The second issue is succinctly quoted by the authors of 'Experimental design and analysis and their reporting II: updated and simplified guidance for authors and peer reviewers' 2018, PMID 29520785. This includes the quote "The main lesson learnt (from internal journal audit) that we may now share is that the guidelines that have been journal requirements since 2015 are not being routinely followed by authors and this is being missed during the peer review process. This 'non-compliance' is not unique to British Journal of Pharmacology (BJP) and is a phenomenon experienced by many other journals". This honest and important observation on the (understandable) shortcomings in author-editor-referee interactions relates back to figure where even the top journals in GtoPdb represent only small proportion of the 10,700 references linked to the 9760 GtoPdb substance submissions (SIDs) in PubChem. This means there is a long tail of journals each of which have different criteria for authors and even those selected for GtoPdb curation may have compliance gaps.