Example of PLOS Biology format
Recent searches

Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
Look Inside
Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format Example of PLOS Biology format
Sample paper formatted on SciSpace - SciSpace
This content is only for preview purposes. The original open access content can be found here.
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

PLOS Biology — Template for authors

Publisher: PLOS
Categories Rank Trend in last 3 yrs
Agricultural and Biological Sciences (all) #6 of 209 down down by 1 rank
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology (all) #17 of 204 down down by 2 ranks
Neuroscience (all) #10 of 110 down down by 2 ranks
Immunology and Microbiology (all) #6 of 45 down down by 1 rank
journal-quality-icon Journal quality:
High
calendar-icon Last 4 years overview: 1445 Published Papers | 15955 Citations
indexed-in-icon Indexed in: Scopus
last-updated-icon Last updated: 15/07/2020
Related journals
Insights
General info
Top papers
Popular templates
Get started guide
Why choose from SciSpace
FAQ

Related Journals

open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

EMBO Press

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 15.6
SJR: 8.523
SNIP: 2.323
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Elsevier

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 12.4
SJR: 3.822
SNIP: 2.504
open access Open Access
recommended Recommended

Elsevier

Quality:  
High
CiteRatio: 4.9
SJR: 0.657
SNIP: 0.944

Journal Performance & Insights

Impact Factor

CiteRatio

Determines the importance of a journal by taking a measure of frequency with which the average article in a journal has been cited in a particular year.

A measure of average citations received per peer-reviewed paper published in the journal.

7.076

16% from 2018

Impact factor for PLOS Biology from 2016 - 2019
Year Value
2019 7.076
2018 8.386
2017 9.163
2016 9.797
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

11.0

4% from 2019

CiteRatio for PLOS Biology from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 11.0
2019 10.6
2018 11.3
2017 12.8
2016 12.0
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

insights Insights

  • Impact factor of this journal has decreased by 16% in last year.
  • This journal’s impact factor is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • CiteRatio of this journal has increased by 4% in last years.
  • This journal’s CiteRatio is in the top 10 percentile category.

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR)

Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP)

Measures weighted citations received by the journal. Citation weighting depends on the categories and prestige of the citing journal.

Measures actual citations received relative to citations expected for the journal's category.

4.127

8% from 2019

SJR for PLOS Biology from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 4.127
2019 4.488
2018 4.783
2017 4.941
2016 5.06
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

2.005

3% from 2019

SNIP for PLOS Biology from 2016 - 2020
Year Value
2020 2.005
2019 2.066
2018 2.102
2017 2.066
2016 1.98
graph view Graph view
table view Table view

insights Insights

  • SJR of this journal has decreased by 8% in last years.
  • This journal’s SJR is in the top 10 percentile category.

insights Insights

  • SNIP of this journal has decreased by 3% in last years.
  • This journal’s SNIP is in the top 10 percentile category.
PLOS Biology

Guideline source: View

All company, product and service names used in this website are for identification purposes only. All product names, trademarks and registered trademarks are property of their respective owners.

Use of these names, trademarks and brands does not imply endorsement or affiliation. Disclaimer Notice

PLOS

PLOS Biology

PLOS Biology is an open-access, peer-reviewed general biology journal published by the Public Library of Science (PLOS), a nonprofit organization of scientists and physicians committed to making the world's scientific and medical literature a public resource. New articles are ...... Read More

Agricultural and Biological Sciences

i
Last updated on
14 Jul 2020
i
ISSN
1544-9173
i
Impact Factor
High - 2.417
i
Open Access
Yes
i
Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy
Green faq
i
Plagiarism Check
Available via Turnitin
i
Endnote Style
Download Available
i
Bibliography Name
plos2015
i
Citation Type
Numbered
[25]
i
Bibliography Example
Beenakker CWJ. Specular Andreev Reflection in Graphene. Phys Rev Lett. 2006;97(6):067007.

Top papers written in this journal

open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.0040088
Relaxed Phylogenetics and Dating with Confidence
Alexei J. Drummond1, Simon Y. W. Ho1, Matthew J. Phillips1, Andrew Rambaut1
14 Mar 2006 - PLOS Biology

Abstract:

