It is a good journal. There always be one of the reviewers that is pretty professional. There are many review opinions and most of them are not easy to answer. But after thorough consideration and careful explanation, my reply was still approved by the reviewer! It was returned and revised with two experiments added after 2 months. It was then accepted directly after revision! Generally speaking, it was very fast.

(0) Thank | Alison

The requirements for the quality of the article are still quite high, and I feel that they preferred studies of the mechanism. The reviewer has very strict requirements, and all original experimental data are required to be uploaded.

(1) Thank | nicole丶

This journal has a good reputation, the quality of the article is high, and the requirements are still quite high. The manuscript was reviewed for about a month. According to the reviewer's request, several figures were added, and finally it got accepted smoothly.

(0) Thank | 柯

For some reason the reviewer comments were very focused in on materials and methods. I was asked for perform two additional experiments. Overall pretty good submission experience.

(0) Thank | tsu2@ualberta.ca

I have been waiting for 3 weeks and the status is still Editor Assigned. How long will this status continue? How long will the first review take?

(0) Thank | pingeruu

May I ask what happened after you submitted your manuscript? It has been 3 weeks and it is still showing as "Editor Assigned".

(0) Thank | pingeruu

How long does the first-instance trial usually take? I have been waiting for 7 weeks and still have not received any news

(0) Thank | linaa

Do all the original data need to be uploaded?

(0) Thank | 晨风含莲

Model diagram is to depict your theoretical model. This diagram is optional in the submission

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Please translate the following paragraph into English and Japanese, and use ":" and ":" as headings

(0) Thank | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Is a model diagram necessary?

(0) Thank | 北国博达

Can my search results include video results?

(0) Thank | Darlene Pepys

Review speed: 24.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 50.0
Experience sharing: Submitted in July 2018, received first review in December, major revisions, resubmitted a little over a week later, and then in December 2019 the second review was completed, minor revisions, and finally accepted at the end of December, almost a month later. It took a year and a half in total, so the review process was not quick

(0) Thank | Matthew Meredith

Review speed: 1.0 Experience sharing: A good journal, the reviews are generally very professional, with many comments that are not easy to respond to. However, after careful consideration and thorough explanation, the review was still accepted. The revision took 2 months, with two additional experiments added, and was accepted after the modifications were made. Overall, the process was quite fast

(0) Thank | 铁头胜平

The requirements for the quality of the article are quite high, and I feel more inclined towards research on mechanisms. Reviewers have very strict requirements, with all raw experimental data being mandatory for submission

(0) Thank | 风陵妙夏

This journal has a good reputation, the quality of articles is very high, and the requirements are quite high. The review process takes about a month, and several additional figures were added based on the reviewers' suggestions. In the end, it was successfully accepted

(0) Thank | 落雁歌韵

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 25.0
Share of experience: 30 Oct 2018
Submitted in mid-December, received major revisions after the first review. After resubmission, waited another month for the second review, which came out on February 3. Accepted but still need to change the language. 17 Feb 2019 Accept

(0) Thank | 龙鳞沛芹

From submission to acceptance took 4 months. However, I spent over two months conducting experiments myself. The review process was quite fast. I will let you know when it is published

(0) Thank | 留云靖巧

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission acceptance rate: 25.0 Experience sharing: 10.22 Submitted: 11.22 Major revision: 2.09 Revision: 2.19 Acceptance: After 4 months of review, the review speed was fast, although the major revision in the middle was time-consuming. The efficiency of the editors and reviewers was very fast. The questions raised by the reviewers were professional and strict, as long as they were modified according to the suggestions. It was accepted right after the Chinese New Year, a great way to start the year

(0) Thank | 留云靖巧

Submitted on October 22, 2017, the first review was returned on November 22, 2017. The revision required high-quality images. It took several attempts before the EPS format finally met the requirements. The review process was very quick, with feedback received within just one month

(0) Thank | 留云靖巧

From submission to receipt for a full 7 months, the intermediate overhaul once

(1) Thank | 506911145@qq.com

From submission to acceptance took a whole 7 months, with one major revision in between

(0) Thank | 稻妻祎芮

Hero. How long does it take from receiving to publication?

(0) Thank | 黑山永嘉

Review speed: 1.0 | Submission hit rate: 25.0 Experience sharing: Submitted on August 20th, received feedback from two reviewers on September 20th. The first reviewer was very nice, suggesting minor revisions; the second reviewer raised some technical issues; however, the final editorial feedback was for major revisions, carefully modifying every point (which was less than 20), and resubmitted on October 1st. This morning, I received an email directly accepting the submission!

(0) Thank | 黑山永嘉

This journal is good, but the impact factor drops sharply.The main reason is that there is no review article. Everyone knows why the domestic SCI Botanical Journal has a sharp increase in the impact factor, and it is rising rapidly. The main reason is to invite a lot of botanical research to lead the big cow, and the calf writes some review articles.However, the editor of this journal seems to have never considered this. I recently decided to write a letter to the editor, suggesting to publish some review articles. Otherwise, it will be lowered soon after being overtaken. I also hope that the peer research colleagues will also write to the editor.This journal has developed even better!The article published by

(1) Thank | tao.su@cos.uni-heidelberg.de