With this issue, Molecular & Cellular Proteomics (MCP) is formally launching two initiatives, one old and one new, that manifest themselves as advisory committees. The composition of each, along with a listing of the often overlooked but truly essential support staff of the journal, is given on the new "second masthead" page.
The first of these new initiatives is the Data Set Advisory Committee, chaired by Associate Editor Patsy Babbitt, which is charged with helping MCP formulate guidelines and procedures for the electronic publishing of data sets. Their tasks include weighing the best formats to use and how they can be interrogated most effectively. In addition to the group of experts that have agreed to serve, there is a representative of HighWire Press, the publishing consortium that handles the e-version of MCP. This group will also advise the journal on its interactions with various existing databases so that we may provide the reader with the best access possible. Recently, we have been exploring the problems associated with annotation in the protein databases (and the errors contained therein that frustrate protein identification), and this issue will be further developed by our Data Set Advisory Committee with the view of making recommendations to address it. The creation of this committee has been planned since the earliest stages of journal development, and I am delighted that it has reached fruition.
The second committee is the Clinical Proteomics Advisory Committee, chaired by Julio Celis, also an Associate Editor of MCP, that we have created to help with an entirely different, but no less important, problem. One need only scan the previous issues of MCP (or recent issues of any of the other journals focused on proteomics) to realize that about half the current crop of papers directly address clinically relevant issues. For the most part, these involve the assessment of tissue of apparent clinical relevance by various proteomic methodologies to provide insight, usually in the form of profiles, which can be used for diagnostic and/or therapeutic purposes. Per force, such papers have two distinct but equally important facets, the proteomic measurements and the clinical samples (and their certification). Recognizing that few people exist that can evaluate both in a knowledgeable and timely way, we are developing a dual review system for such contributions, and the Clinical Advisory Committee, composed of several prominent physician/scientists, will help us achieve this. However, we hope they will do much more. This aspect of proteomics will clearly grow and certainly holds excellent promise for making immediate practical contributions to human and animal health. It is of great importance therefore that this literature be sound and reliable. MCP will strive to take a leadership role in setting standards for this area as part of a larger Clinical Proteomics Initiative. This latter effort is envisioned to include discussion forums, meetings, and, most importantly, coordination with the activities of other groups with similar objectives.
The formation of these advisory committees is in keeping with the founding principles of the journal that it should be an active force in helping the field of proteomics to develop and not simply be a repository of data. Thus, these committees welcome input on issues and concerns that are appropriate to their separate missions. Such memos should be sent to the respective chairs or to the journal feedback address.
HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
All ASBMB Journals | Journal of Biological Chemistry |
Journal of Lipid Research | Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education |