--- name: water-research description: Use when targeting Water Research (Water Res) or deciding whether a water-science or water-engineering manuscript fits this flagship water venue. Encodes the journal's fit, framing, method-and-evidence bar, house style, official-submission re-check, and desk-reject heuristics. --- # Water Research (water-research) ## Journal positioning Water Research is an Elsevier journal published in partnership with the International Water Association (IWA), and it is the flagship venue for water science and engineering. Its defining character is depth and rigor across the technical water field: treatment processes, water and wastewater quality, contaminants and their fate, microbiology, reuse, and process engineering. The journal rewards mechanistic insight and methodological rigor that advances how the water community understands or engineers water systems — not minor process optimizations, single-site monitoring, or incremental parameter studies. It expects work to be situated within the global water-engineering literature and to demonstrate a clear advance with practical or fundamental significance. Readership is the international community of environmental engineers, water-quality scientists, microbiologists, and process specialists. This skill is a **fit / venue-selection / re-framing** tool. It does not replace the journal's current official submission guidelines. Before submitting, re-check the live author instructions on the Water Research Elsevier site. ## When to trigger - The author names Water Research as the target venue for a rigorous water-science or water-engineering study. - A manuscript advances mechanistic understanding of a treatment process, contaminant behavior, or water microbiology, and the author is choosing between Water Research, Environmental Science & Technology, and Nature Water. - A paper has a clear technical advance and depth that suits a full-length water-engineering venue rather than a short-format or generalist outlet. - The author needs Water Research's rigor bar, scope boundaries, and desk-reject criteria before submission. ## Scope & topic fit - Water and wastewater treatment: physical, chemical, and biological process advances, novel reactor concepts, and mechanistic process understanding. - Water quality and contaminants: occurrence, fate, transformation, and removal of organic and inorganic pollutants, micropollutants, and emerging contaminants. - Environmental microbiology and biotechnology: microbial communities, pathogens, antimicrobial resistance, and bioprocesses in water and wastewater systems. - Water reuse and resource recovery: reclamation, recovery of energy and nutrients, and the technical basis of circular water systems. - Disinfection, oxidation, membrane, and adsorption processes with mechanistic and performance characterization. - Analytical and methodological advances that enable new water-quality or process insight across the field. ## Method & evidence bar - The advance must be mechanistic or methodological, not a one-off optimization; the contribution to the field must be identifiable concisely. - Rigorous experimental design is expected: appropriate controls, replication, statistical treatment, mass balances, and reproducible conditions. - Treatment and process claims must use realistic and clearly specified conditions, with performance compared against relevant benchmarks and literature. - Contaminant and microbiology claims need validated analytical methods, quality assurance, and adequate characterization of fate or mechanism. - Modeling claims need validation against experimental or field data and honest treatment of assumptions and applicability. - Data and code should be deposited in a FAIR-compliant repository where applicable; analytical methods and quality-control details must be fully reported. ## Structure & house style - Water Research uses a full-length IMRaD format with detailed methods; re-check current length, figure, and reference conventions on the live site. - The introduction situates the work in the global water-engineering literature, states the knowledge gap, and defines the specific advance. - Methods are detailed and reproducible, including experimental conditions, analytical procedures, and quality-control protocols. - Figures and tables must be efficient and publication-quality, presenting mechanistic and performance evidence clearly; supplementary information carries extended data and additional analyses. - The abstract is unstructured and must convey the advance, approach, and key quantitative findings. - Highlights and a graphical abstract are typically required per Elsevier convention. ## Official-submission checklist - Before giving submission-ready advice, read `../../resources/source-basis.md` and `../../resources/official-source-map.md`; start from the official source anchors for this journal family, then cite the current journal-specific page you checked. - Search the live site for "Water Research guide for authors" and follow the current Elsevier/IWA version. - Re-check current length, figure, and reference conventions; confirm Highlights and graphical-abstract requirements and supplementary-information conventions. - Re-check data-availability and code-availability policy; confirm accepted FAIR repositories and analytical-reporting expectations. - Re-check competing-interests, funding, CRediT author-contribution, and AI-use disclosure; confirm preprint policy. - If the live official instructions conflict with this skill, the official instructions win. ## Pre-submission self-check - [ ] One sentence — the mechanistic or methodological advance in water science/engineering and why it matters to the field. - [ ] The contribution is a genuine advance, not a single-site monitoring report or incremental parameter optimization. - [ ] Experimental design includes controls, replication, mass balances, and realistic, clearly specified conditions. - [ ] Analytical methods are validated with documented quality control; modeling is validated against data. - [ ] The work is positioned within the global water-engineering literature and benchmarked against it. - [ ] Data/code availability, Highlights, and graphical abstract are prepared per current Elsevier requirements. ## Common desk-reject triggers - A single-site monitoring or characterization study without a mechanistic or methodological advance. - An incremental optimization of an established process without new understanding or general significance. - Lab performance reported under idealized or poorly specified conditions, or without benchmarking against the literature. - Contaminant or microbiology work using unvalidated analytical methods or inadequate quality control. - Missing Highlights, graphical abstract, or data-availability statement where required, or work outside the journal's water-science scope. ## Re-routing decision - A broader environmental-science scope beyond water systems (air, soil, multimedia, or environmental policy): `environmental-science-and-technology`. - A higher-impact, cross-disciplinary water advance with strong societal framing: `nature-water`. - A short, high-impact hydrology or land-water finding for the geoscience community: `geophysical-research-letters`. - A broader sustainability framing where water is one dimension of a coupled advance: `nature-sustainability`. ## Output format ```text [Fit] High / Medium / Low (one-line reason) [Target] Water Research [Topic tags] <2–3 closest topics> [Method/evidence] [Top risk] [Official items to re-check] [Re-route suggestion] ```