Perspectiv
Submissions should be made via the online manuscript tracking system.  For technical help with the submission system, please contact ggn@wiley.com. Initial submission does not need to be formatted to Genetics & Genomics Next style.  For ease of evaluation and submission, the journal recommends an editable Word .docx or Authorea text document and a single merged PDF that includes all parts of main text and high-resolution figures embedded into the file.  A suitable PDF will be constructed by uploading text and figures using the online manuscript tracking system.  Genetics & Genomics Next does not impose word count and figure limits.  Table 1 contains the journal’s suggestions so that the manuscript is respectful of reader time and are readable by specialist and generalist alike.

Acknowledgements

Authors should list all funding sources here, please check Open Funder Registry. Contributions and material support from anyone not listed as an author should be acknowledged here, with permission from the contributor. Thanks to anonymous reviewers are not allowed.

Conflict of Interest Statement

All authors are required to declare if they have potential conflicts of interest related to the submission, or none. This declaration shall be published. Submitting authors shall confirm all co-authors agree with the final statement.

Abstract

What is known in the field, for a general readership. Define the area and knowledge for a specialist.
Explain the motivation and need for the research defined by the gap in existing knowledge.
State your main claim or finding . Support that with evidence, statistics and detail, mentioning essential methods and analytical techniques that provided the evidence.
State the meaning and significance of your new results for research in the field.
End by suggesting realistic immediate implications and uses of your findings in your field and more broadly.

Use as many subheading as you have main claims and topics

Give credit to and cite all the primary research publications that lay the background to this work including those to be discussed in the Discussion. Give context as to whether these are essential methods and analytic strategies or experimental findings. Ensure that claims of  causation, correlation and conjecture are distinguished.

 

Make the main claims in logical order, supported by display items

Discussion 

Summarize and evaluate the robustness and meaning of the main findings in light of existing publications. Be skeptical and discuss any limitations of the study and conditions where the results may or may not be applicable. Make a strong conclusion.

References

[terms in brackets will be removed before publication]
1. [article] Wood WG, Eckert GP, Igbavboa U, Muller WE. Statins and neuroprotection: a prescription to move the field forward. Ann N Y Acad Sci 2010; 1199:69-76. 
2. [book] Hoppert, M. Microscopic techniques in biotechnology. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2003.
3. [dataset]Authors; Year; Dataset title; Data repository or archive; Version (if any); Persistent identifier (e.g. DOI)
4. [URI, GWAS summary statistics] Savage, J.E. et al. Genome-wide association meta-analysis in 269,867
      individuals identifies new genetic and functional links to intelligence
      https://www.ebi.ac.uk/gwas/studies/GCST006250 (2018)
5. [supplementary data] Jagadeesan, A. et al. MDS/PCA plots within West Africa
    https://doi.org/10.6084/m9.figshare.5640931 (2017)

Tables or Boxes (each table or box complete with title and footnotes)