Scientific Reports Formatting Requirements: Complete Author Guide

Scientific Reports uses a straightforward unstructured abstract.

• Word limit: 200 words maximum
• Structure: Single paragraph, no subheadings
• Citations: Not allowed
• Keywords: Not required in the abstract. The journal allows up to 6 keywords separately in the submission system.

The 200-word abstract should summarize the study's purpose, methods, main results, and conclusions. Don't start with generic field-level statements. Get to the specific question your paper addresses within the first sentence or two.

Unlike some journals in the Nature family, Scientific Reports doesn't require a separate summary or significance statement. The abstract is the only summary component, and the journal explicitly says it does not support graphical abstracts.

Scientific Reports allows up to 8 display items, where figures and tables are counted together. This combined limit matches Nature's approach but is slightly more generous.

Figure specifications:

Scientific Reports-specific detail: Panel labels use lowercase bold letters (a, b, c), not uppercase. This is consistent with the Nature portfolio style. If you've been formatting for journals that use uppercase labels, make sure to change them.

Table requirements:

• Tables should be created in Word or LaTeX, not as images
• Every column must have a header
• Minimal horizontal rules (top, bottom, below headers)
• No vertical rules
• Tables count toward the 8 display item limit
• Large tables should be moved to Supplementary Information

Color figures: Scientific Reports is online-only, so all figures are published in color at no extra charge. There are no color reproduction fees.

Multi-panel figures: Common and encouraged. A figure with panels a through f counts as one display item. This is your main strategy for fitting within the 8-item limit when you have a data-rich paper.

Scientific Reports uses the Nature reference style, which is a numbered sequential citation system.

In-text citations: Superscript numbers (e.g., "as shown previously^1,2"). Numbers are assigned in the order references first appear in the text.

Reference list format:

1. Smith, A. B., Jones, C. D. & Williams, E. F. Title of article in sentence case. Sci. Rep. 14, 12345 (2024).

Key formatting details:

• Author names: Last name, followed by initials (e.g., "Smith, A. B.")
• Use "&" before the last author
• Journal names are abbreviated per ISO 4 standards
• Volume numbers are bolded in the typeset version
• No issue numbers for most journals
• Year in parentheses at the end
• DOIs are encouraged but not strictly required in the reference list

Author count: List all authors when there are 5 or fewer. For 6 or more, list the first 5 followed by "et al."

The current submission guidelines say references are limited to 60, though not strictly enforced. In practice, that means 30-50 references is still a normal target and a bloated list is still a quality signal editors notice.

Reference manager tip: Most reference managers include "Nature" as a citation style. This works for Scientific Reports. Don't use "Vancouver" style, which is close but not identical (the author format and journal abbreviation rules differ).

Scientific Reports calls supplementary content "Supplementary Information" (SI). It's published online alongside the article.

Supplementary Information structure:

• Supplementary Figures: Figure S1, Figure S2, etc.
• Supplementary Tables: Table S1, Table S2, etc.
• Supplementary Notes: Extended discussion or analysis
• Supplementary Methods: Additional experimental details
• Supplementary Videos: Video S1, Video S2, etc.
• Supplementary Data: Datasets and code

Formatting rules:

• All SI figures and tables should be compiled into a single PDF with legends
• Videos and large datasets are uploaded as separate files
• Each SI item needs a title and brief caption
• In the main text, cite SI items as "Supplementary Fig. S1" or "Supplementary Table S1"
• There's no strict limit on the amount of SI, but keep it focused

Supplementary Information is peer-reviewed at Scientific Reports. Reviewers are expected to evaluate the SI as part of their assessment, which is different from journals where supplements are reviewed more loosely.

Data availability: Scientific Reports requires a Data Availability Statement. Authors must specify where the data supporting the findings can be accessed. For large datasets, deposition in a public repository with an accession number is expected.

Title page (first page of manuscript):

• Full title (no abbreviations, no colons preferred)
• All author names with affiliations
• Corresponding author designation with email
• Abstract on the title page or on the following page

Cover letter: Optional but recommended. Scientific Reports doesn't use the cover letter to assess impact or significance. If you include one, keep it brief and focused on confirming the paper's scope fits the journal. Don't argue for novelty. That's not what Scientific Reports evaluates.

Scientific validity, not novelty. Scientific Reports evaluates papers for methodological soundness and scientific correctness, not for perceived impact or novelty. This is its core distinction from Nature and other selective journals. Your manuscript doesn't need to argue that the findings are transformative. It needs to demonstrate that the methods are sound and the conclusions are supported by the data.

Nature portfolio branding. Scientific Reports uses the Nature portfolio submission system, production pipeline, and style guide. If you've submitted to any Nature journal before, the system will be familiar. The formatting conventions are also consistent with the broader Nature portfolio.

ORCID iDs. The corresponding author must provide an ORCID iD. Co-authors are encouraged to link their ORCID iDs through the submission system.

Author contributions. Required. Must list each author's specific contributions. Both free text and CRediT taxonomy are accepted.

Competing interests. Mandatory declaration. Use the exact wording "The authors declare no competing interests" if none exist.

Ethics approvals. All studies involving human participants or animal subjects must include ethics approval details (IRB/IACUC name, protocol number) in the Methods section.

Reporting standards. Scientific Reports requires adherence to relevant reporting guidelines: CONSORT for clinical trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews, ARRIVE for animal research. Authors must complete appropriate checklists at submission.

Manuscript structure. Standard IMRAD: Introduction, Results, Discussion, Methods (or Introduction, Methods, Results, Discussion). Both orders are accepted. Methods can appear before or after Results.

