Science Submission Guide 2026: Requirements, Format & What Editors Want

Decision cue: Before submitting to Science, compare your manuscript word-for-word against a recent Science research article in your field. If your methods are as detailed, your data are as comprehensive, and your novelty is as apparent, submission is reasonable. If you're cutting corners anywhere, fix them first.

Related: Science journal guide • Science acceptance rate • Avoiding desk rejection at Science

This guide covers everything you need to format and submit a manuscript to Science. The journal's submission process is straightforward, but the bar is exceptionally high.

Manuscript types at Science

Science publishes three main manuscript categories:

Research Articles. Standard research papers, typically 4,000-6,000 words including abstract and methods. These are the most common submission type. They report original research that tests specific hypotheses or answers specific questions. If you're unsure which category fits, this is likely your type.

Reports. Shorter papers (2,000-3,000 words) describing particularly novel or high-impact findings. These are for work that's genuinely surprising or significant. Most submissions from junior researchers belong in the Research Article category, not Reports.

Reviews. Solicited or proposed reviews of significant topics in science. These rarely come from unsolicited submissions. If you're not an established expert being asked to write a review, don't propose this category.

Essential formatting rules

Word processing. Prepare in Microsoft Word, Google Docs, or PDF. Do not submit in LaTeX or proprietary formats initially (though Science will ask for LaTeX source if accepted).

Font and spacing. 12-point font (Times New Roman or Arial), double-spaced throughout (including figure captions, tables, and references). Margins at least 1 inch (2.54 cm) on all sides.

Page limits:

• Research Articles: approximately 4,000-6,000 words for main text
• Abstract: maximum 125 words
• Impact Statement: one sentence (explained below)
• References: 40-60 is typical; no hard limit
• Main figures: 5 maximum
• Supplementary figures: 5 maximum

Title. Concise (typically 10-15 words), specific, and scientifically accurate. Avoid overstated language. Don't use "novel" in the title. Let the work speak for itself.

The abstract

Science abstracts are strictly limited to 125 words and must be comprehensive. Your abstract should:

• Open with the problem or question (1-2 sentences)
• State the approach or methods briefly (1-2 sentences)
• Present the main findings with key numbers or results (3-4 sentences)
• End with implications or significance (1 sentence)

Every word counts. Remove hedging language. Be direct. "We found X" beats "It is possible that X."

Example structure:

• Sentence 1: Problem statement
• Sentence 2: Why existing approaches are inadequate
• Sentence 3: Your approach
• Sentence 4: Main result with data
• Sentence 5: Secondary result
• Sentence 6: Implication or significance

Science abstracts don't include references. They stand alone as the summary of your entire paper.

The Impact Statement

Science requires a one-sentence "Impact Statement" explaining the work's significance. This isn't your take on importance, it's a clear statement of what the work enables or changes.

Good Impact Statements:

• "This study demonstrates that [specific finding] is required for [specific biological outcome], enabling new therapeutic targets."
• "Our results reveal that [specific mechanism] controls [important process], with applications to [field/disease]."

Weak Impact Statements:

• "This work has important implications for the field." (Too vague)
• "This is the first time anyone has studied X." (Novelty, not significance)

The Impact Statement should be a single declarative sentence, no colons or bullet points. It goes right after the abstract.

Methods section

Science has a specific expectation for methods: detailed enough to replicate the work, but not bloated. Here's how to approach it:

Subsections. Organize methods by topic (e.g., "Cell Culture," "Molecular Modeling," "Statistical Analysis"). Short papers might have fewer subsections than long ones.

Level of detail. Describe what you did, but not every parameter. For example:

• OK: "Cells were cultured in DMEM supplemented with 10% FBS at 37°C, 5% CO2 for 48 hours."
• Not OK: "We used a Falcon 6-well plate (Corning, product #353046) and a Heracell 150i CO2 incubator (Thermo Fisher, serial #XYZ)."

Citations for standard methods. If you're using an established protocol or method, cite it rather than re-describing it in detail. For example: "Cells were sorted by fluorescence-activated cell sorting (FACS) as described previously [ref]."

Novel or modified methods. Describe fully if you're doing something non-standard. Include justification for modifications.

Statistical methods. Always describe explicitly: sample size, statistical tests used, p-value threshold for significance, and how data were handled (e.g., outlier removal, normalizations). Describe any software used.

Data availability. State where data are deposited (e.g., GEO, NCBI, institutional repository). If data contain patient information, explain how access is restricted. Raw data or analysis code often must be made available to reviewers.

Figures and tables

Figures in Science are publication-quality and must be self-contained. Each figure should include:

Figure legend. Detailed enough to understand the figure without reading the main text. Lead with a single sentence stating what the figure shows.

Clarity. Fonts must be legible (usually 8-10pt minimum for axis labels). Avoid color schemes that are hard to distinguish for colorblind readers. Use high-contrast colors.

Panels. Main figures typically have 3-5 panels (A, B, C, etc.). Panel labels should be clear.

Error bars and statistics. All error bars must be defined (standard deviation? standard error? confidence interval?). Statistical comparisons should be marked (asterisks, p-values, n=X).

