Nature Genetics Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

Nature Genetics uses an unstructured abstract, consistent with all Nature Portfolio journals.

• Word limit: 150 words maximum
• Structure: Unstructured (single paragraph)
• Citations: Not allowed
• Keywords: Not submitted by authors; assigned editorially
• Abbreviations: Spell out at first use within the abstract

For genetics papers, the abstract should state the study design (GWAS, exome sequencing, functional genomics, etc.), the sample size, the key finding (number of loci identified, effect sizes, functional mechanism), and the broader significance.

Be specific with numbers. "We identified 47 genome-wide significant loci associated with trait X in a meta-analysis of 250,000 individuals" is far stronger than "We identified multiple novel loci in a large-scale study." Nature Genetics reviewers expect precision because the field generates quantitative results that can be stated concisely.

A detail that trips up first-time Nature Genetics authors: don't list all significant loci in the abstract. Pick the 2-3 most notable findings and summarize the rest with a count. The 150-word limit doesn't leave room for a results table.

Nature Genetics allows up to 6 display items (figures and tables combined) in the main text.

Figure specifications:

Extended Data: Up to 10 Extended Data figures or tables. Peer-reviewed, published inline with the article, and don't count toward the 6-item limit. For genetics papers, Extended Data commonly holds regional association plots, additional QQ plots, forest plots for replication cohorts, and gene expression data.

Supplementary Information: Separate downloadable files for additional tables, figures, notes, and large datasets. Supplementary Tables are often submitted as Excel files, which is preferred for large tables of GWAS results, gene lists, and cohort characteristics.

Genetics-specific figure conventions: Manhattan plots must include a clear genome-wide significance line (typically P = 5 x 10^-8). QQ plots should show observed vs. expected P-value distributions with a genomic inflation factor (lambda) annotated. LocusZoom or regional association plots should include LD color coding referenced to the lead SNP. These aren't formal requirements, but omitting them will prompt reviewer comments.

Color-blind-friendly palettes are strongly encouraged. Nature Portfolio has been pushing this across all journals since 2020. Avoid red-green color combinations in Manhattan plots and heatmaps. Use colorblind-safe alternatives from ColorBrewer or similar tools.

Nature Genetics uses the standard Nature citation style.

In-text citations: Superscript numbers, numbered in order of first appearance. Multiple citations separated by commas (e.g., "^1,2,3"), ranges with hyphens (e.g., "^4-8").

Reference list format:

1. Smith, A. B., Johnson, C. D. & Williams, E. F. Title of article. Nat. Genet. 57, 123-130 (2025).

Key formatting details:

• Author names: Last name, comma, initials without periods
• "&" before the last author
• Journal names abbreviated per ISO 4
• Volume in bold
• No issue numbers
• Year in parentheses
• DOIs encouraged but not required in the reference list

Nature Genetics has a reference cap of approximately 50 for Articles, more generous than the main Nature journal's ~30. This reflects the need to cite prior GWAS studies, consortium papers, and replication cohorts. Large-scale genetic studies routinely involve multiple prior discoveries that need citation.

For GWAS papers, it's common to cite the NHGRI-EBI GWAS Catalog as a resource for prior associations. Reference it properly with the publication DOI, not just the URL.

One thing to watch: consortium papers often have hundreds of authors, which takes up significant reference list space. Nature style lists all authors (no "et al." in the reference list), so a single consortium reference can run to several lines. Plan for this when budgeting your reference count.

Nature Genetics uses the standard Nature Portfolio tiered system.

Extended Data (Tier 1): Up to 10 figures or tables. Peer-reviewed. Use this for additional statistical analyses, replication results, and functional validation experiments that are essential but don't fit in the 6 main display items.

Supplementary Information (Tier 2): Downloadable files. Supplementary Tables are typically Excel files for large datasets. Supplementary Notes contain extended methodological descriptions, mathematical derivations, or additional cohort details.

Source Data (Tier 3): Raw data underlying figures. Required for all main and Extended Data figures.

Genetics-specific data requirements:

• GWAS summary statistics must be deposited in a public repository (GWAS Catalog, dbGaP, or equivalent) and made available upon publication
• Sequencing data must be deposited in a recognized repository (EGA for controlled-access human data, SRA/ENA for open-access data)
• Code for custom analyses must be shared via a public repository (GitHub + Zenodo DOI)
• Genotyping array data should be deposited with appropriate access controls for human data

Nature Genetics enforces data deposition actively. The Data Availability statement is checked during production, and papers won't proceed to publication without valid accession numbers. Don't leave data deposition until the last minute. Start the submission process at the target repository when you begin writing the manuscript.

