Immunity Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

The ~7,000-word body limit excludes STAR Methods, references, and figure legends. Editors won't reject at 7,500 words if the science demands it, but papers past 8,000 without justification will face a trimming request. STAR Methods can run 3,000-4,000 words for complex in vivo models with multiple transgenic mouse strains and extensive flow cytometry panels, this is expected and appropriate.

Short Articles follow the same review process as full Articles but with tighter constraints: ~4,000 words, 4 figures, and ~40 references. They're suited for focused discoveries that don't require the full Article framework. Brief Reports are the most constrained format at ~2,500 words and 2 display items.

The abstract should follow a context-approach-results-significance flow and name the specific immune cell type(s), molecular mechanism, and disease context. Vague references to "immune cells" without specifying subsets read as weak to Immunity editors.

Each highlight must be a specific claim: "CTLA-4 engagement on Tregs reprograms glycolytic metabolism through Akt-mTOR axis", not "We investigated the metabolic effects of CTLA-4 signaling."

The In Brief appears in email alerts and the article cover page. It should be accessible to a general scientific audience, not just immunologists. Example: "Zhang et al. demonstrate that ILC3-derived IL-22 maintains intestinal stem cell fitness during inflammation through STAT3-dependent induction of antimicrobial peptides."

Include at least one quantitative result in the abstract. Immunity reviewers are data-driven, and abstracts without numbers raise questions about the strength of the evidence.

Graphical abstract: Required for Articles, Short Articles, and Resources. Dimensions: 1,200 x 1,200 pixels (square, non-negotiable). Format: JPEG, TIFF, or PDF. Minimum text size: 18 pt. Must be self-explanatory without reading the paper. Single panel only. AI-generated graphical abstracts are not permitted per Cell Press policy.

For Immunity, the graphical abstract typically depicts a cellular circuit, which cell type produces which signal, what it acts on, and the downstream effect. Editors look at it during triage, so invest time here.

Flow cytometry figures: Reviewers will ask for gating strategies if they aren't provided. Include full sequential gating from scatter to the final analytical population in supplemental figures as standard practice.

Supplemental figures: No formal limit. Label as "Figure S1, Figure S2." Each needs a title and legend. Twenty supplemental figures for a 7-figure paper is excessive and burdens reviewers.

Immunity uses Cell Press numbered citation style. In-text: superscript numbers in order of first appearance, commas for multiple (^1,2,3), hyphens for ranges (^4-8).

Reference list format:

1. Smith, A.B., Johnson, C.D., Williams, E.F., and Lee, G.H. (2025). Title of article in sentence case. Immunity 58, 123-135.

• List all authors (no "et al." in the reference list regardless of count)
• "and" before the last author (not "&")
• Year in parentheses, journal names abbreviated per MEDLINE, volume in bold
• 60-80 references typical for Articles; Reviews can go to ~150
• Preprints accepted and must include server name and DOI. Immunology moves fast, reviewers expect you to cite relevant preprints posted during review

The Key Resources Table is the most scrutinized formatting element for Immunity papers. It's part of STAR Methods and lists every material used in the study.

Required categories: Antibodies, chemicals/peptides/recombinant proteins, critical commercial assays, deposited data (GEO accessions), experimental models (cell lines and organisms/strains), oligonucleotides (primers, siRNAs, CRISPR guides), recombinant DNA, software, and other.

A typical flow cytometry-heavy Immunity paper uses 20-40 antibody clones. Every one must be listed with target, clone name, conjugate, source, and catalog number. Missing entries generate revision requests regardless of the science.

RRIDs (Research Resource Identifiers) are strongly encouraged and effectively required for common clones. Look up RRIDs at scicrunch.org. Mouse strains need full designations, IMSR catalog numbers, and the original publication describing the strain. If you used a Foxp3-GFP reporter mouse, list the full strain name, Jackson Laboratory stock number, and source paper.

STAR Methods is mandatory for all Articles and Short Articles. The four subsections are fixed:

1. Resource Availability, Lead contact, materials availability statement, data and code availability (repository accessions, DOIs)
2. Experimental Model and Study Participant Details, Mouse strains (full names, sex, age, vendor, housing), cell lines (source, authentication, mycoplasma testing), human samples (IRB, consent, demographics)
3. Method Details, Full protocols. Flow cytometry: all panels, staining conditions, instrument, analysis software. In vivo models: dosing, timing, endpoints
4. Quantification and Statistical Analysis, Statistical tests per comparison, software, sample sizes, exclusion criteria, center/dispersion definitions (mean +/- SEM vs. median + IQR)

Immunology experiments are notoriously difficult to reproduce across labs due to differences in housing conditions, instrument settings, and antibody lot variations. Provide enough detail that another lab could reproduce your experiments.