In phylogenetics, the unrooted model of phylogeny and the strict molecular clock model are two extremes of a continuum. Despite their dominance in phylogenetic inference, it is evident that both are biologically unrealistic and that the real evolutionary process lies between these two extremes. Fortunately, intermediate model... In phylogenetics, the unrooted model of phylogeny and the strict molecular clock model are two extremes of a continuum. Despite their dominance in phylogenetic inference, it is evident that both are biologically unrealistic and that the real evolutionary process lies between these two extremes. Fortunately, intermediate models employing relaxed molecular clocks have been described. These models open the gate to a new field of “relaxed phylogenetics.” Here we introduce a new approach to performing relaxed phylogenetic analysis. We describe how it can be used to estimate phylogenies and divergence times in the face of uncertainty in evolutionary rates and calibration times. Our approach also provides a means for measuring the clocklikeness of datasets and comparing this measure between different genes and phylogenies. We find no significant rate autocorrelation among branches in three large datasets, suggesting that autocorrelated models are not necessarily suitable for these data. In addition, we place these datasets on the continuum of clocklikeness between a strict molecular clock and the alternative unrooted extreme. Finally, we present analyses of 102 bacterial, 106 yeast, 61 plant, 99 metazoan, and 500 primate alignments. From these we conclude that our method is phylogenetically more accurate and precise than the traditional unrooted model while adding the ability to infer a timescale to evolution. read more read less

Topics:

Molecular clock (51%)51% related to the paper, Phylogenetic tree (50%)50% related to the paper
View PDF
5,297 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.1000412
Improving Bioscience Research Reporting: The ARRIVE Guidelines for Reporting Animal Research
Carol Kilkenny, William J Browne1, Innes C. Cuthill1, Michael Emerson2, Douglas G. Altman3
29 Jun 2010 - PLOS Biology

Abstract:

animals used (i.e., species/strain, sex, and age/weight). Most of the papers surveyed did not report using randomisation (87%) or blinding (86%) to reduce bias in animal selection and outcome assessment. Only 70% of the publications that used statistical methods fully described them and presented the results with a measure of... animals used (i.e., species/strain, sex, and age/weight). Most of the papers surveyed did not report using randomisation (87%) or blinding (86%) to reduce bias in animal selection and outcome assessment. Only 70% of the publications that used statistical methods fully described them and presented the results with a measure of precision or variability [5]. These findings are a cause for concern and are consistent with reviews of many research areas, including clinical studies, published in recent years [2–22]. read more read less

Topics:

Blinding (52%)52% related to the paper
View PDF
5,253 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.0060159
Mapping the Structural Core of Human Cerebral Cortex
Patric Hagmann1, Leila Cammoun2, Xavier Gigandet2, Reto Meuli1, Christopher J. Honey3, Van J. Wedeen4, Olaf Sporns3
01 Jul 2008 - PLOS Biology

Abstract:

Structurally segregated and functionally specialized regions of the human cerebral cortex are interconnected by a dense network of cortico-cortical axonal pathways. By using diffusion spectrum imaging, we noninvasively mapped these pathways within and across cortical hemispheres in individual human participants. An analysis o... Structurally segregated and functionally specialized regions of the human cerebral cortex are interconnected by a dense network of cortico-cortical axonal pathways. By using diffusion spectrum imaging, we noninvasively mapped these pathways within and across cortical hemispheres in individual human participants. An analysis of the resulting large-scale structural brain networks reveals a structural core within posterior medial and parietal cerebral cortex, as well as several distinct temporal and frontal modules. Brain regions within the structural core share high degree, strength, and betweenness centrality, and they constitute connector hubs that link all major structural modules. The structural core contains brain regions that form the posterior components of the human default network. Looking both within and outside of core regions, we observed a substantial correspondence between structural connectivity and resting-state functional connectivity measured in the same participants. The spatial and topological centrality of the core within cortex suggests an important role in functional integration. read more read less

Topics:

Cortex (anatomy) (55%)55% related to the paper, Connectome (51%)51% related to the paper, Cerebral cortex (51%)51% related to the paper, Brain mapping (50%)50% related to the paper
View PDF
3,639 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.0020363
Human MicroRNA Targets
05 Oct 2004 - PLOS Biology

Abstract:

MicroRNAs (miRNAs) interact with target mRNAs at specific sites to induce cleavage of the message or inhibit translation. The specific function of most mammalian miRNAs is unknown. We have predicted target sites on the 3′ untranslated regions of human gene transcripts for all currently known 218 mammalian miRNAs to facilitate... MicroRNAs (miRNAs) interact with target mRNAs at specific sites to induce cleavage of the message or inhibit translation. The specific function of most mammalian miRNAs is unknown. We have predicted target sites on the 3′ untranslated regions of human gene transcripts for all currently known 218 mammalian miRNAs to facilitate focused experiments. We report about 2,000 human genes with miRNA target sites conserved in mammals and about 250 human genes conserved as targets between mammals and fish. The prediction algorithm optimizes sequence complementarity using position-specific rules and relies on strict requirements of interspecies conservation. Experimental support for the validity of the method comes from known targets and from strong enrichment of predicted targets in mRNAs associated with the fragile X mental retardation protein in mammals. This is consistent with the hypothesis that miRNAs act as sequence-specific adaptors in the interaction of ribonuclear particles with translationally regulated messages. Overrepresented groups of targets include mRNAs coding for transcription factors, components of the miRNA machinery, and other proteins involved in translational regulation, as well as components of the ubiquitin machinery, representing novel feedback loops in gene regulation. Detailed information about target genes, target processes, and open-source software for target prediction (miRanda) is available at http://www.microrna.org. Our analysis suggests that miRNA genes, which are about 1% of all human genes, regulate protein production for 10% or more of all human genes. read more read less

