In recent years, some articles regarding new plant species records failed to meet the quality standard of this journal and were rejected. Among them, there are some articles that are hastily written, or the new record of species have little significance. For example, for widely distributed species, the distribution range recorded in previous literature is a rough estimate with broad geographical divisions. Some authors believe that if the literature does not explicitly mention the distribution of a species in a particular province, they should publish a provincial-level new record, ignoring the fact that the research area falls within the continuous distribution range of the species. Such “new records” would not be considered as significant.

Principles of Manuscript Review

1. New record of species within a large regional scope, such as new records in China, or new record in a major geographical unit that are isolated (typically by mountain systems with unique landforms and climatic characteristics, such as the Loess Plateau, Qinghai-Tibetan Plateau, Qinling Mountains, etc.). This record is significant in terms of plant biogeography and can be considered for publication.

2. Provincial-level distribution records that appear in taxonomic articles specifically revising the description of a certain species group can be published.

3. For articles on new plant species records, authors are encouraged to include morphological anatomy, individual development, microscopic morphology comparisons, or molecular biology experiments. This is an innovative form of new plant species record papers. However, the research content must be original and novel.

Furthermore, it is not appropriate to consider artificially introduced alien species that have escaped into the wild or were originally introduced within a small range as new record species. As a general principle, our journal does not accept such submissions.