Microorganisms Submission Guide

Source: Clarivate JCR 2024, MDPI editorial disclosures (accessed April 2026).

Source: Microorganisms author guidelines.

Use this page when deciding:

• whether the microbiology contribution is substantive
• whether methodology is rigorous
• whether microbiology framing is articulated

• a clear microbiology contribution
• rigorous methodology
• microbiology framing
• reproducibility (strain ID, protocols)
• a cover letter establishing the contribution

• Weak microbiology contribution.
• Methodological gaps.
• Missing microbiology framing.
• General biology without microbiological focus.

Microorganisms is a flagship MDPI microbiology journal.

Microbiology standard: the journal differentiates from broader life-sciences venues by demanding microbiology contributions.

Methodological-rigor expectation: editors expect validated experimental methods.

The 20-30% desk rejection rate: initial editorial screen.

The strongest Microorganisms cover letters establish:

• the microbiology contribution
• the methodological approach
• the microbiology framing
• the central finding

• Is Microorganisms a good journal?

Before upload, run your manuscript through a Microorganisms microbiology check.

In our pre-submission review work with microbiology manuscripts targeting Microorganisms, three patterns generate the most consistent desk rejections.

In our experience, roughly 35% of Microorganisms desk rejections trace to weak microbiology contribution. In our experience, roughly 25% involve methodological gaps. In our experience, roughly 20% arise from missing microbiology framing.

• Weak microbiology contribution. Editors look for substantive advances. We observe submissions framed as marginal extensions routinely desk-rejected.

• Methodological gaps. Editors expect validated experimental methods. We see manuscripts with thin methodology routinely returned.

• Missing microbiology framing. Microorganisms specifically expects microbiological focus. We find papers framed as general biology without microbiology positioning routinely declined. A Microorganisms microbiology check can identify whether the package supports a submission.

Clarivate JCR 2024 bibliometric data places Microorganisms among microbiology journals.

In pre-submission diagnostic work for top microbiology journals, we consistently see four signals that distinguish strong submissions from weak ones. First, the contribution must be substantive. Second, methodology should be rigorous. Third, microbiology framing should be primary. Fourth, reproducibility should be appropriate.

The single most consistent feedback class we deliver in pre-submission diagnostics for Microorganisms is the general-versus-microbiology distinction. Editors expect microbiology contributions. Submissions framed as general biology without microbiology positioning routinely receive "where is the microbiology contribution?" feedback. We coach authors to lead with the microbiology question.

Beyond the rubric checks, three pre-submission diagnostic patterns recur most often in the manuscripts we review for Microorganisms. First, manuscripts where the abstract reports findings without microbiology framing are flagged. Second, manuscripts where methodology lacks strain identification are flagged. Third, manuscripts that lack engagement with Microorganisms' recent issues are flagged.

The strongest manuscripts we coach distinguish themselves on three operational behaviors. First, they confine the cover letter to one page. Second, they include a one-sentence elevator pitch. Third, they identify the specific recent Microorganisms articles that this manuscript builds on.

Editorial triage at Microorganisms operates on limited time per manuscript. Editors typically scan abstract, introduction, methodology, and conclusions before deciding whether to invite reviewer engagement. We coach researchers to design abstract, introduction, and conclusions for fast assessment.

Beyond methodology and contribution, Microorganisms weights author-team authority within the microbiology subfield. Strong submissions reference Microorganisms' recent papers explicitly.

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.

The single most consistent feedback class we deliver is the synthesis-versus-survey distinction. A comprehensive survey catalogs recent papers. A synthesis offers an organizing framework. We coach researchers to articulate their organizing argument in one sentence before drafting.

Beyond the rubric checks, three pre-submission diagnostic patterns recur most often. First, manuscripts where the abstract leads with context lose force. Second, manuscripts where the methods lack quantitative rigor are flagged. Third, manuscripts that lack engagement with the journal's recent issues are at risk.