Topics:

Gene silencing (59%)59% related to the paper, Conserved sequence (53%)53% related to the paper, Translational regulation (51%)51% related to the paper, Regulation of gene expression (51%)51% related to the paper, Gene (50%)50% related to the paper
View PDF
3,413 Citations
open accessOpen access Journal Article DOI: 10.1371/JOURNAL.PBIO.0050177
Development of the human infant intestinal microbiota.
26 Jun 2007 - PLOS Biology

Abstract:

Almost immediately after a human being is born, so too is a new microbial ecosystem, one that resides in that person's gastrointestinal tract. Although it is a universal and integral part of human biology, the temporal progression of this process, the sources of the microbes that make up the ecosystem, how and why it varies f... Almost immediately after a human being is born, so too is a new microbial ecosystem, one that resides in that person's gastrointestinal tract. Although it is a universal and integral part of human biology, the temporal progression of this process, the sources of the microbes that make up the ecosystem, how and why it varies from one infant to another, and how the composition of this ecosystem influences human physiology, development, and disease are still poorly understood. As a step toward systematically investigating these questions, we designed a microarray to detect and quantitate the small subunit ribosomal RNA (SSU rRNA) gene sequences of most currently recognized species and taxonomic groups of bacteria. We used this microarray, along with sequencing of cloned libraries of PCR-amplified SSU rDNA, to profile the microbial communities in an average of 26 stool samples each from 14 healthy, full-term human infants, including a pair of dizygotic twins, beginning with the first stool after birth and continuing at defined intervals throughout the first year of life. To investigate possible origins of the infant microbiota, we also profiled vaginal and milk samples from most of the mothers, and stool samples from all of the mothers, most of the fathers, and two siblings. The composition and temporal patterns of the microbial communities varied widely from baby to baby. Despite considerable temporal variation, the distinct features of each baby's microbial community were recognizable for intervals of weeks to months. The strikingly parallel temporal patterns of the twins suggested that incidental environmental exposures play a major role in determining the distinctive characteristics of the microbial community in each baby. By the end of the first year of life, the idiosyncratic microbial ecosystems in each baby, although still distinct, had converged toward a profile characteristic of the adult gastrointestinal tract. read more read less

Topics:

Metagenomics (51%)51% related to the paper
View PDF
2,416 Citations
Author Pic

SciSpace is a very innovative solution to the formatting problem and existing providers, such as Mendeley or Word did not really evolve in recent years.

- Andreas Frutiger, Researcher, ETH Zurich, Institute for Biomedical Engineering

Get MS-Word and LaTeX output to any Journal within seconds
1
Choose a template
Select a template from a library of 40,000+ templates
2
Import a MS-Word file or start fresh
It takes only few seconds to import
3
View and edit your final output
SciSpace will automatically format your output to meet journal guidelines
4
Submit directly or Download
Submit to journal directly or Download in PDF, MS Word or LaTeX

(Before submission check for plagiarism via Turnitin)

clock Less than 3 minutes

What to expect from SciSpace?

Speed and accuracy over MS Word

''

With SciSpace, you do not need a word template for PLOS Biology.

It automatically formats your research paper to PLOS formatting guidelines and citation style.

You can download a submission ready research paper in pdf, LaTeX and docx formats.

Time comparison

Time taken to format a paper and Compliance with guidelines

Plagiarism Reports via Turnitin

SciSpace has partnered with Turnitin, the leading provider of Plagiarism Check software.

Using this service, researchers can compare submissions against more than 170 million scholarly articles, a database of 70+ billion current and archived web pages. How Turnitin Integration works?

Turnitin Stats
Publisher Logos

Freedom from formatting guidelines

One editor, 100K journal formats – world's largest collection of journal templates

With such a huge verified library, what you need is already there.

publisher-logos

Easy support from all your favorite tools

PLOS Biology format uses plos2015 citation style.

Automatically format and order your citations and bibliography in a click.

SciSpace allows imports from all reference managers like Mendeley, Zotero, Endnote, Google Scholar etc.

Frequently asked questions

1. Can I write PLOS Biology in LaTeX?

Absolutely not! Our tool has been designed to help you focus on writing. You can write your entire paper as per the PLOS Biology guidelines and auto format it.

