Received date: 03 Apr 2020; Editorial assignment start date: 06 Apr 2020; Independent review start date: 16 Jun 2020; Interactive review activated date: 30 Jun 2020; Review finalized date: 24 Jul 2020; Final validation date: 24 Jul 2020. They had not found a suitable editor to process the manuscript for two months. It was so difficult to wait... 2 months later, when I sent a reminder email and was going to withdraw the manuscript, a notification was received that they’ve found the editor to process the manuscript. Later, the speed became relatively faster. The result was received in more than a month, and it was accepted after two rounds of revisions. The overall speed is not fast, but it is acceptable, after all, the final result is good. ps, the publication fee is really expensive.

(10) Thank | 励励前行

02 Jan 2019 Author submitted manuscript. 25 Feb 2019 Interactive review forum activated. 29 Mar 2019 Author re-submitted manuscript. 16 Apr 2019 Article accepted for publication. After undergoing substantial revision, minor revision and acceptance, the two reviewers are experts in the field, and the revision comments are more helpful to improve the quality of the paper. The impact factor has also increased this year. It is the first SCI article in my life. Good.

(5) Thank | Lappula

Journals in bioinformatics-related field are overall of low efficiency. Submitted date: 08 Jan 2019; Editorial assignment start date: 30 Jan 2019; Independent review start date: 03 Feb 2019; Interactive review activated date: 26 Apr 2019; Review finalized date: 31 May 2019; Final validation date: 18 Jun 2019.

(2) Thank | ZJW86

Submitted on June 4. Two reviewers, one of them questioned the concentrations of reagents in my formula. What I used was an optimized formula, and the test results were very good. However, the editor insisted that my reagents were incompatible with the operation manual and said that he could not evaluate my formula because he had not used such a formula before. What can I say? Maybe I should have done more, but I didn’t think I needed to at the time, so I just cited a paper (published in an IF 5.0 journal) that used that same formula in my response. That’s the only paper that used the same formula as mine. Later, another reviewer agreed to accept the paper after a week, but this  reviewer took 40 days to accept the paper. I thought that was it. Then, the deputy editor is really responsible and Sent me an email to question my formula again, even questioning the other paper. I pointed my evidence in the GE operation manual in my reply to the deputy editor, who was still not satisfied and asked  me to provide a standard curve. OK, I sent the standard curve, and the editor replied in half an hour: “that is great!” and accepted the paper. The process is a bit of a twist, but it clearly shows that the editors worked responsibly and rigorously. In general, this journal is very good, and has published many high-quality review articles.

(6) Thank | zhangning88012@126.com

Hello everyone, I would like to ask for some advice. During the Initial Validation phase, the journal editor sent me an email requesting information on how the cotton samples were collected, the reasons for using these cotton samples. However, the submission system shows "NO ACTION IS REQUIRED FROM YOU" and there is no option to resubmit after making modifications. What should I do in this situation? Has anyone else encountered this issue before?

(1) Thank | KPBL

My paper on this journal was online on April 25th, but as of May 14th, it has not been retrieved yet. Can anyone tell me when this journal is likely to be retrievable?

(0) Thank | 淘气笨笨

Does anyone know if the technical review sent an email asking for an explanation of some issues, but after replying to the email, the same email with the same content and questions was sent again after 4 days (feeling like the other party did not see the reply to the email)? Is it because the reply email address is incorrect? Or is it due to other reasons?

(0) Thank | xiaobai@001

The submission system is user-friendly, and the editors process submissions quickly and patiently. Due to my limited understanding, I have had multiple email exchanges with the editors, and they have been very patient in providing explanations.

(0) Thank | zhiyong1995

Open access journals are like this now. Some editors seem to have their own agendas. I had an article before, and the opinions of two reviewers were very good. However, the editor rejected it with a very lame excuse that my experimental design was flawed. If there was a problem with the experiment, why not just reject it directly instead of wasting everyone's time with peer review?

(0) Thank | resistance

The initial stage was slow, but the process sped up significantly after being assigned to reviewers.

(0) Thank | junshengchen

Submitted on December 12th, 24, reminded to submit original data on the 16th, revised on January 4th, uploaded response on the 8th, reviewer completed review the next day, and accepted for publication by the editor on the 14th.