Supplemental figures and tables are peer-reviewed and published alongside the article. Label as "Figure S1," "Table S1." Videos accepted in MP4.

Large datasets (scRNA-seq, proteomics) must be deposited in public repositories. GEO accession numbers are the standard for transcriptomic data. The Data and Code Availability section at the end of STAR Methods must list all accessions, code repositories with DOIs, and materials available upon request. Papers won't proceed to production without valid accession numbers.

Manuscripts must include: full title, author names with superscript affiliation numbers, full institutional addresses, lead contact email, CRediT author contributions (Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Formal Analysis, Writing (Original Draft, Writing) Review and Editing, Visualization, Supervision, Funding Acquisition), declaration of interests, and up to 10 keywords.

The declaration of interests must appear in the manuscript text ("The authors declare no competing interests" if none exist). This is separate from the submission system's conflict-of-interest form.

1. Key Resources Table is a gate, not a formality. Cross-check every antibody, chemical, and mouse strain in your Methods against the table before submission. This is the most common formatting-related revision at Immunity.

2. Gating strategies are effectively mandatory. Include full sequential gating in supplemental figures from the start. Reviewers will request them if missing.

3. Mouse experiment reporting must be precise. "6-8 weeks" is too vague, specify "6-week-old." State exact mice per group, sex-matching, littermate controls, and pooling details.

4. Statistical reporting must distinguish biological vs. technical replicates. Figure legends must state the number of biological replicates and independent experiments. "n = 5" without clarification isn't sufficient.

5. Gene and cell nomenclature matters. Human genes: italic capitals (FOXP3). Mouse genes: italic, first letter capitalized (Foxp3). Cell types: current conventions after first use ("ILC3" not "group 3 innate lymphoid cell").

6. The graphical abstract influences triage. Editors look at it during initial assessment. A clear graphical abstract that conveys the immune circuit or mechanism at a glance positively influences the triage decision. Generic diagrams with unlabeled arrows and boxes don't help. Remember: AI-generated art is not permitted.

The Key Resources Table alone can contain dozens of entries, and a single missing antibody clone or catalog number triggers a revision. Immunity submission readiness check checks your formatting against Immunity's requirements, STAR Methods structure, reference formatting, word limits, and resource table completeness.

For related Cell Press journals, see our guides for Cell Metabolism and Molecular Cell.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Immunity, four patterns generate the most consistent desk-rejection outcomes.

Novelty does not meet the "conceptual advance in immunity" threshold. Immunity is one of Cell Press's highest-impact immunology journals and applies a stringent novelty standard. Papers that describe a new role for a known pathway in a new cell type, or report an incremental mechanistic extension, are desk-rejected. The editorial team looks for papers that reframe understanding of a regulatory axis, identify an unexpected mechanism, or resolve a major controversy in immunology. The cover letter must articulate the advance explicitly.

STAR Methods section incomplete. Cell Press journals require STAR Methods (Structured Transparent Accessible Reproducible Methods) formatted according to the Cell Press template, with specific subsections: Key Resources Table, Resource Availability, and Method Details. Papers that use a generic Methods and Materials section instead of STAR Methods format are returned before peer review. The Key Resources Table must include catalog numbers and sources for all antibodies, reagents, and software.

Graphical Abstract does not meet Cell Press specifications. Immunity requires a Graphical Abstract at 1200 x 1200 pixels (square format) that captures the central mechanistic finding as a single conceptual illustration. The most common failure is submitting a data panel composite, a flow chart, or a non-square image. The Graphical Abstract must be self-contained and interpretable without reading the paper.

In vivo data insufficient for mechanistic immunology claims. Immunity reviewers expect mechanistic conclusions to be validated in at least two independent experimental systems. A pathway identified in cell lines must be confirmed in primary cells, and a primary cell finding should be validated in a mouse model. Papers relying on a single experimental system for their central mechanistic claim are consistently asked for additional validation.

A Immunity submission readiness check evaluates manuscript scope, Cell Press formatting compliance, and mechanistic depth against these desk-rejection patterns.