ACS Nano Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

ACS Nano follows the ACS Nano manuscript checklist abstract rules with nanoscience-specific expectations.

• Word limit: 250 words maximum for Articles and Reviews; 120 words maximum for Perspectives and Nano Focus

• Structure: Unstructured (single paragraph)

• Citations: Not allowed

• Abbreviations: Define at first use unless universally known

• Keywords: 5 to 7 keywords for Articles; 8 to 10 for Reviews, with a Vocabulary section for Reviews

The abstract should open with the motivation (one sentence), describe the approach (one to two sentences), present the main findings with specific quantitative data, and close with the significance. For nanoscience, "significance" means the practical application, the fundamental insight, or the advancement over existing approaches.

ACS Nano abstracts should include specific characterization numbers. Instead of "we synthesized nanoparticles with improved properties," write "we synthesized gold nanoparticles (15 nm diameter, PDI 0.08) with a 3.2-fold increase in photothermal conversion efficiency compared to commercial controls." The editors want to see the data in the abstract.

The article-type limit is enforced during submission. A 230-word Article abstract may be valid, while the same abstract would be non-compliant for a Perspective or Nano Focus piece.

In our pre-submission review work with ACS Nano manuscripts, and in our review of ACS Nano formatting packages, we see one specific failure pattern repeatedly: formatting choices that hide the science rather than clarify it. This page was checked against the ACS Nano author-guidelines checklist and Manusights pre-submission review notes from ACS Nano-targeted drafts. The strongest packages make the nanoscale mechanism, controls, and comparison standard visible before a reviewer has to reconstruct the argument from Supporting Information.

ACS Nano abstract overload. The first recurring pattern is an Article abstract that stays under 250 words but tries to carry the whole manuscript: synthesis route, characterization list, application claim, mechanism, and field significance in one dense block. That technically fits the limit, but it fails as an editorial signal. ACS Nano abstracts work better when the first sentence names the nanoscale system, the middle names the decisive control or benchmark, and the final sentence states the mechanism or functional consequence. The component to test is not only word count; it is whether the abstract makes the nano-specific advance legible without reading Figure 1 twice.

ACS Nano TOC graphic copied from a figure. The second pattern is a TOC graphic cropped from a main figure panel. It may meet resolution requirements, but it often loses labels, scale context, and the cause-and-effect story. For ACS Nano, the TOC graphic should behave like a miniature mechanism diagram: material architecture, tested function, and direction of improvement. If the graphic only shows a microscopy image or decorative schematic, the formatting is compliant on paper but weak for reader uptake.

ACS Nano Supporting Information doing the main paper's job. The third pattern is a main text that sends core controls, synthesis reproducibility, benchmark conditions, or statistical details into Supporting Information too early. ACS Nano expects extensive SI, but the main Article still has to carry the argument. If a reviewer needs the SI to understand the method logic or why the comparator is fair, the formatting decision has become a review-risk decision.

Like all ACS journals, ACS Nano requires a TOC (Table of Contents) graphic. At ACS Nano, this graphic carries particular weight because the journal's readership is broad and interdisciplinary.

Specifications:

The TOC graphic is the first visual impression of your paper. At ACS Nano, where competition for reader attention is intense, a compelling TOC graphic directly affects readership.

In Manusights formatting checks for ACS Nano-targeted drafts, the TOC problem is usually not resolution alone. The higher-risk pattern is a TOC graphic that repeats a main figure panel without explaining the nanoscale mechanism. Editors and readers should be able to see the material, the functional change, and the reason the nano design matters before they read the abstract twice.

Effective TOC graphics for nanoscience:

• Schematic of the nanomaterial structure or assembly

• Before/after comparison showing the functional outcome

• TEM/SEM image combined with a performance graph

• Application-oriented diagram linking the nano-construct to its function

Common mistakes:

• Text-heavy graphics that are unreadable at published size

• Generic schematics that could apply to any nanoscience paper

• Cropped figure panels that lack context without the caption

• Incorrect dimensions for the article type

The TOC graphic is uploaded separately during submission and also placed in the manuscript after the abstract. Include a one-sentence caption that summarizes the graphic's content.

