Nature Communications Review Time: What to Expect at Every Stage

Decision cue: If you need a yes/no submission call today, compare your draft with 3 recent accepted papers from this journal and only submit when scope, methods depth, and claim strength line up.

Related: How to choose a journal • How to avoid desk rejection • Pre-submission checklist

Nature Communications publishes roughly 6,000-7,000 articles a year: more than most journals would consider high-impact. The tradeoff is volume against quality: a 20-25% overall acceptance rate, but a desk rejection rate that sits around 50%. Getting the timing right and understanding how editorial decisions are made can shave weeks or months off your path to publication.

How Nature Communications positions itself in the Nature portfolio

Nature Communications sits below Nature, Nature Medicine, Nature Biotechnology, and the specialist Nature journals in prestige. It's explicitly designed for high-quality science that lacks the narrow "exceptional advance" threshold those journals require. Think of it as the home for research that's methodologically rigorous, clearly significant within its field, and well-executed, but doesn't claim to reshape an entire discipline.

That positioning matters for timing. Nature Communications editors are experienced enough to distinguish "good paper, wrong journal" from "good paper, right journal." If your work would obviously fare better at PNAS, eLife, or a specialist journal like JCI, they'll desk reject it with a brief note. That's not a judgment on your science: it's scope curation.

The editorial pipeline: who sees your paper and when

Nature Communications uses professional editors (not active researchers) to handle most manuscript decisions. When you submit, a primary editor does the initial desk assessment. If the paper looks suitable, they may consult with a second editor or advisory board member before deciding whether to send out for review.

Here's what the review pipeline looks like:

Based on data from author reports and the journal's own published statistics, the median time from submission to first decision is around 7-8 weeks for papers that go to external review. Papers that are desk rejected come back faster: usually within 2-3 weeks.

Factors that slow your paper down

Nature Communications is a high-volume journal running on a tight editorial schedule. Several submission issues reliably cause delays:

Reviewer availability. Nature Communications has a large but finite pool of willing reviewers. Highly specialized papers in emerging fields sometimes take 6+ weeks just to secure two external reviewers. If your paper sits in "under review" for a long time, reviewer recruitment is usually the reason.

Incomplete submission. Missing files, wrong file formats, or incomplete author details trigger administrative holds before the paper even reaches an editor. Use the submission checklist in the author portal and submit everything in the correct format the first time.

Broad authorship disputes. Papers with many co-authors, especially across institutions and countries, sometimes encounter contribution statement disputes during submission. CREDIT taxonomy contribution statements are required: sort these out before you submit, not after.

Requests for additional data. Editors at Nature Communications sometimes ask for additional experiments or analyses before sending to review, especially if the study has obvious gaps. This pre-review revision round is common and adds 4-8 weeks.

What the editors are looking for at the desk stage

The desk acceptance threshold at Nature Communications is higher than most authors expect. The editors are evaluating:

Advance beyond existing literature. What specifically does this paper add that isn't already in the literature? "Confirms previous findings in a different context" almost always gets desk rejected. "Resolves a long-standing controversy" or "demonstrates a previously unknown mechanism" almost always goes to review.

Interdisciplinary or broad appeal. Nature Communications specifically values work that crosses disciplinary lines. A paper that matters only to specialists in one narrow subfield is a harder sell than one that connects, say, structural biology to drug development.

Technical execution. Are the key experiments appropriate and well-controlled? Is the sample size defensible? Do the main figures tell a coherent story? Editors are experienced scientists: they spot methodological shortcuts.

Writing and presentation quality. Nature Communications receives papers from non-native English speakers around the world. If the writing makes it hard to assess the science, editors flag it for English editing before formal review. Get a native speaker to review your manuscript before you submit.

Peer review at Nature Communications

External peer review at Nature Communications typically involves 2-3 reviewers. Reviews are substantive: often 1-3 pages per reviewer. Reviewers are identified by the editors, not suggested by authors (though you can suggest reviewers and these suggestions are sometimes used).

Nature Communications uses a modified open peer review model since 2016: once a paper is accepted, peer review reports are published alongside the paper by default, though authors can opt out. Reviewers are asked if they consent to attribution; many decline and remain anonymous.

The revision cycle is where a lot of time gets lost. First revisions at Nature Communications typically require significant new experiments or analyses: not just clarifications. Budget 2-3 months for a major revision response. The bar for a second revision is lower: editors usually make an accept or reject decision after one round of revision.

APC and open access

Nature Communications charges an APC of €5,390 (2025 rate). This is one of the highest APCs among multidisciplinary journals, which reflects Springer Nature's pricing strategy.

However, many researchers pay significantly less or nothing at all. Springer Nature has read-and-publish agreements ("significant agreements") with hundreds of institutions worldwide. If your institution has an agreement, the APC is covered entirely. Check the Springer Nature OA agreement finder before assuming you'll pay.

For researchers without institutional agreements, fee support and waiver options exist but are more limited than at journals like PLOS ONE or eLife. Plan for the full APC if you don't have institutional coverage.

Common reasons papers fail at Nature Communications

Scope creep. Framing a solid specialist paper as a field-changing advance. Editors read the advance framing in your cover letter against what the data actually show. If the gap is large, desk rejection comes fast.

Missing mechanistic insight. Papers that describe phenomena without explaining why they happen are a consistent weakness. Nature Communications values mechanistic work. Descriptive papers need an unusually strong significance argument to compensate.

Incomplete controls. Missing positive or negative controls in key experiments. In complex biological systems especially, reviewers will ask for them if they're not there.

Over-claiming in the discussion. Conclusions that extrapolate far beyond the data in the paper. Stay close to what you've demonstrated.

Practical submission checklist

• [ ] Cover letter clearly states the advance beyond published work (not just describes the study)
• [ ] Broad interdisciplinary relevance is explicit: why does this matter outside your field?
• [ ] All files in correct format (Word for manuscript, TIFF/EPS for figures)
• [ ] CREDIT contribution statements complete for all authors
• [ ] Key controls present and labeled in figures
• [ ] Data availability statement with specific repository links
• [ ] Competing interests and funding statements complete
• [ ] Writing reviewed by a native English speaker if English is not your first language
• [ ] Suggested reviewers list prepared (2-4 names with affiliations and email addresses)
• [ ] Cover letter doesn't pitch the paper as "suitable for Nature" or invoke journal prestige

Related resources

See our full Nature Communications journal guide for acceptance rates, editorial scope, and APC details.

• Nature Communications impact factor guide: IF trend, rankings, what it means for your submission
• Nature Communications APC 2026: open access cost, waivers, and institutional agreements
• How to choose the right journal: when Nature Communications is the right target vs. a specialty journal
• Cover letter templates: including a high-impact multidisciplinary journal template
• Nature Communications submission guide
• Nature Communications vs PNAS
• Impact factor data from Clarivate Journal Citation Reports

The Bottom Line

The 8-12 week timeline at Nature Communications is only relevant if you get past the desk. The desk decision comes in 7-9 days, and roughly 80% of submissions don't make it past that stage. Preparation before submission matters more than understanding the timeline after.

Sources

• Journal official submission guidelines
• Author experience data compiled from journal tracker communities (SciRev, Researcher.Life)
• Editorial policies published on journal homepage
• Pre-Submission Checklist , 25-point audit before you submit

See also

• Nature Communications Submission Process 2026
• Nature Communications Impact Factor 2026
• Is Nature Communications a Good Journal?

Compare Review Times Across Journals

See how Nature Communications stacks up against other journals in our review timelines comparison. For a head-to-head analysis, check Nature Communications vs PNAS or Nature Communications vs Science Advances.