The review speed of this journal is still very fast. The acceptance rate of manuscripts is relatively high. It is a pity to throw away some data pieces of the students, so I wrote an article with the data gathered. There were four reviewers in the first review. One directly recommended the acceptance, and the other three raised questions on the small amount of data. Two months were given to revise the manuscript, but the equipment was damaged and the data could not be supplemented during this period. After consulting with the editor, it was extended by one month. After the data was supplemented as required, the second review took 8 days. A reviewer raised some problems on the literatures. The others had no questions. I returned the revised manuscript in two days and waited for a week for acceptance. I think the actual review cycle is three months, and the speed is still very fast

(0) Thank | 璞伟

1.31: submitted; 3.5: revised, 2 reviewers asked 14 questions, most of which were about the details of the experiment. A test need be added. They are easy to answer. 3.12: submitted, re-uploaded after revision; 4.9 accepted; 4.16 proof. A proofreading notice was sent back and I completed it on the same day and submitted it; 4.22 online! The speed was good, I was very fortunate to be able to catch up with the graduation, and there are not many requirements for the format of the article when submitting.

(3) Thank | ymy

05-16, submitted. 06-04, without knowing why, I was notified by e-mail that the manuscript should be submitted in the submission system again. 06-08, reviewers were invited. 08-19, major revisions, two months was given for revision. 10-13, revision was submitted to journal. 10-07, under review. 10-26, minor revision. 10-27, revision was submitted to journal. 11-02, under review.11-11, accept! Thanks to editor Aracely Hernandez-Ramirez and two reviewers for their comments raised which significantly improved the quality of the manuscript, and I learned a lot of new things!

(5) Thank | zby

This is the first article I have has accepted by this journal. I feel that the editor is very responsible. The editor gives you some suggestions for grammar and returns it almost the same day. However, it took 6 months for my paper to be finally accepted after the revisions were made.

(1) Thank | Anonymous

Apr 28, 2025 Submitted
May 02, 2025 Under Review(0-1-6)
May 07, 2025 Under Review(0-2-8)
May 14, 2025 Under Review(1-2-8)
The second reviewer for the first review is taking a long time, how long can I urge the editor or customer service?

(0) Thank | yurongrong

During my master's program, the first SCI paper was published. The editor of the journal was very efficient, and the reviewers were diligent and responsible. The suggestions and questions raised were pertinent, and I hope that the journal's impact factor will continue to rise.

(0) Thank | w,m

Good luck to the original poster!

(0) Thank | 喵喵喵

March 02, 2025	Accept
The overall journal editors and reviewers are very responsible and rigorous, and the quality of the journal is very high.

(0) Thank | Lico

Dec 17, 2024      Submit to Journal
Dec 18, 2024      Under Review
Dec 24, 2024      Under Review
Dec 26, 2024      Under Review
Jan 03, 2025       Under Review
Jan 12, 2025       Required Reviews Completed
Jan 12, 2025       Revise
Jan 22, 2025       With Editor (First modification)
Jan 23, 2025       Under Review
Feb 01, 2025	     Under Review
Feb 06, 2025	     Required Reviews Completed
Feb 13, 2025	     With Editor (Second modification)
Feb 15, 2025	     Under Review
Good luck!

(0) Thank | Lico

Will the new partition table in February next year affect the SCI Zone 2?

(0) Thank | Lico

Rework completed, has been received. Thank you very much.

(0) Thank | 悲伤大蛤蟆

On September 9th, I received an email requesting for a second revision. The questions were not too difficult, and I hope to pass.

(0) Thank | 悲伤大蛤蟆

I don't know what's going on with this journal recently (see the comments below, pushing the editor and immediately getting rejected, I dare not push). The article was revised in June, and it is still under review. Although it has indeed taken too long this time, it is still the first journal I submitted my paper to. Hopefully it will be accepted.

(0) Thank | 悲伤大蛤蟆

Just reviewed an article from this journal, giving the reviewers only half a month. It shouldn't take that long.

(0) Thank | 有点可惜

This journal, which I submitted to SCI for the first time, was not written very well. I made a lot of revisions, but in the end, it was still accepted.

(0) Thank | 天府小罗罗

It's hard to evaluate, submitted on 4/28, three reviewers accepted the review. The first reviewer replied on 6/16, and the second reviewer replied on 7/2. Then there was no movement. Because I was in a hurry, I politely asked about the status of the editorial on 7/23, and the editor replied in the morning of the 24th that they were waiting for the opinion of the third reviewer, but then directly rejected the submission in the evening. The reviewers' opinions were clearly positive, with only minor revisions needed. I urgently need the article for graduation or to meet the deadline for scholarship selection. It's too slow, and it could also be just my bad luck.

(0) Thank | 快点accept好不好

As the review process was taking too long, I politely sent an email to inquire about the status with the editor, but the editor unexpectedly rejected the submission.

(0) Thank | 快点accept好不好

Does this journal support checking the review status via WeChat?

(0) Thank | 携李

After being sent for external review, it was rejected. The reviewer strongly demanded rejection due to formatting issues, which was quite inexplicable.

(0) Thank | 一个混子

I am also one of them. I submitted my application at the end of April and it went under review within two to three days. However, it is still under review as of 7/13. It's so difficult, I'm very anxious ??.

(0) Thank | 快点accept好不好

Have you received the message?

(0) Thank | panghu

2024.3.25 submitted to journal
3.25 with editor
3.25 under review
4.30 under review (one reviewer completed the review)
5.25 review completed (the last two reviewers did not complete the review, and the editor gave 3 weeks for major revision based on the first reviewer's comments)
6.14 under review after revision
6.23 accepted
The whole review process took 3 months. Best wishes for the journal to become better and have a higher impact factor!

(0) Thank | Under Dog

6.7 Submission
6.7 With editor
6.17 Reminder for submission
6.17 Submitted in the morning and under review in the afternoon, not sure why
6.17 Invited three reviewers
6.18 No one accepted the invitation

(0) Thank | 霞

There is a paper tracking feature on the Aisville public account

(0) Thank | 小公举的小熊维尼

Hello, what is the status of the submission?

(0) Thank | xiagutiantian