ACS Nano papers are figure-intensive. A typical Article contains 5 to 8 main-text figures plus extensive characterization data in the Supporting Information.

Figure specifications:

Microscopy images: ACS Nano has specific expectations for TEM, SEM, AFM, and other microscopy images. Every microscopy image must include a scale bar. The scale bar should be embedded in the image, not added as text in the caption. For TEM images, specify the accelerating voltage in the caption or methods. For AFM, include the scan parameters.

Multi-panel figures: Very common in ACS Nano. A single figure might include TEM images, size distribution histograms, UV-Vis spectra, and performance data. Label panels as (a), (b), (c) in lowercase. Each panel needs to be described in the figure caption.

Scheme figures: ACS Nano uses "Scheme" designations for synthetic routes and reaction mechanisms, separate from the regular Figure numbering. Schemes are numbered sequentially (Scheme 1, Scheme 2) and have their own captions.

Table formatting: ACS standard format with horizontal rules only (top, below header, bottom). No vertical rules. Table captions above the table. Footnotes use superscript lowercase letters.

ACS Nano uses the standard ACS reference style.

In-text citations: Superscript numbers, assigned sequentially. Multiple citations: ^1,2 or ^1-3. Place superscript numbers after punctuation.

Reference list format:

(1) Author, A. B.; Author, C. D.; Author, E. F. Title of the Article. J. Abbrev. Year, Vol, Pages. DOI: 10.xxxx/xxxxx

Key formatting details:

• Author names: Last name, initials (e.g., "Smith, J. K.").

• Semicolons between authors.

• Article title in plain text.

• Journal name abbreviated and italicized.

• Year in bold.

• DOIs required for all references with DOIs.

• For books: include publisher, city, year.

• For patents: include patent number and date.

The achemso LaTeX package or ACS-formatted Zotero/EndNote styles handle these details automatically. Manual formatting is error-prone given the many small style requirements.

No formal reference cap. Articles typically cite 40 to 80 sources. Reviews can exceed 200. Cite what's relevant, but avoid citation padding, which reviewers at high-impact journals notice and dislike.

A nanoscience-specific detail: when citing characterization methods or instruments, cite the original method paper, not just the instrument manual. Reviewers expect proper attribution for analytical techniques.

Supporting Information (SI) is expected for virtually every ACS Nano Article. The SI document is where most of the characterization data lives.

Typical SI content for ACS Nano papers:

• Additional TEM/SEM/AFM images

• Size distribution data

• XRD, XPS, FTIR, UV-Vis spectra

• Control experiment results

• Stability and reproducibility data

• Detailed synthetic procedures

• Computational methods and additional simulation data

• Cytotoxicity and biocompatibility data (for biomedical applications)

SI formatting:

• Compiled as a single PDF

• Pages numbered S1, S2, S3...

• Figures labeled Figure S1, S2, S3...

• Tables labeled Table S1, S2, S3...

• Include a table of contents at the beginning

• Must have its own reference list (can refer to main-text reference numbers)

SI quality expectations: ACS Nano holds the SI to the same quality standard as the main text. Reviewers frequently request additional characterization data to be added to the SI. Low-resolution images, poorly labeled spectra, or missing controls in the SI will trigger reviewer criticism.

Most ACS Nano Articles have SI documents of 15 to 40 pages. Extensive SI is a sign of thorough characterization, not a sign of poor manuscript management. Move supporting characterization to the SI and keep the main text focused on the primary findings and narrative.

For raw data or large datasets, deposit in a public repository (Zenodo, Figshare) and cite the DOI in the paper and SI.

These are the details that experienced ACS Nano authors know:

Abstract/TOC graphic vs. main text figures. The TOC graphic is separate from the numbered figures. Don't refer to the TOC graphic as "Figure 1" or include it in the figure numbering sequence. It's its own category.

