Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers Submission Guide

Source: Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers author guidelines.

• a clear inorganic-frontier contribution

• rigorous structural characterization

• mechanistic insight

• frontier framing

• a cover letter establishing the contribution

• Incremental synthesis without mechanism.

• Weak structural characterization.

• Missing inorganic-frontier framing.

• General chemistry without inorganic frontier focus.

Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers is a flagship inorganic-frontier journal.

Frontier-research standard: the journal differentiates from broader chemistry venues by demanding inorganic-frontier contributions.

Crystallographic-characterization expectation: editors expect X-ray structures where appropriate.

The initial editorial assessment: decisive editorial screen (RSC publishes no desk-rejection rate for the journal).

The strongest Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers cover letters establish:

• the inorganic-frontier contribution

• the structural characterization

• the mechanistic insight

• the central finding

Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers submissions go through ScholarOne Manuscripts, the Royal Society of Chemistry's online submission system, accessible from the journal's Author Guidelines. The journal belongs to the Frontiers journal portfolio, a collaboration between the Chinese Chemical Society and RSC, with Peking University as the collaborating institute, and is led by the Editor-in-Chief (listed on the journal's editorial-team page; verify before quoting). RSC reports a median time to first decision of 28 days for peer-reviewed submissions, and 10 days for all first decisions (RSC figures for 2025), on the journal page.

All original research is published in a single "Research article" format; Communications and Full Papers are not formatted differently after acceptance. Review articles should provide a critical and in-depth discussion of a particularly relevant or interesting topic in inorganic chemistry, with an authoritative, balanced, and up-to-date overview.

An Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers submission involves these items; RSC asks for some of them only at the revision stage or after acceptance:

• main manuscript file as Word, PDF or LaTeX (the RSC template is optional)

• cover letter establishing the inorganic-chemistry advance and the cross-disciplinary appeal (catalysis, biochemistry, nanoscience, energy, materials, or environmental science)

• table of contents entry (a graphic plus 1-2 sentences of up to 250 characters), which RSC asks for at the revision stage

• ORCID iD for the submitting author (RSC requires it when a revised manuscript is submitted and encourages all co-authors to link theirs)

• conflicts of interest statement (RSC requires one for every submitted manuscript; if none exist, it reads "There are no conflicts to declare")

• ethical statement where the study involves live animals or human subjects (RSC's author guidelines say one may be required; its author responsibilities page requires a methods-section statement naming the ethics committee that approved the study and, where possible, the approval or case number)

• data availability statement covering crystallographic data (with CCDC deposit references), spectroscopic data, computational data, and any imaging or characterization datasets

• supporting information (compiled separately; RSC peer-reviews it, so include it with the original submission)

• any CCDC numbers, and CheckCIF files for each crystal structure (RSC asks for these on submission)

• declaration of any generative AI use in the cover letter (RSC also asks for a statement in the methods section and the tool details in the Acknowledgements)

• for Reviews, Chemistry frontiers and Highlights, a brief proposal (under 2 pages, with the author's CV and recent publications) sent to the editorial office in advance

• for revised submissions, a response to the referees, figures as separate high-resolution files and a table of contents entry

For Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers submissions, the most common artifact-related issue is missing or unverified CCDC deposit numbers for crystallographic claims. RSC asks for any CCDC numbers, and CheckCIF files for each crystal structure, on submission rather than at acceptance.

Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers manuscripts move through the stages RSC describes for its journals. RSC's journal page gives a median time to first decision of 10 days for all first decisions, including rejections without peer review, and 28 days for submissions that were peer reviewed (RSC figures for 2025); RSC publishes no stage-by-stage timetable.

• Submission and completeness check: After submission, RSC checks the files for completeness and the editorial team contacts the submitting author if something is missing. The manuscript is then assigned to a publishing editor at RSC or to an associate editor.
• Initial assessment by an editor: An editor assesses whether the manuscript is suitable for peer review, looking at scope, scientific quality, general interest and novelty. RSC's scope statement says the journal publishes research where there is significant crossover appeal to other audiences such as catalysis, biochemistry, nanoscience, energy, materials and environmental science. RSC says a manuscript may be returned without external review, or the authors may be offered a transfer to another RSC journal.
• External peer review: Manuscripts that pass the initial assessment are peer reviewed by independent experts in the relevant field. RSC's Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers page does not state how many reviewers are used. RSC's manuscript tracker shows the number of reviewers who have agreed to provide a report.
• Decision and revision: The handling editor makes the decision on the basis of the reviewer reports. For a revision, RSC asks for a response to the referees, figures as separate high-resolution files and a table of contents entry. RSC publishes no figure for the number of revision rounds. If a paper is rejected, authors may be offered the option to transfer to another RSC journal either during initial assessment or after reviewer reports.

Across inorganic-chemistry manuscripts targeting Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers, three issues consistently trigger desk rejection.

