ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY

2018-12-05, submit; 2018-12-07, editor assigned; the managing editor was Prof. Zimmerman; 2019-02-16 (Oh my god! the fifth day of the first lunar month, others greet the God of Wealth, I greet the review comments), major revision required, 180 days were given to resubmit after major revisions; 2019-09-16, resubmit, we applied to delay for one month, adding a new collaborator, but the number of words in this version exceeded 2600; 2019-10-09, resubmit, put the secondary content into SI to limit the number of words; 2019-11-08, major revision, two new reviewers were added this time, 1 required minor revision, 2 required major revisions, 1 did not return comments; 2019-12-02, resubmit; 2019-12-27, major revision, 1 Accept 1 minor revision and 1 major revision; 2020-01-14, resubmit; 2020-01-29 (Oh my god! It was the fifth day of the first lunar month again), minor revision; 2020-01-31, resubmit; 2020-02-05, accept.

(66) Thank | 卖碳翁

4 reviewers. I have to say that the journal editors are very responsible, and minor errors are repeatedly checked. The overall feeling of this journal is that the articles are more innovative and effective, and the review speed is fast. The editor and reviewers are very serious.

(9) Thank | 123456

2019.1.22Submission,2019.1.23 received the revision of the submission format, added the line number and returned on the same day;2019.1.30 distribution editor John C. Crittenden,Look at the forum generally for a week or so to submit a review, currently waiting for the results

(0) Thank | 风信子1926

Feedback February 4, 2019February 6th allocation deputy editor wonongong choiIt has been sent to peer review on February 13th. It is estimated that it will take a month to review the results.

(4) Thank | 小钟哥

Method paper on high-resolution spatiotemporal distribution of elements in wetlands.For the first time, the comments of the three reviewers were positive.However, when the change was completed, the editor added the opinion of the fourth reviewer.After the revision, the fourth reviewer still had opinions.However, the problems are quite good, and the improvement of the article after the test is done is also very big.Has released the latest revised draft, hope good luck!

(4) Thank | Yuanli

Feedback February 4, 2019On February 6th, Deputy Editor-in-Chief Wonyong ChoiI do not know whether to submit for review?

(1) Thank | 小钟哥

First trial for one month, after overhaul, second trial for one month, minor repair for 10 days after accept

(14) Thank | yan123

Manuscript No.: 63598, I can see how many fires are there

(3) Thank | gyd

The efficiency is very low, and the comments from the reviewers don't feel that they are particularly familiar with this piece.

(0) Thank | Q

Downstairs said that the submission of more than 20,000 is not only wrong with the decimal point, but the first digit is also wrong, terrible.

(0) Thank | 江湖小生

5.14Submission, the editor is Dr. John Crittenden, manuscript number 2584, has not changed since now, is it still not in the editor's hand......

(1) Thank | yudeyou92@gmail.com

2018 On April 18th, the manuscript number has been more than 2,500. It seems that this journal is not a little bit hot. I estimate that the volume of manuscripts in the four major parallel journals is not as good as it is!

(0) Thank | leon

can only say that the AE in China is simply...I published seven or eighty articles in EST, and the other Chinese scholars made it difficult to review the journals

(3) Thank | 77859

has been submitted for a week, and the status display has not yet been edited by the editor...Efficiency and efficiency ~~~ Let's share the time node of the recent manuscript status change.

(2) Thank | Anonymous

2016 October 25 contribution, two months later, the first trialAs a result, a total of five reviewers put forward a lot of suggestions and questions (very pertinent, very constructive, all opinions and suggestions have a strong reference value), the editor is also very serious and responsible, and oftenTheir holidays have dealt with our manuscripts (the results of the first trial were received at Christmas time) and must be praised!Then began a long process of revision, a total of three major overhauls in the middle, each time the response letter has done a lot of homework and argumentation.Finally received the letter of acceptance on May 3, 2017, and received proof on May 8.Recalling the entire submission process of the past six months, I lost my mind, I passed it, sometimes I didn't want to give birth, I even wanted to give up, but fortunately I finally persisted. The result is good, and I have a lot of exercise for myself.In short, our team likes this journal very much!

(48) Thank | 99360068@qq.com

The direction of toxicology and genetics, submitted in mid-May, minor repair at the end of June, and received after returning.No doubt, ES

(0) Thank | 哈哈民

15 submission in August, two or three months before and after the technical review, small repair experiments and characterization, 30 comments, and 15 comments for the second time, in general, the requirementsA lot of

(3) Thank | 烟酒僧

In 2015, ES

(1) Thank | i

In 2015, ES

(0) Thank | i

2014, will publish its sister journal ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY LETTERS, http://pubs.acs.org/journal/estlcu

(3) Thank | Anonymous

don't know thisThe journal published letter

(0) Thank | Anonymous

submitted an article, the result is unknown

(0) Thank | Anonymous

This journal quality has been steadily declining over the past few years, and it is not difficult to send a essay on it.There is a deputy editor, Ruben Kretzschmar, who has had several contacts with him during his work in Switzerland. He feels that this person has racial prejudice against the Chinese. Most of the articles about the Chinese as the first author are based on a few excuses.

(15) Thank | Anonymous

I am very lucky. I have already had two ESTs this year. I am very satisfied with the chemical/water treatment process. This is the dream journal of my reading.The two submissions were very good. The last time I edited was Stephan Hug of ETH, Switzerland. This time it was David Sedlak. I was very responsible. From submission, modification to reception, the last one was 4 months (see me in May).Reviews), this one is 3 months.During the period, David Sedlak also invited me to review two articles similar to my submission.

(21) Thank | Anonymous

The journals that were selectd for were not in the process, and the ES&T was still very serious. Three reviewers were overhauled twice in the middle to receive... and also tossed for 6 months....... Must be patient...

(3) Thank | Anonymous