the announcement of his new position, and he shares some of those ideas with PNAS.

Figure1
  • Download figure
  • Open in new tab
  • Download powerpoint

Randy Schekman

PNAS:How does it feel to be handed the reins of this journal?

Schekman:I am exhilarated. I really am thrilled to be doing this, for several reasons. One is that my close colleague Nick Cozzarelli did such a fantastic job. He was passionate about it, and he moved the journal up several notches from its rather staid existence. In doing so, he made this position more visible and more influential. So, to honor him and shake things up myself, I thought this was a great opportunity.

PNAS:Do you think having close ties to the previous editor-in-chief will provide any advantages or disadvantages?

Schekman:You mean, you think people will be suspicious? [Laughs] No, Nick was a great guy, and I think it's only good that I was close to him. I saw what he did, and I know what his strengths were. And it wasn't only Nick. Dan Koshland was editor-in-chief of PNAS as well for a time, so I have two outstanding role models to guide me. But I'm certainly going to do things my own way.

PNAS:You've mentioned that the gears in your head have already begun turning. Care to share some ambitions?

Schekman:I have several ideas that I'm eager to explore with the Editorial Board. One thing that PNAS has done recently that I think is terrific and could be a model was creating a new discipline on sustainability. This is an increasingly important area, and we actually have luminaries like James Hansen publishing their stuff in PNAS. So I like that general idea, of creating new fields rather than necessarily always doing the same thing.

Another thing to encourage is for members and nonmembers to submit their best work. Since length limitations can discourage the submission of complete studies, I would like to publish a small number of primary research “feature articles” in each issue that are evaluated at the highest standard exclusively through the Track II [direct manuscript submission] mechanism. We would try to use these articles to publish work as broadly representative of the NAS [National Academy of Sciences] as possible and combine them with commentary, author interviews, and other highlights. This way, we could feature people who are not necessarily yet in the Academy.

PNAS:So, would you say that the journal should reevaluate its position with the Academy and its members, like the issue of member submissions for example?

Schekman:Well, that is a sensitive topic. And while I and other members may have strong feelings about it, we need to go slow here. Remember, back in the 1970s when it was entirely members' privilege, it was still a great journal. Currently, though, I'm not persuaded that all members are contributing their best work. That both damages the journal and might turn off nonmembers who think, “Well, if the members aren't going to put in their best work, why should I?” It's tough, but we have to change that perception and, at the very least, encourage members to contribute their best work.

On the other side, we have this flagship publication of the Academy, PNAS, and the major public arm of the Academy, the National Research Council [NRC]. Yet other than a few cognoscenti in the Academy, the connection between the NRC and the NAS is unknown. The NRC does all these amazing studies and has a lot of publicity, but it's not displayed in the journal. So, maybe these NRC reports could be packaged in a summary for front material in PNAS.

PNAS:Switching from science to business, one of Cozzarelli's main legacies was developing an open access publication policy. What is your take on that?

Schekman:I admit I did not sign the petition to make scientific literature publicly available that so many others did. Journals are still businesses, and they need a viable business plan to survive. What Nick did, making the literature available free to all after 6 months, I think was pitched just right. We did the same thing at the Journal of Cell Biology when I was a senior editor there. Now, what Nick did that I applaud was to make PNAS available immediately and free to the developing nations. That was inspired.

PNAS:Any other business-related issues that need to be addressed?

Schekman:We have to continue to explore opportunities in the electronic medium to enhance and package parts of the journal for public exposure. I'm not sure that we're doing it to optimum advantage, but I'm open to all kinds of ideas in that respect, such as podcasting or other audio content.

Another thing to think about in that regard, and frankly this will be challenging, is possibly doing away with the print copy. I mean, I don't look at the print copy of journals anymore. I don't know that anybody does. Printing is a considerable expense, so we have to look hard at whether hard copy is worth it.

PNAS:To sum, what is Randy Schekman's vision for PNAS?

Schekman:When I was a graduate student, this was the journal of record in biochemical and molecular biology, and back then it was still exclusively a members' journal. Of course today, there are a lot more journals. Cell came along, you know, and both Cell and Nature have cloned themselves; but, I see no reason why PNAS can't come back.

I mean, PNAS is run and managed by the nation's best scientists. Why can't we pull in those hot articles? Despite the wonderful progress, PNAS still doesn't have the impact that it once had. We have to convince the young, aspiring movers and shakers to consider publishing their best stuff in PNAS.

PreviousNext
Back to top
Article Alerts
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on PNAS.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
QnAs with Randy Schekman
(Your Name) has sent you a message from PNAS
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the PNAS web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
QnAs with Randy Schekman
Nick Zagorski
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2006, 103 (50) 18881; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0609700103

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
QnAs with Randy Schekman
Nick Zagorski
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences Dec 2006, 103 (50) 18881; DOI: 10.1073/pnas.0609700103
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Mendeley logo Mendeley
Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences: 103 (50)
Table of Contents

Submit

Sign up for Article Alerts

Jump to section

  • Article
  • Figures & SI
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

You May Also be Interested in

Water from a faucet fills a glass.
News Feature: How “forever chemicals” might impair the immune system
Researchers are exploring whether these ubiquitous fluorinated molecules might worsen infections or hamper vaccine effectiveness.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Dmitry Naumov.
Reflection of clouds in the still waters of Mono Lake in California.
Inner Workings: Making headway with the mysteries of life’s origins
Recent experiments and simulations are starting to answer some fundamental questions about how life came to be.
Image credit: Shutterstock/Radoslaw Lecyk.
Cave in coastal Kenya with tree growing in the middle.
Journal Club: Small, sharp blades mark shift from Middle to Later Stone Age in coastal Kenya
Archaeologists have long tried to define the transition between the two time periods.
Image credit: Ceri Shipton.
Illustration of groups of people chatting
Exploring the length of human conversations
Adam Mastroianni and Daniel Gilbert explore why conversations almost never end when people want them to.
Listen
Past PodcastsSubscribe
Panda bear hanging in a tree
How horse manure helps giant pandas tolerate cold
A study finds that giant pandas roll in horse manure to increase their cold tolerance.
Image credit: Fuwen Wei.

Similar Articles

Site Logo
Powered by HighWire
  • Submit Manuscript
  • Twitter
  • Facebook
  • RSS Feeds
  • Email Alerts

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Special Feature Articles – Most Recent
  • List of Issues

PNAS Portals

  • Anthropology
  • Chemistry
  • Classics
  • Front Matter
  • Physics
  • Sustainability Science
  • Teaching Resources

Information

  • Authors
  • Editorial Board
  • Reviewers
  • Subscribers
  • Librarians
  • Press
  • Cozzarelli Prize
  • Site Map
  • PNAS Updates
  • FAQs
  • Accessibility Statement
  • Rights & Permissions
  • About
  • Contact

Feedback    Privacy/Legal

Copyright © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. Online ISSN 1091-6490