2. Do you follow the PLOS Biology guidelines?

Yes, the template is compliant with the PLOS Biology guidelines. Our experts at SciSpace ensure that. If there are any changes to the journal's guidelines, we'll change our algorithm accordingly.

3. Can I cite my article in multiple styles in PLOS Biology?

Of course! We support all the top citation styles, such as APA style, MLA style, Vancouver style, Harvard style, and Chicago style. For example, when you write your paper and hit autoformat, our system will automatically update your article as per the PLOS Biology citation style.

4. Can I use the PLOS Biology templates for free?

Sign up for our free trial, and you'll be able to use all our features for seven days. You'll see how helpful they are and how inexpensive they are compared to other options, Especially for PLOS Biology.

5. Can I use a manuscript in PLOS Biology that I have written in MS Word?

Yes. You can choose the right template, copy-paste the contents from the word document, and click on auto-format. Once you're done, you'll have a publish-ready paper PLOS Biology that you can download at the end.

6. How long does it usually take you to format my papers in PLOS Biology?

It only takes a matter of seconds to edit your manuscript. Besides that, our intuitive editor saves you from writing and formatting it in PLOS Biology.

7. Where can I find the template for the PLOS Biology?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per PLOS Biology's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

8. Can I reformat my paper to fit the PLOS Biology's guidelines?

Of course! You can do this using our intuitive editor. It's very easy. If you need help, our support team is always ready to assist you.

9. PLOS Biology an online tool or is there a desktop version?

SciSpace's PLOS Biology is currently available as an online tool. We're developing a desktop version, too. You can request (or upvote) any features that you think would be helpful for you and other researchers in the "feature request" section of your account once you've signed up with us.

10. I cannot find my template in your gallery. Can you create it for me like PLOS Biology?

Sure. You can request any template and we'll have it setup within a few days. You can find the request box in Journal Gallery on the right side bar under the heading, "Couldn't find the format you were looking for like PLOS Biology?”

11. What is the output that I would get after using PLOS Biology?

After writing your paper autoformatting in PLOS Biology, you can download it in multiple formats, viz., PDF, Docx, and LaTeX.

12. Is PLOS Biology's impact factor high enough that I should try publishing my article there?

To be honest, the answer is no. The impact factor is one of the many elements that determine the quality of a journal. Few of these factors include review board, rejection rates, frequency of inclusion in indexes, and Eigenfactor. You need to assess all these factors before you make your final call.

13. What is Sherpa RoMEO Archiving Policy for PLOS Biology?

SHERPA/RoMEO Database

We extracted this data from Sherpa Romeo to help researchers understand the access level of this journal in accordance with the Sherpa Romeo Archiving Policy for PLOS Biology. The table below indicates the level of access a journal has as per Sherpa Romeo's archiving policy.

RoMEO Colour Archiving policy
Green Can archive pre-print and post-print or publisher's version/PDF
Blue Can archive post-print (ie final draft post-refereeing) or publisher's version/PDF
Yellow Can archive pre-print (ie pre-refereeing)
White Archiving not formally supported
FYI:
  1. Pre-prints as being the version of the paper before peer review and
  2. Post-prints as being the version of the paper after peer-review, with revisions having been made.

14. What are the most common citation types In PLOS Biology?

The 5 most common citation types in order of usage for PLOS Biology are:.

S. No. Citation Style Type
1. Author Year
2. Numbered
3. Numbered (Superscripted)
4. Author Year (Cited Pages)
5. Footnote

15. How do I submit my article to the PLOS Biology?

It is possible to find the Word template for any journal on Google. However, why use a template when you can write your entire manuscript on SciSpace , auto format it as per PLOS Biology's guidelines and download the same in Word, PDF and LaTeX formats? Give us a try!.

16. Can I download PLOS Biology in Endnote format?

Yes, SciSpace provides this functionality. After signing up, you would need to import your existing references from Word or Bib file to SciSpace. Then SciSpace would allow you to download your references in PLOS Biology Endnote style according to Elsevier guidelines.

Fast and reliable,
built for complaince.

Instant formatting to 100% publisher guidelines on - SciSpace.

Available only on desktops 🖥

No word template required

Typset automatically formats your research paper to PLOS Biology formatting guidelines and citation style.

Verifed journal formats

One editor, 100K journal formats.
With the largest collection of verified journal formats, what you need is already there.

Trusted by academicians

I spent hours with MS word for reformatting. It was frustrating - plain and simple. With SciSpace, I can draft my manuscripts and once it is finished I can just submit. In case, I have to submit to another journal it is really just a button click instead of an afternoon of reformatting.

Andreas Frutiger
Researcher & Ex MS Word user
Use this template