The manuscript was about theoretical ecology research, the revision comments were received within two months after submission, and I was requested to make more detailed analysis and discussion of the selected model’s parameters. The editor initially requested that the revision should be completed within a few weeks, but because the revision comments were difficult to deal with, they agreed to extend the revision period after communicating with the editors. After several months of careful revision, the manuscript was accepted directly.

(21) Thank | qiang.00.yang

External review failed. One opinion is positive, while others are neither positive nor negative.

Personal understanding: It is already quite successful to submit for review. The submission rate is estimated to be only 10%, and it is also troublesome. 

Editorial taste is very important. They seem to prefer breadth of research rather than just depth. 

If you go into depth and neglect breadth, they will suggest you find a specialized journal. 

Furthermore, if your new findings are an extension of common conclusions, it is probably not enough. 

After submitting for external review, you may encounter strict scrutiny. Personally, it seems that only positive opinions are given a chance for revision. 

Regarding individual advice, it is difficult. From a theoretical perspective, it is not as good as Ecology Letters or Ecology.

(0) Thank | MKS

Recently, I plan to submit a paper on theoretical ecology, just like the one downstairs. But personally, I feel that universities have a better understanding of NC (possibly referring to the meaning of "NC" in a specific context). Which one is faster, NC or the other one?

(0) Thank | MKS