The manuscript was submitted in November 2019. About two week later, it was under review. Later, there was no comment returned. Recommending reviewers was asked for three times. Reviewers were hard to find! In mid-to-late April, the comments of the first review were returned, and major revision was required. The associate editor Dr. Paul Shin was very friendly, and I was given two months for revision. 05.14, the revised manuscript was submitted; 05.20, the results of the second review were returned, and a few minor questions were raised. However, but it was suggested that the discussion and the results should be combined. Dr. Paul Shin revised the language of the full text and asked to send it to a professional editing agency and provide the proof. 06.18, the revised manuscript was submitted; 06.22, the results of the third review were returned, and some detailed questions were raised again; 06.24, the revised manuscript was submitted; 06.25, part of the format was required to revise in the fourth review; 06.26, the revised manuscript was submitted; 06.27, accepted. It was the first SCI article. There are great deficiencies in language, and the article has some small innovations. This should be the reason why the editor-in-chief gave the chance. Thank you, Dr. Paul Shin and review experts, for your meticulous and patient guidance. It can be seen that this journal has high requirements on the language, and the editors are very meticulous. In the initial time, it is estimated that the reviewers are difficult to find and the delay is long. During the later period, the processing speed of the revised manuscript submitted was very fast. I hope that the Marine Pollution Bulletin will get better and better!

(2) Thank | 木潇

2019.11.10, first submission; 11.20, editor assigned; 2020.2.6, comments returned: Reviewer 1 rejected it; Reviewer 2 required major revision; Reviewer 3 accepted it; The editor rejected it directly, and then said that the journal had 67% rejection rate after desk rejection. The original test is as follow: We currently have a rejection rate of about two-thirds of submissions after desk rejections. What this means is that the views of the referee of this paper are especially important… (The following was full of reviewers' comments.) If you need to graduate, it is recommended to choose other journals. There are also many other journals in marine.

(9) Thank | Jane

It took a month to be submitted for review, and then it took 4 months to get the review conclusion: “I regret to inform you that reviewers have advised against publishing your manuscript. Please refer to the comments listed at the end of this letter for details. We appreciate having the opportunity to consider your work and we wish you well.” There were more than 40 questions for revision posted below. If you are in a hurry to graduate, do not submit to this journal. It is not easy to deal with the tough reviewers encountered.

(5) Thank | Lens

The process took about 5-6 months from submission to publication.

(0) Thank | Anonymous

2025 05 13 submitted
2025 05 19 under review 0 0 7

(0) Thank | luoji

20 Jan 2025: Received at Editorial Office
18 Apr 2025: Article revised
6 May 2025: Article accepted for publication

(0) Thank | qiaoling

Submission on 28th October 2024.
As of 28th April 2025, the first review comments have not been received, despite multiple emails sent to inquire.

(0) Thank | Meng Cui

How long does it usually take to get the results after rework?

(0) Thank | mj

How long does it take for the first instance to reply to comments?

(0) Thank | kuihuazi

Received on February 17th.

(0) Thank | luoji

Submitted in November, still not reviewed by February...

(0) Thank | u

I like the journal and have published in it a few times, I think it has quality articles. But I have had very mixed success with the review/editor process. Recently, I submitted an article in September. It went out to review quite fast but 4 months later still nothing, which is well above their average time. I've sent a message through the online system (noreply_EMsupport@elsevier.com)  to follow up and still heard nothing.

(0) Thank | steve

December 2nd, submitted for review 0 0 8

(0) Thank | luoji

November 30, 2024 Paper Submission
Waiting...

(0) Thank | luoji

I encountered a very irresponsible editor. I submitted my article on August 7th, and it has been "with editor" for 20 days. I sent an email to urge them, and finally it was sent for review on August 28th. The editor only sent out 7 invitations on that day, and only 1 was accepted. Then a month passed, during which there was no progress. They did not send out new review invitations, and the person who accepted the invitation was clearly overdue, but they did not follow up. It is really frustrating.

(0) Thank | 大海啊全是水

Submission on August 1, 2024.
Revision on September 16, inviting a total of 21 people, 3 reviewers accepted the review, and 2 reviewers submitted their review comments. Thanks to the diligent editor! Thanks to the reviewers for their professional editing suggestions!
On September 23, under review with editor.
On September 25, one reviewer accepted and completed the review.
Waiting...

(0) Thank | walk & learn

Submission on May 12, 2024
Minor revisions on July 10, 2024
Resubmission after revisions on July 23, 2024
Acceptance on July 24, 2024
Proofing on July 29, 2024
Online on August 2, 2024

(0) Thank | Yaoo.

Just afraid of this

(0) Thank | 大海啊全是水

Submitted on August 7th, it has been with the editor until now. Has the editor gone on summer vacation and stopped processing manuscripts?

(0) Thank | 大海啊全是水

Your luck is pretty good. I am speechless. One article was submitted here, and for some reason the editor invited 4 reviewers, 2 major revisions, 1 minor revision, and 1 rejection. Then the editor rejected it without giving a chance for major revisions; another article was also submitted here, with two major revisions, and after revisions, it was rejected. Yes, you read that right, it was rejected directly after major revisions, I am speechless. The review process for both articles took around 3 months, very slow.

(0) Thank | 老老韩

Why does the number of review invitations for MPB decrease?

(0) Thank | ChengyinLi

March 5 submitted
March 5 with editor
April 5 with editor
May 5 with editor
May 31 "Unfortunately, after an initial evaluation, I feel your manuscript is not appropriate for this journal's readership." 
Waited for three months, only to receive a rejection after an initial evaluation. I have seen low-quality journals, but this experience with this journal is the worst, I do not recommend submitting articles in a rush to this journal, as it could delay graduation. The editor in charge of the manuscript has a much slower response time compared to what we have seen on letpub. We will not be submitting to this journal in the future

(0) Thank | 奔跑的骏马

Same question! What level of journal is MPB? The impact factor is not high, and neither is the ranking. The same goes for ECSS

(0) Thank | complexcc

Dear friends, may I ask how well recognized this journal is in the industry? I've noticed that many experts tend to publish their reviews in this journal as well as in the low-impact journal of estuarine coastal and shelf science. Why is that?

(0) Thank | 24March

9.28 Submitted
10.29 Received reviewers' comments: Two reviewers, minor revision and major revision (major revision requires extensive data reprocessing)
Due to time constraints, rebuttals were made to the major revision comments and sent back to the two reviewers
12.17
Reviewer comments: One acceptance, one likely rejection, editor provided a chance for revision, stating: if unable to make serious revisions, tendency towards rejection
Entire data reprocessed, figures redrawn, discussion revised
12.30 Submitted revisions
2024.01.28 Accepted
Wishing the journal continued success!

(0) Thank | tianyeouc