Figure numbering. Number figures consecutively. Refer to them in text as Fig. 1A, Fig. 2, etc.

Supplementary figures. These go in a separate supplementary information (SI) document and follow the same rules as main figures.

Tables

Tables should present data that can't be easily shown in figures. Keep them relatively simple. Use clear headings and units. In the caption, explain any abbreviations or symbols used.

The cover letter

Science requires a cover letter. It should be brief (three to four sentences) and include:

1. Opening. "We submit the enclosed manuscript [title] for consideration for publication in Science."

1. Significance. State concisely why the work is important and why it's suitable for Science. One sentence is fine. "Our findings reveal a previously unknown mechanism controlling X, with direct implications for Y."

1. Originality statement. "This work is original and has not been published or submitted for publication elsewhere."

1. Conflicts of interest. "The authors declare no competing financial interests" or list any that exist.

1. Suggested reviewers (optional). You can suggest 3-4 reviewers who are not recent collaborators. Provide names and email addresses. Don't suggest researchers from your own institution.

1. Contact information. Corresponding author name, phone, email, and institution.

The cover letter should be professional and direct. Don't oversell your work or use superlatives. Let the data speak.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information (SI) includes materials and methods (if too lengthy for main text), additional figures, detailed data, and extended discussions.

Science allows generous supplementary material. It's reviewed by peer reviewers and included in the published article online. This is where you can include details that didn't fit in the main text.

Organize SI with:

• Materials and Methods (if extensive)
• Supplementary Figures (labeled Fig. S1, Fig. S2, etc.)
• Supplementary Tables
• References cited only in SI

Common formatting mistakes

Too-long methods. Methods sections that run 3-4 pages are too long for Science. Use supplementary information for extensive details.

Vague statistical reporting. "Statistical analysis was performed" isn't acceptable. Say what test, what threshold, what sample size.

Inconsistent figure quality. Some figures publication-quality, others look like PowerPoint slides. Science figures must all be polished.

Weak figure legends. Legends that don't explain what readers are seeing. Remember: figures should be understandable without reading the main text.

No error bars or statistics on graphs. Show variability and how you tested for significance.

Submitted as compressed/archived file. Submit main manuscript as single Word or PDF file. SI as separate file.

Data availability and reproducibility

Science strongly prefers, and sometimes requires, public data deposition. Here's the standard expectation:

Genomic data. Deposit in Gene Expression Omnibus (GEO) or NCBI Sequence Read Archive (SRA).

Structural data. Deposit in Protein Data Bank (PDB).

Microscopy/imaging data. Deposit in institutional repository or BioImage Archive.

Other data. OSF, Zenodo, Figshare, or institutional repositories.

You'll provide accession numbers in the paper and a statement about data availability. Private or restricted data can be provided to reviewers under confidentiality agreements, but public deposition is preferred.

Code and analysis scripts should be available through GitHub, Zenodo, or supplementary information.

Before you submit

Use this checklist:

• [ ] Manuscript is double-spaced throughout, 12-point font
• [ ] Abstract is exactly 125 words or fewer
• [ ] Impact Statement is one clear sentence
• [ ] Main text is 4,000-6,000 words (excluding abstract, methods if in SI, and references)
• [ ] Methods are detailed enough to replicate
• [ ] All statistical tests are explicitly described with sample sizes and p-thresholds
• [ ] Figures are publication-quality with clear legends
• [ ] Error bars and statistical comparisons are visible on graphs
• [ ] All data sources are cited or deposited with accession numbers
• [ ] Cover letter includes significance statement and originality declaration
• [ ] All author conflicts of interest are disclosed
• [ ] Manuscript has been reviewed by collaborators or your institution's submission service

The submission portal

Science uses a Manuscript Tracking System (MTAS) for submissions. You'll need to:

1. Create an account on the Science submission portal
2. Upload main manuscript (Word or PDF)
3. Upload separate supplementary information file
4. Provide author information and affiliations
5. State conflicts of interest
6. Provide contact information for the corresponding author
7. Include abstract, impact statement, and key words
8. Upload figures (often auto-extracted from manuscript)

You can save and return to your submission. Submission isn't complete until you click the final submit button.

After submission

Science sends an automatic confirmation email with a manuscript number. This is your reference for all future correspondence.

Desk rejection decisions usually come within 5-10 days. If your manuscript passes initial review, Science notifies you that it's being sent to peer review. The first decision usually comes 60-90 days after acceptance for peer review.

You can view your manuscript status online in MTAS at any time.

Sources

• Science journal author instructions: https://www.science.org/content/page/science-information-authors
• Science editorial policies and standards
• Submission portal guidelines at MTAS
• Selected Science articles as formatting examples

Quick reference: formatting checklist

• 12pt font, double-spaced: ✓
• Main text 4,000-6,000 words: ✓
• Abstract 125 words max: ✓
• Impact statement (one sentence): ✓
• Methods reproducible: ✓
• Figures (5 main max, publication quality): ✓
• Statistical tests described with sample sizes: ✓
• Data deposited or available to reviewers: ✓
• Cover letter included: ✓
• All author conflicts disclosed: ✓

See our full Science journal guide for acceptance rates, review timelines, and what editors look for at desk review.