Abstract
A farewell from Graeme …
This issue marks the end of my term as Editor-in-Chief of JNIRS.
The founding Editor of the Journal of Near Infrared spectroscopy (JNIRS), Mr Tony Davies, with Ian Michael of IM Publications, laid the ground work for a successful peer review journal with the focus reporting findings of work utilizing the near infrared (NIR) region of the electromagnetic spectrum. I regard it as a privilege to have been asked to be Editor-in-Chief of JNIRS once Tony retired. I have also been acutely aware that I was responsible for the quality of the science published and hence the image of the journal and of NIR spectroscopy as an analytical technique.
As Editor-in-Chief, I have been keen to ensure that JNIRS published papers which are of a high standard. The days of NIR spectroscopy being regarded as a ‘black box’ technique are long gone. Today, readers of an original scientific paper can rightly expect papers to have (i) a short but informative title; (ii) an abstract which clearly summarises the work and states the novel contribution to knowledge; (iii) sufficient background information to explain why the work was undertaken; (iv) an hypothesis which gives a focus to the paper; (v) experimental procedures that are appropriate and reported in sufficient detail for others to understand what was done, evaluate its strengths and weaknesses, and if necessary repeat the experiment; (vi) results with discussion that test the stated hypothesis; and (vii) a conclusion which states, but does not over-state, the potential value of the work. Most importantly, for papers to be published in JNIRS, the paper should identify the significant spectral loadings information (wavelengths) that were utilised.
Scientists are often ‘too close’ to a project. By this I mean, it is not uncommon for authors to submit papers which contain unexplained abbreviations, do not fully describe the samples studied or the details of the experiment and some authors draw conclusions which are not supported by the results. The peer review model for scientific publications is respected by both scientists and non-scientists. It could be said that this is a form of ‘science by team work’ and the end result is the publications of quality scientific findings.
As Editor-in-Chief, I owe an enormous thank you to the Editorial Advisory Board members who were consulted from time to time on specific issues and for reviewing or adjudicating on papers. I am also in eternal debt to the Editors who supported me by providing reviews and by seeking reviewers and making recommendations on papers assigned to them. Their expertise and dedication have ensured the high standard we set for JNIRS.
The low turnover of Advisory Board members and Editors of JNIRS is testimony to the dedication of NIR scientists. Many have remained actively involved until very senior in years, a trend set by none other than the modern-day father of NIR spectroscopy Dr Karl Norris. Sadly, the contributions of some were cut short by ill health.
Reviewers, who find time in their busy schedule to read papers and prepare reports, are central to the peer review scientific process. I took the view that reviewers should primarily report to me with comments based on ‘how they see the paper’. Some papers are best reviewed by peers with very different expertise. It is the Editor’s/Editor-in-Chief’s role to consider the reviews as presented and make the decision that a paper should be accepted as is (this very rarely happens), be revised or if necessary rejected. I have occasionally sought a third opinion, sometimes from a member of the Editorial Advisory Board. I can assure reviewers that authors do appreciate the feedback you provide.
In my experience, even the most competent/experience/senior reviewers are keen to compare their report on a paper with comments made by the other(s) who reviewed the same paper. This, and seeing senior NIR scientists attend pre-conference courses, clearly demonstrates a willingness by NIR scientists to continue to learn more, so as to become even better at understanding and using NIR wavelengths.
Without scientists in many countries using NIR wavelengths to study a range of material and learning how to extract more and more reliable information from NIR spectra, there would be no role for JNIRS. I wish to thank the authors for submitting manuscripts and for responding in such a positive manner to the comments, criticism and suggestions made by the reviewers. I encourage authors to continue to enjoy testing new hypotheses and to submit the novel findings of their studies for publication. To early career NIR scientists, I say, do not fear the peer review process. The peer review system gives you the benefit of the experience of some of the most respected scientists in the world.
So why am I stepping down after overseeing 14 volumes and 84 issues of JNIRS? The short answer is to rebalance the many activities in my life: family, community, hobbies and academic (this will involve using NIR spectroscopy, which I plan to publish in JNIRS).
The NIR community is my second family, and I have agreed to continue my ties with JNIRS as an Editor under the guidance of the incoming Editor-in-Chief, Professor Roger Meder. Roger has experience with a range of spectroscopic techniques and is a leader in the basic and applied aspects of NIR spectroscopy, especially in the area of wood technology and forestry. He teaches chemometric/data processing and has been a Guest Editor for three special issues of JNIRS. The future of JNIRS is in very good hands.
Together we have witnessed many advances in the science of NIR spectroscopy and the world is a better place because of this.
Thank you all for your friendship, encouragement and support.
And a hello from Roger…
With the publication of the January 2018 issue of JNIRS, we mark 25 years since the first issue of JNIRS appeared in January 1993. It so happens that 1993 also marked the year in which I ran my first NIR spectra (on an ASD FieldSpec Mark 1 and a NIRSystems 5000). Since then, only two Editors-in-Chief (Tony Davies and Graeme Batten) have guided the journal to the position it holds today as the pre-eminent journal for NIR research. Graeme too has led the journal through the first year of ownership by our new publishers, Sage Publishing and I thank Louisa, Sophie and Lucinda of Sage for welcoming us to their stable of publications.
My first action as incoming Editor-In-Chief is to thank Graeme for the effort and devotion he has shown to the task over the last 14 years and, on behalf of the Editors and Editorial Board, I wish him all the best as he spends time with Lyn and the next generation of Battens. I am personally grateful that Graeme will continue to assist JNIRS as an Editor, and he has made the offer to assist me in learning the ropes of actual journal production. I understand too, that he will look to JNIRS as his preferred journal for publishing manuscripts from the backlog of data that he has accumulated in recent years.
Since Issue 1 of Volume 1, the journal has published some of the pivotal manuscripts in near infrared research, such as the RPD statistic, 1 the highly cited manuscript on variable selection, 2 the rapidly and highly cited review of band assignments in wood NIR, 3 a review of standardisation and calibration transfer, 4 advice on method selection 5 and how to include NIR results into an informative and meaningful manuscript. 6 Under Graeme’s management, we have seen the introduction of Tutorials and Technical Notes, which have proven to be useful in the training of the next generation of NIR spectroscopists. The journal could not be in better shape.
I look forward to working with you all to grow the success of JNIRS into the next 25 years (although I probably won’t last that long).
Thank you once again Graeme, and thank you all for your continued support of JNIRS.