At the helm of JCS – Editors-in-Chief past, present… and future

The Editor-in-Chief (EIC) of Journal of Cell Science plays a key role in defining the overall vision of the journal, helping to decide on journal strategy, policy and priorities, and overseeing all content published by the journal. Since being established in 1853 (initially as the Quarterly Journal of Microscopical Science and then changing its name to Journal of Cell Science; JCS), the journal has been spearheaded by various eminent cell biologists (Adhikari and Grewal, 2025). In this Editorial, and as part of the 100-year anniversary of The Company of Biologists, Fiona Watt (JCS EIC from 1992–2011) and Michael Way (JCS EIC, 2012–present) reflect on their time at the journal, highlighting how they first became involved with JCS and The Company of Biologists and how this interaction progressed with time.My relationship with The Company of Biologists dates back to when I was an undergraduate at Cambridge, UK, and opted for Zoology in my final year because it offered courses in cell biology. Several people who were active in the Company at the time were associated with the Zoology department and took part in teaching – these included Bill Grimstone, Simon Madrell and Richard Skaer. The Company connection continued when I moved to Oxford, UK, and carried out my DPhil under the supervision of Henry Harris, head of the Dunn School of Pathology and also an Editor at JCS. Indeed, my first paper was published in JCS (Watt et al., 1978).I was a member of the JCS Editorial Advisory Board from 1988–1991 and EIC from 1992–2011. I do recall asking Professor Harris how much work was involved in being an Editor, and he replied that it was a bit like shaving – something routine that you did every day. I must have been reassured by that answer because I accepted the EIC's job with enthusiasm.I have many happy memories of my fellow Editors and Editorial Advisory Board members, and also of the staff and Board at the Company. Recruiting Richard Sever to work on JCS led to big improvements in the way we worked, and we spent quite a lot of time at conferences promoting the journal, sometimes on the football pitch (R.S.) and sometimes in the bar (R.S. and F.W.). It was also fun to interact with the Editors of the other Company journals, in particular Chris Wylie (Development) who introduced me to FileMakerPro software as a means of maintaining a referee database.Board meetings were usually entertaining and occasionally challenging. I remember a member of the Board referred to a JCS staff member's maternity leave as ‘a temporary local difficulty’ when I requested cover – a phrase that still makes me smile all these years later. But a more serious challenge was to persuade the Board that we needed to move away from hard-copy manuscripts to online submissions. I finally managed by submitting one of my own research papers to the Journal of Investigative Dermatology, which had online submissions, and taking a screenshot of each step in the process. I then showed a printout of each screenshot sequentially at a Board meeting – I felt like Bob Dylan in the video of Subterranian Homesick Blues.In the end, I left JCS because I had been an EIC for so long and I was entranced by the opportunity to take part in a new publishing adventure at eLife. But my experience of The Company of Biologists has stayed with me. Through Richard, I have had the opportunity to take part in bioRxiv and medRxiv, which played such an important role in the rapid dissemination of COVID-related preprints during the pandemic. When I became EMBO Director, I was surprised to discover that FileMakerPro is the core database software for EMBO activities. And the preprint review platform Review Commons, launched by EMBO Press, involves a close collaboration with The Company of Biologists' journals. I am optimistic that the move from unpublished and published as binary options to a continuum from preprint to refereed preprint to publication is good for science and good for scientists. I also feel that a diverse ecosystem of journals is healthy, and I wish The Company of Biologists all the best for the years ahead.I had never used a microscope in my research until the last few weeks of my postdoc at the Whitehead Institute, MIT, Boston. I had also never thought about trying to get a journal cover (as most of my images were Coomassie-stained gels of purified recombinant actin-binding protein preps), but this time it was different – I had a striking image. In the end, I was fortunate that the first research paper I published in JCS (Way et al., 1995) was highlighted on the cover with a striking immunofluorescence image of horseshoe crab sperm. Even better, the next paper I published in JCS (Cudmore et al., 1996), which was one of my first papers as a group leader, also got the cover. JCS was definitely now on my radar, and I always looked at it when it appeared