(0) Thank | wei98

Hey, can I ask you something?

(0) Thank | ybfei

To be honest, you're a bit unlucky. My evaluation is that this journal, although not a top-tier one, is not as bad as a low-quality journal. My paper submitted to this journal was accepted within 3-4 months. I also suggest that you read more articles from the journal before submitting to a magazine. Write in the style commonly used by the journal, instead of taking a gamble.

(0) Thank | CV届的小白

I am four months old and still in Independent Review.

(0) Thank | junshengchen

Once again, it is stated that the above content does not contain any emotional connotations, please do not overinterpret.

(0) Thank | Peter

Okay, you are the reviewer, you are God, your word is final. Over the next week, I will carefully respond to and address each comment provided by the reviewer. Unexpectedly, this effort only resulted in one acceptance and one rejection. The reason for the rejection was stated as "The manuscript contains fundamental errors that cannot be rectified through author revisions." This feedback was simply baffling, as I had made all the requested revisions. Since a third reviewer was not sought, the editor was unsure whether to reject or accept the manuscript. This led me on a long journey to find a third reviewer, from August to December. Looking back, if I had voluntarily withdrawn the manuscript in August, it wouldn't have taken up so much of my time. At the time, my advisor and colleagues advised against withdrawing, suggesting that I wait for the third reviewer's opinion before making a decision.

(0) Thank | Peter

Two months later, I found that the editorial review was still ongoing, and it was already July. The school had already started summer vacation. Did foreign publishers also take a summer break? I sensed something was wrong, as this was far from the review cycle stated by Frontiers. Therefore, on the advice of a friend, I wrote to the journal to inquire about the progress of my manuscript. Three days later, Frontiers officially replied that the editorial review had been completed and they were currently looking for reviewers. They asked me to be patient. Upon logging into the journal's forum, I found that the progress had indeed reached the Independent Review stage, but I had been assigned a new editor. Fine, no problem.

After waiting another month with no reviewers found, it was already August. I wrote to the journal again to inquire about the progress of my manuscript. The journal asked me to recommend a few reviewers. Perhaps I was not well-informed, as I had never seen a journal ask authors to recommend reviewers before. Nonetheless, I found several reviewers related to my research area within Frontiers and sent them over. Five days later, two reviewers accepted the review. After a "lengthy" month of review, the two reviewers provided dozens of comments on formatting and images, even suggesting changes like replacing "Researcher" with "We" for a more professional tone. ???

(0) Thank | Peter

Today is December 27, 2024. With great excitement, I am writing this article to commemorate my year and a half of research career since I started my postgraduate studies. I would like to declare that this article does not contain any emotional bias, and everything stated is based on facts.

Since starting my postgraduate studies, I have been full of enthusiasm and determination to make a mark in the academic world. The demanding schedule of working nine to nine, six days a week did not make me feel tired. Under this high-intensity working mode, I produced my first paper in May this year. After careful polishing, I submitted it to the journal Frontiers of Plant Science on May 27th. To be on the safe side, I chose to publish it open-access, as this paper is related to my graduation requirements.

(0) Thank | Peter

After the responsible editor entered the Independent Review state, it lasted for over a month. Now the responsible editor is no longer displayed. What is the current situation of being in the Independent Review state?

(0) Thank | binsoul

Return to the first reviewer's comments on 12.20, and return to the second reviewer's comments on 12.23.

(0) Thank | 曾娟

Submitted on 23rd November 2024.
Editor's name displayed on 27th November 2024, starting to invite reviewers.

(0) Thank | 曾娟

How long have you been in EA status?

(0) Thank | 曾娟

Thumbs up for the conscientious editor, who resolved the issue very promptly. I hope to always encounter such a good editor...

(0) Thank | 地遥求索者&Fu

It has been almost a month, and it has been in the hands of the editor all this time without being assigned a reviewer. Should I remind them?

(0) Thank | TBZZZZ

The submission process is cumbersome, and the current outcome is unknown. (Hey experts, anyone interested in adding friends to share status? The forum is a bit troublesome.)

20240915 initial validation
20240916 editorial assignment (handling editor appears, if you don't understand, ask. