Another impact of the proliferation of journals
I was just browsing the viewpoint piece by Les Grivell: "Through a glass darkly: The present and the future of editorial peer review" (2006) EMBO Reports
7, 567–570 doi:10.1038/sj.embor.7400718.
One of the points he makes is that the best peer reviewers tend to be younger and publish a lot. There are a limited number of desirable reviewers for each paper and he expresses concern of reviewer fatigue.
A lot of the things he says in the piece I've seen elsewhere, but I don't know that I'd thought of how the proliferation of journals is impacting the quality of peer review, but I guess it must. Interesting how this is in a journal published by NPG ;)