Nature Genetics Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

Nature Genetics asks for an unreferenced abstract, and the length depends on the article type.

• Word limit: up to 150 words for Articles (Analysis: 100-150 words; Brief Communication: 70 words)

• Citations: Not allowed

• 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 Articles allow up to 8 display items (figures and/or tables) in the main text.

Figure specifications:

Extended Data: A maximum of 10 Extended Data display items. They are online-only, are not copy-edited or styled by the journal, and are not counted as main display items. 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 good practice. 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: Numerical references only, numbered sequentially in the order cited. References that are uncited or cited out of sequence may need manual reworking in production.

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 with periods, as in the journal's examples

• "&" before the last author

• No issue numbers

• Year in parentheses

Nature Genetics recommends, as a guideline, up to 50 references for Articles, which is 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.

Nature Genetics distinguishes Extended Data, Supplementary Information and Source Data.

Extended Data: A maximum of 10 display items, reviewed along with the main paper. Use this for additional statistical analyses, replication results, and functional validation experiments that are essential but don't fit in the 8 main display items allowed for Articles.

Supplementary Information: 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: Data underlying figures. Encouraged whenever possible; full-length, unprocessed gels and blots must be provided as source data for any relevant figures.

Genetics-specific data requirements:

• Linked genotype and phenotype data for human subjects must be submitted to a public repository with appropriate access control (for example dbGaP or the European Genome-phenome Archive)

• Sequencing data must be deposited in a recognized repository (EGA for controlled-access human data, SRA/ENA for open-access data)

• Custom code central to the paper must be available to editors and reviewers during peer review, and a Code availability statement is required; releasing it in a DOI-minting repository such as Zenodo or Code Ocean is best practice at publication

• Genotyping array data should be deposited with appropriate access controls for human data

Nature Portfolio requires accession numbers in the paper for the data types with mandatory deposition, and the editor's acceptance-in-principle instructions cover the journal's standards for the reporting of data and code. 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; Brief Communication titles are limited to 10 words or 90 characters)

• Author names with superscript affiliation numbers

• Affiliations with full institutional addresses

• Corresponding author(s) with email addresses

• ORCID iDs (the corresponding author of an accepted paper must provide one before the final version; encouraged for all authors)

Separate from the manuscript:

• Cover letter (uploaded as a separate file)

• Reporting Summary (life sciences research articles; the editor tells the corresponding author when to complete it, before peer review)

• 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 papers meet Nature Portfolio requirements and several editorial conventions that matter in practice for genetics and genomics research.

1. The reporting summary is required for life sciences research articles. Nature Portfolio asks authors to give details of elements of experimental and analytical design that are frequently poorly reported. It is made available to editors and reviewers during assessment and published with accepted manuscripts. Incomplete or vague responses can generate revision requests. Take the time to fill it out thoroughly.

2. Data availability is a requirement, not an aspiration. A data availability statement is required for all original research, and certain data types (including DNA and RNA sequencing data, genetic polymorphisms, and linked genotype and phenotype data) must be deposited in a public repository with accession numbers in the paper. Linked genotype and phenotype data for human subjects go to a public repository with appropriate access control, such as dbGaP or EGA.

3. Replication expectations depend on study type. The journal publishes no replication rule for GWAS. In practice, editors and reviewers look for either replication in an independent cohort or strong functional evidence for novel loci, and large meta-analyses are judged case by case.

4. Multi-ancestry studies are strongly encouraged. The journal publishes no rule on ancestry, but representation of non-European populations is a recurring editorial and reviewer concern. If your study is limited to a single ancestry group, the Discussion should address this limitation explicitly and outline plans for multi-ancestry replication.

5. Code availability expectations are high for methods-heavy papers. If your paper introduces or applies a new statistical method, Nature Portfolio requires the code to be shared with editors and reviewers during peer review and a Code availability statement in the paper; journals undertake peer review of code that is central to the manuscript. A GitHub repository with a clear README, example data, and installation instructions is good practice.

Nature Genetics submissions layer general Nature Portfolio formatting on top of requirements like data deposition mandates and the reporting summary. Missing any of these can delay your manuscript by weeks.

Nature Genetics pre-submission checklist 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.

For 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.

The expectation is 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 Portfolio policy requires a data availability statement for all original research, and mandatory deposition in a public repository (GEO, dbSNP, dbGaP, EGA and similar) for specific data types, with accession numbers in the paper. Custom code central to the paper must be available to editors and reviewers during peer review, with a Code availability statement in the paper.

Multi-ancestry representation absent for association studies. Nature Genetics editors apply heightened scrutiny to GWAS and population genetic studies performed exclusively in European ancestry cohorts. 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 submission readiness check evaluates manuscript structure, dataset scale, data availability compliance, and functional evidence against these desk-rejection patterns before you submit.

For a manuscript-specific signal before you submit, run a Nature Genetics submission readiness check.

Or see example reports before you finalize.