Scheme numbering. Synthetic routes and reaction mechanisms use "Scheme" numbering, separate from Figures and Tables. Scheme 1, Scheme 2, etc. Captions for Schemes follow the same formatting as Figure captions.

Conflict of interest disclosure. Required. Listed under "Notes" at the end of the manuscript. State "The authors declare no competing financial interest" or disclose specific conflicts. This exact wording is expected.

ORCID iDs. Required for the corresponding author. Encouraged for all authors. Enter during the submission process in ACS Paragon Plus.

Author contributions. ACS Nano expects an author contribution statement, especially for papers with many co-authors. This can follow the CRediT taxonomy or use descriptive text.

Safety considerations. For papers involving hazardous nanomaterials, include a brief safety statement in the Experimental Section describing the precautions taken. This is becoming increasingly expected for papers involving quantum dots (cadmium-containing), carbon nanotubes, and other materials with known toxicity concerns.

Methods section heading. ACS Nano uses "Methods" or "Experimental Section," not "Materials and Methods." Both are accepted, but be consistent. The Methods section can appear at the end of the paper (before references) or in its traditional position after the Introduction.

Associated Content paragraph. Required. Before the references, include a paragraph describing the Supporting Information: "Supporting Information: The Supporting Information is available free of charge at [ACS Publications URL]. Additional characterization data, synthetic procedures, and control experiments (PDF)."

Acknowledgments. Place after the main text and before the Associated Content and references. Include funding sources, facility access acknowledgments, and personal thanks.

1. TOC graphic dimensions. ACS Nano uses article-type maximums: 9.0 cm x 4.0 cm for Articles and Reviews, 4.5 cm x 4.0 cm for Perspectives and Nano Focus. The submission system can flag non-conforming graphics.

1. Scale bars on microscopy images. Every TEM, SEM, AFM, and optical microscopy image must have a scale bar. Missing scale bars are one of the most common reviewer complaints at ACS Nano.

1. SI table of contents. The Supporting Information document needs its own table of contents at the start. Don't skip this.

1. DOIs in references. ACS requires DOIs for all cited works that have them. The production team will add missing DOIs, but this delays publication.

1. Scheme vs. Figure designation. Synthetic routes go in Schemes, not Figures. Using "Figure" for a reaction scheme is a formatting error.

For manuscripts targeting ACS Nano, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

TOC graphic not meeting dimensional requirements. ACS Nano requires a separate Table of Contents graphic and sets different maximum sizes by article type: 9.0 cm x 4.0 cm for Articles and Reviews, 4.5 cm x 4.0 cm for Perspectives and Nano Focus. Figures copied directly from the manuscript are often non-compliant because typical figure panels are designed for column widths, not for the TOC slot. The TOC graphic must be designed specifically for this format and can be caught in ACS pre-acceptance checks before production.

Nano aspect is incidental rather than central. ACS Nano's scope requires that the nanoscale property or phenomenon be the central scientific contribution, not an enabling feature of a broader study. Materials characterization studies where nanostructuring is one of several synthetic parameters, or catalysis studies where the surface area effect could equally be achieved by other means, are rejected for scope. The author guidelines state that ACS Nano publishes work where "unique properties arising from the nanoscale" are the subject of investigation, not just a formulation choice.

Supporting Information absent or insufficient for replication. ACS reviewers check SI thoroughness. For synthesis papers, full characterization (XPS, TEM at multiple magnifications, size distributions, BET surface area, NMR where applicable) is expected in the SI even if summary data appear in the main text. A 2-page SI for a complex nanostructure synthesis, or SI that consists only of additional plots without experimental protocols, generates major revision requests focused on reproducibility.

Synopsis paragraph too long or too generic. ACS Nano requires a 150-word synopsis for the Table of Contents describing the key finding in accessible language. Synopses that exceed 150 words are non-compliant. Synopses that restate the title ("We report a new method for...") without conveying the nanoscale mechanism or the scientific insight are revised during pre-acceptance.

A ACS Nano submission readiness check evaluates TOC graphic compliance, nanoscale scope, SI completeness, and synopsis quality against these patterns.