Molecular Cell Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

These three elements are the first things readers encounter and what appears in email alerts.

Highlights: 3--4 bullet points, each 85 characters maximum (including spaces). No abbreviations. Each should state a specific mechanistic claim:

• "RING domain dimerization activates E3 ligase activity through allosteric repositioning"
• "m6A modification of pri-miRNA recruits DGCR8 through a structured RNA interface"

In Brief (eTOC blurb): ~40 words, written in third person. This appears in the electronic table of contents and email alerts. It should be accessible to non-specialists while capturing the main finding. Example: "Park et al. reveal the structural basis for substrate recognition by the CRL4-DCAF1 E3 ubiquitin ligase complex, explaining how a conformational switch enables selective targeting of DNA damage response proteins."

Graphical abstract:

• Dimensions: exactly 1,200 x 1,200 pixels (square, non-negotiable)
• Format: JPEG, TIFF, or PDF
• Minimum text size: 18 pt
• Must be a single cohesive visual, not a multi-panel collage
• Submit as the final image, Cell Press does not edit or alter it
• Should be understandable without reading the paper

For Molecular Cell, effective graphical abstracts typically show a molecular mechanism as a schematic: the protein complex, the structural change, and the functional consequence. Avoid cramming an entire model figure into the square. Simplify to the single most important conclusion.

• Word limit: 150 words maximum
• Structure: No formal subheadings; follow context-approach-results-significance logic
• Citations: Not permitted in the abstract

The abstract should name specific molecules (proteins, RNA species, complexes), the experimental approach (cryo-EM, proteomics, genetic screen), and the mechanistic finding. "We studied the role of protein X in process Y" is too vague. "We determined the 3.2 angstrom cryo-EM structure of the X-Y complex, revealing that X remodels Y through a conserved loop insertion mechanism" gives readers what they need.

Gel and blot images: Western blots and gels must not be spliced without clear indication (white space between non-adjacent lanes, noted in the legend). Brightness/contrast adjustments must be uniform across the entire image. Cell Press runs automated image integrity checks, duplications or manipulations, even accidental ones, lead to rejection. Every blot must show molecular weight markers with labeled sizes.

Structural biology figures: For cryo-EM or crystallography papers, include map quality panels showing representative regions. Use consistent color schemes across all structural figures. Provide PDB/EMDB accession numbers in the figure legend.

The Key Resources Table (KRT) is the most common source of revision requests at Molecular Cell. It is part of the main article, not supplemental information.

KRT columns:

What goes in the KRT: Antibodies (with target, host, clone), chemicals and recombinant proteins, commercial assays, deposited data (PDB, EMDB, GEO accessions), cell lines (with source and authentication), organisms/strains, oligonucleotides (with sequences), recombinant DNA (plasmids with Addgene IDs), and software (with version numbers and URLs).

What doesn't go in the KRT: Standard chemicals like SDS, sucrose, or culture media. The KRT documents resources needed for reproducibility, not a comprehensive inventory.

Items in the KRT must also appear in the Method Details text. All references cited in the KRT must be in the manuscript's reference list. Authors can create the KRT using Cell Press's Word template or their interactive webform.

STAR Methods required subsections:

1. Resource Availability, lead contact, materials availability, data and code availability
2. Experimental Model and Study Participant Details, cell lines, organisms, human samples
3. Method Details, all experimental procedures with complete protocols
4. Quantification and Statistical Analysis, statistical methods, software, sample sizes

Cell Press numbered citation style. In-text: superscript numbers in order of first appearance. Commas between multiple citations (^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. Mol. Cell 85, 123-135.

All authors listed (no "et al." in the reference list). "and" before the last author. Year in parentheses. Journal abbreviation per MEDLINE, volume in bold, comma between volume and pages. Period at the end.

Articles typically cite 60--80 references. Preprints are citable with the preprint server name and DOI, Cell Press has supported preprint citation since 2017, and Molecular Cell reviewers expect engagement with relevant preprints in your field.

For structural biology papers, cite PDB and EMDB entries as references in addition to listing accession numbers in Methods. This ensures database entries are findable from the reference list.

Supplemental figures/tables: Peer-reviewed and published alongside the article. Label as "Figure S1," "Table S1." No formal limit on supplemental items, but Molecular Cell editors push back if you bury main results in supplements. Each main figure should present a complete set of experiments addressing a specific question. Supplemental figures should contain controls, replicates, and supporting characterizations, not the results that drive your conclusions.

