The views expressed in this Editorial do not necessarily reflect the views of ASM . Through its academy track, mBio allows members of the American Academy of Microbiology (AAM) to submit for consideration for publication one paper per year accompanied by at least two reviews solicited by the corresponding member. This track, referred to here as the AAM track, was modeled on that used for the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America (PNAS), which allows members of the National Academy of Sciences to contribute papers directly for publication. The major difference between the AAM track and mBio regular submission track is that the latter uses blinded review. Hence, all mBio papers are peer reviewed but differ in the mechanism of peer review. AAM track papers are labeled as such, with the following footnote: “This article is a direct contribution from a Fellow of the American Academy of Microbiology.” When mBio was planned in 2009, the AAM track was conceived with two goals in mind. First, we hoped that it would serve as a mechanism for greater integration between the AAM and the ASM Journals program. Second, it provided a perk to AAM members in the form of a rapid publication mechanism to encourage them to submit outstanding papers to mBio . Both goals were accomplished, and the result has been a beneficial synergy for both the AAM and mBio . In the early years the AAM track was extremely helpful for mBio to establish itself. Since the launching of mBio in 2010, the AAM has increasingly identified with mBio , with many AAM Fellows serving as editors, invited editors, and reviewers, and the direct submission …