in the library (as, of course, nothing was online at this point). I was also being asked to review the odd paper for JCS.It was not until 2005 that my relationship became even stronger when Fiona Watt (who was EIC of JCS at that time) asked me in the canteen of Cancer Research UK's, London Research Institute in Lincoln's Inn Fields whether I would like to become an Editor. It was a shock and something that had never crossed my mind. I asked some friends what they thought about being an editor. I got mixed responses along the lines of “it's probably a lot of work”, “it's a position of responsibility”, “how come they asked you?!”, “do they pay you?”, “go for it!”, “what's actually involved?” and of course “I would say no”. However, given my experience with JCS and the fact that many of my papers had been handled by research-active scientists, I decided to say yes. Looking back, I am surprised I accepted the offer without really knowing what I was getting into. However, I haven't regretted it for a minute. It turned out that the workload was not so bad, although papers often appeared like London buses – all at once or not at all. Fiona was also a great EIC, and I had wonderful support from the JCS office staff, which made things easier as I discovered the joys of difficult reviewers and frustrated authors.Then, in 2011, Fiona announced she was stepping down and the publisher needed to find a new EIC for the journal. That was when Ron Laskey, head of the JCS advisory group and a Director at The Company of Biologists, contacted me to ask if I wanted to be considered for the position. Apparently, my name had come up multiple times during their consultations as part of the search for a new EIC. This was right before I was heading to Italy for the 26th European Cytoskeletal Forum meeting funded by EMBO and FEBS that I was co-organising with Giorgio Scita, so I was somewhat distracted. This probably explains why I said yes, assuming it was largely the same job. On returning, I learnt I was the lucky winner and of course the job wasn't the same – I now had to make decisions beyond the papers I was handling, including appointing new Editor and Editorial Advisory Board members, coming up with new journal policies, presenting the annual report to the Board of Directors and writing Editorials, which always seemed to have tight deadlines.So how has it really been? Well, first, I couldn't have done it without help and advice from many people including the JCS Editors and advisory group (Laura Machesky, Steve Royle and Sean Munro) as well as the Directors at The Company of Biologists. However, I particularly want to single out the JCS Executive Editors Sharon Ahmad, and more recently Seema Grewal, with whom I have worked very closely, discussing virtually everything concerning new journal policies and initiatives. Throughout my term, we've seen lots of change including new and improved journal websites and submission systems, the launch of a new community site for microscopists, the start of our successful journal meeting series, the introduction of Guest Editors, Associate Editors and our successful special issues, and fruitful partnerships with like-minded organisations, such as Journal of Cell Biology, Molecular Biology of the Cell, Review Commons and bioRxiv, which overall aim to make things easier for authors. There have also been big changes and challenges in the scientific publishing world, including the emergence of Open Access, preprints and the frustrating rise of mega money-grabbing predatory journals that undermine society journals and not-for-profit publishers such as The Company of Biologists.The fact that I have been EIC for 15 years clearly indicates I have enjoyed the experience, especially of course the one-line cover letters that say: “Dear editor – here is our paper”. Through the Company, I have met and interacted with many people who are committed to scientific publishing and supporting scientists. It is no surprise to me that The Company of Biologists is 100 years old and long may it continue; but, please, submit your papers to us rather than to journals and publishers who only care about making money.Finally, I have been EIC for much longer than I expected but will sadly be stepping down at the end of 2026. However, once I do, I still plan to try and get a few more JCS covers before I stop running a lab! As part of the consultation process that will lead to the appointment of a new EIC, we are seeking feedback from the cell biology community so please do spare the time to complete our survey (https://www.surveymonkey.com/r/XRTC3WW) to provide your thoughts on the journal and who the next EIC should be. As a journal that really cares about our community, we'd really appreciate your input. And if you are considering putting yourself forward for the role, or if you are approached by the search committee, go for it as, trust me, you won't regret it!