Nature Cell Biology 'Under Review': What Each Status Means

Before the paper reaches external reviewers, a Nature Portfolio handling editor at Nature Cell Biology evaluates whether the cell-biology mechanism warrants Nature Cell Biology's selective editorial slots. The 6-day immediate-rejection median reflects this fast desk-screen cadence. A desk rejection most often means the handling editor concluded that the work would fit better at a sister Nature Portfolio title (Nature Communications, Communications Biology) or that the wide-relevance criterion is not met.

The Nature Portfolio editorial office confirms files are complete: manuscript with figures embedded, supplementary information separate, reporting checklists where applicable (ARRIVE for animal work, MIQE for quantitative PCR), cover letter directed to the editor, conflict-of-interest declarations, ethics-statement documentation including IACUC approval for vertebrate animal work, and data-availability statement.

The handling editor reads the paper and evaluates cell-biology advance, methodological soundness, and wide relevance. Nature Portfolio's published guidance lists four explicit criteria; most rejections happen here within the 6-day immediate-rejection window.

In parallel with the handling editor's primary read, ambiguous-fit papers are discussed at the Nature Cell Biology editor meeting where peer handling editors at sister Nature Portfolio titles weigh in on whether the paper would fit better at Nature Cell Biology, Nature Communications, or Communications Biology. This editorial-team discussion runs alongside the desk-screen and adds 3 to 5 days to the timeline that is invisible to the author in the portal.

Nature Portfolio handling editors at Nature Cell Biology typically invite two to three external reviewers. The recruitment window can take 7 to 14 days because cell-biology reviewers with topic-matched expertise (e.g., live-cell imaging specialists, structural cell biology, organelle mechanism) are scarce.

Once reviewers agree to review, Nature Portfolio asks reviewers to complete their report within 1 to 2 weeks, a timeframe Nature Cell Biology describes as avoiding compromise of quality for speed. The 1.7-month first-review-round average reflects reviewer-extension reality across the typical recruitment-plus-review cycle. Reviewer reports for Nature Cell Biology tend to be thorough; 2500 to 5000 word reports are typical for primary research papers.

After both reports return, the handling editor synthesizes them. Total submission-to-acceptance averages about 5.0 months per community-reported data.

• Rejection within 1 to 3 days: Administrative issue or immediate scope mismatch.
• Rejection within 3 to 10 days: Handling editor desk rejection. Most rejections happen here per the 6-day immediate-rejection median.
• Still Under Review after 2 weeks: Strong signal. Paper passed the steepest Nature Portfolio filter.
• Still Under Review after 10 weeks: Reviewer-recruitment or reviewer-report delay. A polite inquiry via the submission portal is appropriate.
• Status changes to "Reports Received": Reports are in; expect a decision within 2 to 3 weeks.

This is the most common anxiety we hear from Nature Cell Biology authors during the active editorial window. The honest answer: no, 6 weeks at Under Review puts you right at Nature Cell Biology's 1.7-month first-review-round average. Reports may already be in editorial synthesis with the handling editor preparing a recommendation. Most reviewer-driven delays come from reviewer-recruitment timing for cell-biology specialists rather than slow reviews. If the portal still says Under Review at the 9-week mark, the most likely explanation is that one of the assigned reviewers asked for an extension and the handling editor granted it. This is normal practice at Nature Portfolio even with the 1-2 week reviewer target.

What you should NOT do during the 6-to-9-week window is email the editorial office. Nature Portfolio handling editors at Nature Cell Biology are managing 40+ active papers; an inquiry at 6 weeks adds friction without accelerating the timeline.

If your Nature Cell Biology paper is rejected after review, the natural cascade depends on what the reviewers and handling editor cited:

Nature Communications is the most natural Nature Portfolio cascade because Nature Portfolio supports manuscript-transfer where the receiving editor can request reviewer reports from Nature Cell Biology, preserving substantial peer-review work. Nature Communications has a broader scope and an open-access publishing model. The transfer process takes 5 to 10 days.

Communications Biology is a Nature Portfolio open-access option for technically rigorous cell-biology papers where the wide-relevance criterion is narrower than Nature Cell Biology's bar.

Journal of Cell Biology (JCB) is a Rockefeller University Press cascade option for cell-biology papers with strong imaging or structural mechanism. RUP operates independently; reports do not transfer, but JCB editors may recognize Nature Portfolio reviewer reports informally.

Molecular Cell is a Cell Press cascade for molecular-mechanism papers where the broader cell-biology framing is secondary to the molecular-mechanism contribution.

Nature Portfolio asks reviewers at Nature Cell Biology to evaluate four things specifically. The table below maps each to actionable preparation.

Three patterns generate the most consistent reviewer concerns we see at Nature Cell Biology.

Mechanism without orthogonal confirmation. When the central cell-biology mechanism rests on one experimental approach (e.g., only imaging or only genetic perturbation), Nature Cell Biology reviewers consistently request a second orthogonal validation. The strongest revisions add complementary perturbation modalities.

Imaging methodology under-documented surface as reviewer requests. When live-cell imaging, super-resolution microscopy, or electron microscopy methods are thin on acquisition parameters, reviewers consistently request expanded methods. The strongest revisions add detailed microscopy methods including objective, NA, sampling rates, and image-processing pipelines.

Nature Portfolio venue mismatch flagged by handling editor. When the handling editor concludes the work is sound but the wide-relevance criterion is uncertain, transfer offers to Nature Communications or Communications Biology are common. Nature Portfolio editors take these transfers seriously.

Once the handling editor decides to send the paper for external review, Nature Cell Biology staff editors invite two reviewers (sometimes three for borderline-fit cell-biology papers) over 7 to 14 days because cell-biology subspecialty experts are scarce. Status updates flow through the Nature Cell Biology for-authors how-to-submit portal; editorial-office queries can reach cellbiol@us.nature.com per the Nature Cell Biology contact page.

This page was created from Nature Portfolio's public author guidance at nature.com/ncb/submission-guidelines/editorial-process, Nature Cell Biology editorial-process documentation including the 1-2 week reviewer target, Nature Portfolio peer-review guidance, community-reported transit data (6-day immediate rejection, 1.7-month first-review round, 5.0-month total handling), and Manusights pre-submission review experience with Nature Cell Biology-targeted manuscripts.

For the Nature Portfolio cell-biology landscape beyond Nature Cell Biology, see Nature Communications (broader scope with open-access), Communications Biology (Nature Portfolio open-access), Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology (review article focus), and sister Cell Press titles (Molecular Cell, Cell Reports). The choice across these titles depends on whether the central contribution is wide-relevance-cell-biology (Nature Cell Biology), broader-multidisciplinary (Nature Communications), open-access (Communications Biology), or review-article (Nature Reviews Molecular Cell Biology).

Reviewers at Nature Cell Biology typically draw from one cell-biology-mechanism expert and one broader-cell-biology specialist. Preparing a response template that addresses both perspectives accelerates revision rounds substantially.

For a pre-upload check of your manuscript against the Nature Cell Biology mechanism-plus-wide-relevance bar before submission, our Nature Cell Biology pre-submission diagnostic flags the orthogonal-validation gaps and narrow-framing weaknesses most likely to surface in reviewer reports.