Nature Genetics follows the standard Nature Portfolio manuscript structure. There's no formal "cover page" in the clinical journal sense, but the manuscript must begin with:

• Title (concise, typically under 100 characters)
• Author names with superscript affiliation numbers
• Affiliations with full institutional addresses
• Corresponding author(s) with email addresses
• ORCID iDs (required for corresponding author, encouraged for all)

Separate from the manuscript:

• Cover letter (uploaded as a separate file)
• Reporting Summary (mandatory, uploaded separately)
• GWAS checklist (if applicable, uploaded separately)
• Conflict of interest declarations (entered in the submission system)

The cover letter should address why the findings are appropriate for Nature Genetics specifically, the novelty relative to prior GWAS or genetic studies, and any aspects that might raise editorial questions (e.g., sample size, population representation, functional validation depth).

Nature Genetics has several requirements and editorial conventions that go beyond standard Nature Portfolio guidelines.

1. The Life Sciences Reporting Summary is mandatory and taken seriously. This checklist covers statistical methods, antibody validation, cell line authentication, animal study reporting, and more. It's shared with reviewers, who use it to evaluate methodological rigor. Incomplete or vague checklist responses will generate revision requests. Take the time to fill it out thoroughly.

2. GWAS papers have a specific checklist. If your paper reports genome-wide association results, you must complete the Nature Genetics GWAS checklist. This covers quality control (call rate, HWE filtering, relatedness checks), population stratification (principal components, genomic control), imputation (reference panel, software, quality thresholds), significance criteria (P-value threshold, multiple testing correction), and replication strategy.

3. Data availability is enforced, not aspirational. Nature Genetics was one of the first journals to mandate public deposition of GWAS summary statistics. Full summary statistics must be available upon publication, either through the GWAS Catalog or another public repository. Controlled-access individual-level data should be deposited in dbGaP or EGA with appropriate governance.

4. Replication expectations depend on study type. For novel GWAS loci, Nature Genetics expects either replication in an independent cohort or strong functional evidence. For large meta-analyses (e.g., 500,000+ samples), the statistical evidence may be considered sufficient without separate replication, but this is evaluated case by case.

5. Multi-ancestry studies are strongly encouraged. Nature Genetics editors have increasingly pushed for studies that include non-European populations. If your study is limited to a single ancestry group, the Discussion should address this limitation explicitly and outline plans for multi-ancestry replication.

6. Code availability expectations are high for methods-heavy papers. If your paper introduces or applies a new statistical method, the code must be publicly available, documented, and functional. Reviewers will test it. A GitHub repository with a clear README, example data, and installation instructions is the minimum expectation.

Nature Genetics submissions layer general Nature Portfolio formatting on top of genetics-specific requirements like the GWAS checklist, data deposition mandates, and the Life Sciences Reporting Summary. Missing any of these can delay your manuscript by weeks.

Nature Genetics submission readiness check checks your formatting against Nature Genetics' requirements, including structural elements, reference style, word limits, and the presence of required checklists and data availability statements. It's particularly useful for catching formatting issues that are easy to overlook when you're focused on the genetics.

For related journals in the Nature Portfolio, see our Nature formatting requirements guide and our full collection of journal submission guides.

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

Dataset scale insufficient for the genetic claim being made. Nature Genetics editors evaluate whether the sample sizes and dataset scales match the genetic architecture of the trait or association being studied. GWAS submissions with discovery cohorts below 50,000 participants for common complex traits are routinely questioned at desk review, given that the journal routinely publishes studies with hundreds of thousands to millions of samples. Editors are explicit that sample size should reflect current state-of-the-art for the specific association, not just be "adequately powered" in the traditional sense.

Code and data not available or not committed at submission. Nature Genetics, as a Nature Portfolio journal, requires that all custom code used in the analysis be made publicly available at time of submission, not at acceptance. The data availability policy requires that all datasets supporting the conclusions be deposited in a public repository (GEO, dbSNP, TCGA, etc.) with accession numbers included in the manuscript. Submissions where code or data are described as "available upon request" are no longer accepted. This is checked during editorial processing.

Multi-ancestry representation absent for association studies. Since 2021, Nature Genetics editors apply heightened scrutiny to GWAS and population genetic studies performed exclusively in European ancestry cohorts. Author guidelines note that "studies restricted to European ancestry populations may not adequately capture global genetic architecture." Submissions that do not include multi-ancestry replication or explicitly address the single-ancestry limitation with a justified research rationale are asked to address this in revision or at desk.

Functional validation missing for novel genetic associations. Nature Genetics peer reviewers expect that novel genetic associations, particularly for genes not previously linked to a trait, are accompanied by functional evidence connecting the associated variant to a plausible molecular mechanism. A GWAS hit in a novel locus without supporting eQTL, expression data, animal model, or in vitro validation is considered hypothesis-generating rather than mechanistically sufficient. Reviewers consistently request functional follow-up before accepting novel associations as contributions.

A Nature Genetics formatting and readiness check evaluates manuscript structure, dataset scale, data availability compliance, and functional evidence against these desk-rejection patterns before you submit.