bioRxiv

bioRxiv
Title	bioRxiv
Discipline	Biology
Abbreviation	bioRxiv
Publisher	Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory
Country	United States
Frequency	Continuous
History	2013–present

bioRxiv

bioRxiv is an open-access preprint server for the biological sciences that enables rapid dissemination of manuscripts prior to formal peer-reviewed publication. Founded and hosted by Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, it has influenced communication among scholars associated with institutions such as Harvard University, Stanford University, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, University of Cambridge, and Max Planck Society. The platform interacts with journals including Nature, Science, Cell, PLOS, and eLife and is used by researchers affiliated with the National Institutes of Health, European Molecular Biology Laboratory, Broad Institute, and Wellcome Trust.

History

The service was launched in 2013 at Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory by leaders associated with the laboratory and figures from institutions like Rockefeller University, University of California, Berkeley, University of Oxford, and Yale University. Early adoption drew attention from proponents connected to the Howard Hughes Medical Institute, Wellcome Trust, and National Institutes of Health, while critics from editorial offices at Elsevier, Springer Nature, and Wiley debated implications for journals such as Nature and Science. Milestones include integration with CrossRef, indexing initiatives aligned with Europe PMC and PubMed Central, and policy shifts influenced by funders like the Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation and the Chan Zuckerberg Initiative. Key events related to uptake involved discussions at meetings organized by the American Association for the Advancement of Science, Gordon Research Conferences, and the Royal Society.

Content and Scope

bioRxiv hosts preprints covering subfields linked to units and labs at institutions like Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory, Harvard Medical School, Karolinska Institute, Institut Pasteur, Salk Institute, and Johns Hopkins University. Subjects span areas referenced by journals such as Nature Genetics, Cell Reports, PLOS Biology, and Genome Research, and intersect with projects from the Broad Institute, EMBL-EBI, and Wellcome Sanger Institute. Authors often later publish in outlets including Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, The Lancet, Journal of Clinical Investigation, and Molecular Cell. The repository's scope accommodates contributions related to model organisms studied at institutions like The Francis Crick Institute and research funded by agencies such as National Science Foundation, Medical Research Council, and European Research Council.

Submission and Screening Process

Submissions originate from investigators associated with laboratories at MIT, University of California, San Francisco, Princeton University, Columbia University, and University of Toronto. The platform implements a screening procedure involving staff with expertise similar to editing teams at journals like eLife, PLOS, and Nature Communications, and follows policies shaped by organizations such as COPE and ORCID. Metadata practices align with CrossRef, DataCite, and indexing services like Scopus and Web of Science. Authors may deposit versions that later appear in journals including Cell, Science Advances, Journal of Experimental Medicine, and Nature Medicine; partnerships exist with publishers including Springer Nature and Public Library of Science for submission transfer workflows.

Licensing and Copyright

Authors submit under licenses commonly used by universities such as Harvard, Yale, and University of Cambridge, and funder mandates from Wellcome Trust, National Institutes of Health, and Gates Foundation influence choices. Common license options parallel those offered by publishers like Elsevier, Wiley, and Oxford University Press and include Creative Commons frameworks used by PLOS and eLife. Copyright policies reflect practices at organizations like Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory Press and interface with institutional repositories at University College London, King's College London, and University of Edinburgh.

Impact on Scientific Communication

bioRxiv has reshaped dissemination patterns observed across communities linked to institutions like Stanford, MIT, University of California system, and Max Planck Society, influencing editorial practices at Nature, Science, Cell, and PLOS. The platform affected metrics considered by funders including NIH, Wellcome Trust, and ERC and prompted discussions at conferences such as Keystone Symposia and Gordon Research Conferences. Adoption by research groups at Broad Institute, EMBL, and Salk Institute accelerated preprint citations in journals like Nature Communications, eLife, and PLOS Biology and influenced policy at repositories like Europe PMC and PubMed Central.

Criticisms and Controversies

Critiques have been voiced by editors and researchers affiliated with Elsevier, Springer Nature, Wiley, and some societies such as the American Chemical Society and Federation of American Societies for Experimental Biology about issues including priority disputes, media coverage of non–peer-reviewed findings, and politicized interpretations. High-profile debates involved work from laboratories at Wuhan Institute of Virology, University of Hong Kong, and institutions engaged in pandemic research, intersecting with statements from WHO, NIH, and national governments. Concerns also relate to retraction practices overseen by COPE, the role of major funders including Wellcome Trust and Gates Foundation, and the interaction with indexing services such as Scopus and Web of Science.

Category:Preprint servers Category:Cold Spring Harbor Laboratory