In our pre-submission review work, we see many Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers desk rejections trace to incremental synthesis. We also often find these cases involve weak structural characterization. A related pattern is that these cases often arise from missing inorganic-frontier framing.

Incremental synthesis without mechanism

Editors look for frontier advances. We observe submissions framed as marginal synthesis routinely desk-rejected.

Check incremental synthesis without mechanism before submitting to Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers →

Weak structural characterization

Editors expect X-ray crystal structures where applicable. We see manuscripts with thin structural data routinely returned.

Check weak structural characterization before submitting to Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers →

Missing inorganic-frontier framing

Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers specifically expects frontier focus. We find papers framed as routine inorganic without frontier positioning routinely declined. An Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers check can identify whether the package supports a submission.

Clarivate 2026 JCR release bibliometric data places Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers among top inorganic-chemistry journals.

Check missing inorganic frontier framing before submitting to Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers →

This page was researched from Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers' author guidelines, RSC editorial-policy materials, Clarivate JCR data, and our pre-submission review work on submissions.

The official RSC pages explain submission mechanics and article types, but they do not tell an author what separates a paper that clears the desk screen from one that gets transferred to Dalton Transactions. In our pre-submission review work with inorganic-chemistry manuscripts considering this journal, the decisive question is almost always whether the cross-disciplinary frontier contribution is visible early rather than buried in the discussion. The guide focuses on that editor-facing judgment rather than restating the published rules.

In pre-submission diagnostic work for top inorganic-chemistry journals, we consistently see four signals that distinguish strong submissions from weak ones. First, the contribution must be frontier. Second, structural characterization should be rigorous. Third, mechanistic insight should be provided. Fourth, frontier framing should be primary.

For Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers-targeted manuscripts, the single most consistent feedback class we deliver in pre-submission diagnostics for Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers is the routine-versus-frontier distinction. Editors expect frontier contributions. Submissions framed as routine synthesis without frontier positioning routinely receive "where is the frontier contribution?" feedback. We coach authors to lead with the frontier question.

For Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers-targeted manuscripts, beyond the rubric checks, three pre-submission diagnostic patterns recur most often in the manuscripts we review for Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers. First, manuscripts where the abstract reports synthesis without frontier framing are flagged. Second, manuscripts where structural characterization lacks crystallography are flagged. Third, manuscripts that lack engagement with Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers' recent issues are flagged.

The Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers submissions we coach toward acceptance distinguish themselves on three operational behaviors. First, the cover letter names the cross-disciplinary appeal (catalysis, biochemistry, nanoscience, energy, materials, or environmental science) in the opening paragraph, which is the explicit differentiator between ICF and RSC Dalton Transactions. Second, CCDC deposit numbers for any new crystal structures appear in the abstract or cover letter, not reserved for the supplementary.

Third, the recent-literature engagement section names at least two Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers papers from the past 18 months and explicitly frames how the new work advances beyond them.

Editorial triage at Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers is an initial assessment by an editor; RSC says only manuscripts that pass it are forwarded to reviewers. We coach researchers to design abstract, introduction, and conclusions for fast assessment.

Beyond methodology and contribution, RSC asks its editors and reviewers to focus on the science instead of the names, locations or career stages of the authors. Strong submissions reference Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers' recent papers explicitly.

For Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers-targeted manuscripts, beyond methodology and contribution, journals at this tier increasingly reward submissions that explicitly position the work within a specific subfield conversation rather than treating the literature as undifferentiated.

For Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers Reviews, RSC asks for a critical and in-depth discussion of a particularly relevant or interesting topic in inorganic chemistry: an authoritative, balanced and up-to-date overview, not a comprehensive list of all possible references, that identifies areas where further developments are needed and does not describe unpublished results. RSC asks authors of review-type articles (Reviews, Chemistry frontiers and Highlights) to send a brief proposal to the editorial office in advance.

For Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers specifically, three desk-rejection patterns recur in our pre-submission reviews. First, structural claims without CCDC deposit numbers cited inline (the journal expects CIF deposition at first submission, not at acceptance). Second, catalysis submissions that report turnover numbers without comparison to established benchmark catalysts in the same transformation, which reviewers consistently flag and editors increasingly pre-empt. Third, computational inorganic chemistry submissions that report DFT-derived bonding analyses without functional benchmarking against the relevant chemistry (the question "compared to what method?" is unforgiving here).

Before any Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers submission, we walk authors through a journal-specific pre-flight checklist that mirrors what the Editor-in-Chief (listed on the journal's editorial-team page; verify before quoting), the Associate Editors, and reviewers will actually look for: the cover letter names the cross-disciplinary appeal in the opening paragraph; the TOC graphic communicates the inorganic advance AND the adjacent-field implication; any new crystal structures have CCDC deposit numbers cited inline;

any catalysis claim is benchmarked against the established standard for the transformation; any computational result is benchmarked against the appropriate functional or wavefunction method; and the discussion engages at least two Inorganic Chemistry Frontiers papers from the past 18 months on adjacent inorganic-chemistry questions.