Data deposition requirements:

Molecular Cell will not publish structure papers without deposited coordinates. Accession numbers must appear in the manuscript text and in the Key Resources Table.

Source data files: Raw, unprocessed data underlying figures are increasingly expected, especially for quantitative measurements. This is separate from repository deposition, source data files are published directly alongside the article.

Image integrity screening is automated. Cell Press runs duplication detection software on western blots, gel images, and microscopy figures. Accidental duplication (reusing a loading control across figures, for instance) gets flagged and can lead to rejection even if the underlying data are valid.

Structural data tables have expected formats. Crystallography papers need a data collection and refinement statistics table. Cryo-EM papers need micrograph count, particle count, resolution (gold-standard FSC 0.143), and model refinement statistics. These tables belong in main figures, not just Methods.

Plasmid deposition is expected. New plasmids should be deposited in Addgene (or equivalent) with the Addgene ID in the Key Resources Table. If you can't share publicly, provide justification in the Materials Availability statement.

Manuscripts should begin with: full title, author names with superscript affiliations, full institutional addresses, lead contact email, CRediT author contributions (Conceptualization, Methodology, Investigation, Writing, etc.), Declaration of Interests ("The authors declare no competing interests" if none), and up to 10 keywords.

For large structural biology groups, the CRediT section matters for attribution. Specify who collected data, processed cryo-EM maps, built and refined the model, and designed functional experiments.

• Initial submission: Single PDF accepted from any source. LaTeX-compiled PDFs work fine.
• Revision stage: Cell Press Word template preferred. LaTeX accepted but there's no official template.
• Key Resources Table: Must be in editable table format (Word or the Cell Press webform) regardless of manuscript format.

Tip for LaTeX users: the KRT is tricky to format in LaTeX. Consider creating it in Word or Google Sheets even if the rest of the manuscript is in LaTeX. The table format is very specific and easier to manage in a spreadsheet.

The Key Resources Table alone can contain 50+ entries across multiple reagent categories, and a single missing entry triggers a revision. Combined with STAR Methods structure, graphical abstract specs, and image integrity requirements, there's a lot to get right before submission.

Molecular Cell submission readiness check checks your formatting against Molecular Cell's requirements, STAR Methods structure, reference style, word limits, and figure specifications. It catches structural formatting issues before they become revision requests.

For related Cell Press journals, see our guides for Cell Metabolism and Immunity. Browse our full journal submission guides for additional resources across publishers.

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

STAR Methods section absent or Key Resources Table missing. Cell Press author guidelines mandate a structured STAR Methods section for all research articles published in Molecular Cell. The STAR Methods section includes a Key Resources Table listing all reagents, software, and resources used, with catalog numbers and identifiers (RRID). Manuscripts submitted without a STAR Methods section, or with a conventional unstructured Methods section, are returned before editorial assessment. The Cell Press STAR authors guide specifies that the Key Resources Table is not optional for primary research.

Graphical abstract not provided or not self-explanatory. Molecular Cell requires a graphical abstract for all research articles. The graphical abstract must be a single image that summarizes the study's main finding in a visual format comprehensible without reading the manuscript. A common submission error is providing a cartoon that describes the experimental system rather than the conclusion. The Cell Press guidelines specify that the graphical abstract should convey "what the study is about, not how it was done."

Figure panels using rasterized images where vector graphics are required. Cell Press formatting standards require that all schematics, diagrams, and data figures be submitted as vector graphics (EPS, PDF, or AI) or at a minimum 300 dpi for photographs and 600 dpi for line art. Manuscripts where pathway diagrams and schematic figures are submitted as low-resolution bitmaps are flagged for figure revision before review. This is checked at the submission stage by editorial staff.

Mechanistic claims without orthogonal validation across at least two experimental approaches. Molecular Cell peer reviewers specifically evaluate whether mechanistic conclusions are validated by independent experimental evidence. A binding interaction shown by co-immunoprecipitation requires confirmation by an orthogonal approach (proximity ligation, structural analysis, or in vitro reconstitution). Manuscripts where a central claim rests on a single experimental modality without orthogonal support are routinely revised with requests for additional data before acceptance.

A Molecular Cell formatting and readiness check evaluates manuscript structure, STAR Methods compliance, and mechanistic validation evidence against these desk-rejection patterns before you submit.