《自然综述分子细胞生物学》自然出版集团（2000年）。ISSN 1471-0072。每月发行。首先出现了年度评论，然后是月度爱思唯尔趋势期刊，两者都试图确定其选择领域的热门话题。几年后出现了“现状观点”期刊，《细胞生物学现状观点》现在是最高“影响因子”评论期刊之一，拥有杰出的编辑和顾问委员会以及对细胞生物学主要领域进行定期覆盖的系统方法。每年都会访问重要话题，无论是否在过去的12个月里发生了什么特别令人兴奋的事情。除此之外，还有《细胞与发育生物学研讨会》，FASEB杂志以及“真实”期刊中无数的小型评论文章，让人不禁怀疑任何人如何找到时间进行实验，或者读原始文献。 那么，这个已经拥挤的领域又迎来了三个重要的新成员：《自然综述：分子细胞生物学》、《遗传学》和《神经科学》，其中前两个可能最吸引《细胞科学杂志》的读者。由于得到了自然集团的名字和资金支持，由有经验的自然员工编辑，很难看到这些出版物在作家和读者中不成功。 第一期中有什么内容？《自然综述分子细胞生物学》封面呈现了一个蓝色的细胞核，周围是绿色的GPI锚定的GFP斑点，覆盖着来自其他地方的橙色肌动蛋白应激纤维的三色蒙太奇。这张图片伴随着Kai Simons和Derek Toomre的关于脂质筏的全面评论。还有另外五篇重要的评论文章：钙泡和火花、DNA周围的环、HIV抑制剂、肌动蛋白和昼夜节律提供了作者知道自己在谈论什么的丰富而多样的话题。围绕这个核心的是娱乐性的“亮点”：关于最近主要文献的三个编辑撰写的新闻和观点。我认为这些有点太玩世不恭了。在这种文章中，我认为把轻松和清晰等同起来是一种可怕的诱惑和错误。这种糖衣包裹更有可能引起恼怒而不是启迪。如果这确实是一项政策，我还会质疑这种智慧，只允许编辑在本节中写作。我支持有经验的作家写作，但我认为我更喜欢由父母级自然新闻和观点证明的声音和权威性的多样性。 在主要评论之后，是一个名为“观点”的部分，其中包括Jerry Shay和Woodring Wright关于海弗里克和他的极限的“时间轴”部分，我非常喜欢，以及Judah Folkman、Philip Hahnfeldt和Lynn Hlatky关于癌症的评论（或观点）。用他们自己的话说，“这篇观点文章的动力集中在对癌症基因组的异质性和不稳定性越来越清醒[. . .]有可能压制这个退化过程本身会构成另一种基于限制的替代范例。”作者喜欢这种预示性的语言，对我来说有点毁了他们的讨论。我也对一篇关于分子计算的文章有困难。PCR反应可以解决旅行推销员问题，但与真正的计算机相比速度极慢。这本杂志看起来非常厚重，而且设计精美，呈现出色彩鲜艳的色彩，虽然主要字体很小，对于在伦敦一个特别阴沉多雨的星期里阅读的中年评论家来说读起来有些困难。第一期应该是一种展示，但如果他们能够保持下去，编辑们肯定会在手中拥有成功，您可能需要订阅个人（85英镑），或者说服您的图书馆支付565英镑。这比TiBS便宜一点，比《细胞生物学现状观点》便宜得多，如果他们想要在同一地方停留，这两者都必须跑得更快。

Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology Nature Publishing Group (2000). ISSN 1471-0072. Monthly First there was Annual Reviews, then came the monthly Elsevier Trends Journals, both of which try to identify hot topics in their chosen fields. The Current Opinion journals followed several years later, and Current Opinion in Cell Biology is presently one of the highest 'impact factor' review journals, with a distinguished board of editors and advisors and a systematic approach to regular coverage of the major fields of cell biology. Important topics are visited once a year, whether or not something specially exciting happened in the last 12 months. Add to this list Seminars in Cell and Developmental Biology, the FASEB journal and the countless minireviews in 'real' journals, and you begin to wonder how anyone finds any time for doing experiments, or indeed reading the primary literature. So, into this already crowded field arrive three important newcomers: Nature Reviews in Molecular Cell Biology, Genetics, and Neurosciences, of which the first two will probably interest readers of Journal of Cell Science the most. Backed by the name and money of Nature and edited by experienced Nature staff, it is hard to see how these publications can possibly do other than succeed with writers and readers alike. What's inside the first issue? The cover of Nature Reviews in Molecular Cell Biology presents a 3-colour montage of a blue cell nucleus surrounded by splotches of green GPI-anchored GFP overlaid by orange actin stress fibres that seem to come from somewhere else. This image trails a comprehensive review from Kai Simons and Derek Toomre about Lipid Rafts. There are another five major review articles: calcium puffs and sparks, rings around DNA, HIV inhibitors, kinesin and the circadian clock provide a rich and varied mix of topics from authors who know what they're talking about. Surrounding this core is an entertaining mixture of 'highlights' at the front: news and views about a well-chosen selection of recent articles in the primary literature written by the three editors. These struck me as striking slightly too jokey a style. It is a terrible temptation and mistake in this kind of piece, I think, to equate lightheartedness with clarity. The sugar coating is more likely to irritate than enlighten. I would also question the wisdom, if it is indeed a policy, of only allowing editors to write in this section. I'm all for experienced writers writing, but I think I would prefer the variety of voice and authority evinced by the parental Nature News and Views. After the main reviews comes a section entitled 'perspectives', which include a 'Timeline' piece on Hayflick and his limit by Jerry Shay and Woodring Wright that I very much enjoyed, and a review (or Opinion) about cancer from Judah Folkman, Philip Hahnfeldt and Lynn Hlatky. In their own words, "the impetus for this Opinion article centres on the increasing awareness of the heterogeneity and instability of the cancer genome [. I]t is possible that suppressing this degenerative process may itself comprise an alternative constraint-based paradigm." The authors' fondness for portentous phrases of this kind rather spoiled their discussion for me. I also had trouble with an article on molecular computing. PCR reactions can solve the travelling salesman problem, it seems, but extremely slowly compared to a proper computer. The magazine has a nice heft to it, and is attractively designed and presented in glossy colour, although the main font is small enough to make reading difficult for your middle-aged reviewer in a particularly heavily overcast and rainy week in London. A first issue is supposed to be a kind of showcase, but if they can keep this up, the editors will surely have a success on their hands and you will probably be obliged to take out a personal subscription (£85), or persuade your library to part with £565. That's slightly cheaper than TiBS and a lot cheaper than Current Opinion in Cell Biology, both of which will have to run faster if they want to stay in the same place.