No structured abstract. Unlike journals that require Background/Methods/Results/Conclusions headings, Scientific Reports uses a single unstructured paragraph.

Title length. Keep titles under 20 words. No abbreviations in the title. Avoid colons when possible. Scientific Reports follows Nature portfolio title conventions.

The live author instructions add a few small details that are easy to miss and expensive to ignore.

• Data Availability Statement placement. Scientific Reports requires the statement in every submitted manuscript and specifies that it belongs at the end of the main text before the References section.
• Competing interests language. The journal requires an explicit competing-interests statement for each contributing author, not a vague global sentence.
• Line and page numbering. The journal says those numbers are not added automatically for editors and reviewers, so including them yourself makes review easier.
• No footnotes and no graphical abstract. These are easy copy-over errors when authors recycle files from other journals.
• Table and legend sprawl. Figure legends are capped at 350 words each and tables are expected to stay within one page.

These are not prestige-journal flourishes. They are the small formatting decisions that determine whether your file package feels submission-ready the first time an editor opens it.

Scientific Reports is fully open access. All articles are published under a Creative Commons license (typically CC BY 4.0).

The current APC for Scientific Reports is approximately $2,190. This positions it between PLOS ONE (~$1,900) and Nature Communications (~$6,000+). Fee waivers and discounts are available through institutional agreements and for researchers from qualifying countries.

The APC is charged upon acceptance. It doesn't influence editorial decisions.

1. Panel labels are lowercase. Use (a), (b), (c) in figures, not (A), (B), (C). This is Nature portfolio convention and gets flagged in production.

1. Display items cap is combined. The 8-item limit includes both figures and tables. Plan your visual strategy early.

1. Data Availability Statement is mandatory. It must specify exactly where data can be accessed, not just "available upon request."

1. Reporting guidelines must be followed. CONSORT, STROBE, PRISMA, ARRIVE. Complete the relevant checklist and submit it with your manuscript.

1. Line numbers. Required for the review manuscript. Continuous numbering.

1. Double spacing. Required for the submitted manuscript.

1. Single PDF for initial submission. Don't submit separate files for the first round. Combine everything into one PDF.

1. Supplementary Information is reviewed. Don't treat it as a data dump. Reviewers will evaluate it.

In our pre-submission review work on Scientific Reports-targeted manuscripts, three patterns consistently predict formatting desk-screen failure at Scientific Reports (Nature Publishing Group). The patterns below are the same ones Rafal Marszalek and outside reviewers flag at first-pass triage.

Scope-fit ambiguity in the abstract. Scientific Reports editors move fastest on manuscripts whose contribution is obviously aligned with research evaluated on technical soundness rather than perceived novelty; multidisciplinary Nature-Publishing-Group megajournal. The named failure pattern: manuscripts without explicit data-availability statements extend revision rounds. Check whether your abstract reads to Scientific Reports's scope

Methods package incomplete for the journal's reviewer pool. Scientific Reports reviewers expect specific methodological detail. Methodology sections deferring statistical-analysis detail extend reviewer assignment. Check if your methods package is reviewer-complete

Reference-list and clean-citation failure mode. Editorial team at Scientific Reports (Nature Publishing Group) screens reference lists for retracted-paper inclusion. Recent retractions in the Scientific Reports corpus we audit include 10.1038/s41598-022-12547-6, 10.1038/s41598-021-08087-4, and 10.1038/s41598-023-15234-2. Citing any of these without a retraction-notice acknowledgment is an automatic desk-screen flag. Check whether your reference list is clean against Crossref + Retraction Watch

Manusights submission-corpus signal for Scientific Reports (Nature Publishing Group). Of the manuscripts our team screened before submission to Scientific Reports and peer venues in 2025, the editorial-culture mismatch most consistent across the cohort is scientific reports academic editors enforce reproducibility-first review; manuscripts without explicit data-availability and statistical-methodology extend revision. In our analysis of anonymized Scientific Reports-targeted submissions, Recent retractions in the Scientific Reports corpus include 10.1038/s41598-022-12547-6, 10.1038/s41598-021-08087-4, and 10.1038/s41598-023-15234-2.

In our pre-submission review work with manuscripts targeting Scientific Reports, three formatting patterns generate the most consistent production returns and editorial revision requests.

Panel labels submitted in uppercase instead of lowercase bold. Scientific Reports author guidelines specify that figure panel labels must use "lowercase bold letters (a, b, c)" per Nature portfolio convention. Authors preparing figures for journals that conventionally use uppercase (A), (B), (C) frequently submit panels with the wrong case. Production returns these figures for regeneration, adding weeks to the publication timeline. The lowercase requirement applies to panel labels in both the main figures and the Supplementary Information.

Data Availability Statement that reads "available upon request." The Scientific Reports author guidelines are explicit: "data available upon request" is not an acceptable Data Availability Statement. Authors must specify exactly where data are deposited and how to access them, including repository links. For large datasets, a public repository with an accession number is required before submission. Submissions without a compliant, specific DAS are returned at the desk before editorial assessment begins.

Reporting guideline checklist missing from the submission package. Scientific Reports requires completion of the relevant reporting checklist at submission: CONSORT for clinical trials, STROBE for observational studies, PRISMA for systematic reviews, ARRIVE for animal research. Authors frequently treat these checklists as post-acceptance documentation rather than submission requirements. Papers submitted without the appropriate completed checklist are returned with a request to resubmit before the manuscript enters editorial assessment.

A Scientific Reports formatting compliance check can verify your panel labels, Data Availability Statement, and reporting checklist compliance against Scientific Reports requirements before you submit.