The review speed was indeed a bit anxious. The process lasted for a whole year. It was submitted in March 2019 and accepted in nearly May 2020. I revised it twice. I revised and resubmitted it once. I made major revisions once, which was equal to rewrite. But the suggestions made by the reviewers were indeed very professional. Even though my direction was relatively comprehensive and less popular, the comments in the two review were much indeed. But it did bring a great improvement to the quality of the manuscript. Finally, it was accepted. It is not wasteful that I struggled for a year, during which sometimes I did not even want to continue to revise. It is said that AGU’s journals are still highly recognized.

(6) Thank | 温柔善良帅气

The manuscript was submitted to BIOGEOSCIENCES. The reviewers rejected it, but the full text of the paper is still published permanently. Then I submitted it to other journals. The repetition rates must be very high with the article that was rejected by BG. The editors of other journals regarded it as plagiarism of my own paper. The two consecutive submissions were rejected for plagiarism. Only if you are very confident, you may consider the journal. I wasted an original paper!

(4) Thank | ran

It’s really a sad story. I strongly recommend you not to submit your manuscript to this journal for open peer review. From April of last year for the first submission to April this year, we made two rounds of major revisions. There were two reviewers for the first round, but all the reviewers were changed for the second round, The comments or suggestions the reviewers made were almost meaningless, and we wrote two pages for explanations to the basic concepts to them. I really recommend that such reviewers don’t ask the questions about the basic concepts if they don’t understand it. After all, I’m not a Wikipedia. The journal even required the author to answer the questions online for 1 hour... However, I’m still lucky, because almost all the reviewers were invited by the journal editors, and there were no comment from any non-invited reviewers. Sometimes lay readers can comment at will. So.... You might get really pissed off. The impact factor of this journal is not high enough, and I really doubt if this journal is pretending to be a great one. We haven’t heard from it for one year after submission. Please think very carefully before your submission!

(11) Thank | 小心心

BG has an impact factor of 3.587 and is SCIE. BG is different from other journals in that it publishes articles in two stages. All articles are published on the Biogeosciences Discussion (BGD) website in the first stage, which serves as an opportunity for public discussion. All review comments and revisions are posted on the BGD home page, and the forum is open to the public. Once the manuscript has passed the review stage, it will be published in print in BG. The layout fee is very expensive (my manuscript cost nearly $1300).

(1) Thank | Anonymous

Received: 18 Aug 2023
Discussion started: 22 Sep 2023
Revised: 02 Mar 2024
Accepted: 24 Mar 2024
It took about a month from submission to the start of discussion. Due to personal reasons, revisions were slower which delayed the process by a month. In total, there were two revisions. The reviewers were very professional and their comments were incisive and detailed. The review process was strict, compared to many other journals (in my opinion). Although the journal has a lower impact factor, it is reputable and well-recognized. If you are in a rush to graduate, it might not be the best choice

(0) Thank | CT_GZU

egu's Biogeosciences and agu's JGR-Biogeosciences are sister journals, but I prefer egu's Biogeosciences because the formatting is very visually appealing (hahaha, yes, it's quite shallow). Europeans like to submit important works on biogeochemical cycles to this journal, and it seems that there are more articles on models, as well as a preference for lengthy discussions. I study the forest C-N cycle, and it took about 1 month from submission to open discussion. The peer review process, including major and minor revisions, took 3 months (the feedback was very detailed... the paper was basically restructured). After acceptance, it took another month to be published.

(21) Thank | lzugeo

The reviewer's comments were very pertinent, and it took 7 months from submission to acceptance.

(0) Thank | Flora

May I ask if the journal requires uploading the track change version of the manuscript, should the modified parts be highlighted in red or should the manuscript be revised in the reviewing mode, so that others can see the changes made even if they are not accepted?

(0) Thank | 花花

After submitigating for three months, there is a reviewer who has been giving advice. It is really annoying.

(0) Thank | tianyeouc

I only hope that you don’t touch someProfessional editors, or switch to other types of journals.Some editors are very unprofessional.Once rejected, it is difficult to switch to other publications.

(2) Thank | aikeyan

submitted an article, the editor is very responsible, the revised opinion is very pertinent, and played a very important role in my research.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Journals reflect very quickly, but the individual is slower.The journal is very strict.And I learned a lot, and the reviewers and the editors are very good.The process is quite painful, but it is a bit expensive.Different from PLOSone.The level of articles in this journal is still ok.

(1) Thank | Anonymous

I rarely read and quote EGU's publications, but I have not selectd for it, especially, plos one, not good in quality although the IF is high. Many people are playing tricks, don'twas misled!!

(1) Thank | Anonymous

is not an SCI extension

(1) Thank | Anonymous

has heard a few things recently, and the impression of this journal has been greatly reduced. This journal has become a member of some domestic editorial committees.It’s shameless to designate reviewers for each other’s manuscripts and give them a green light.

(4) Thank | Anonymous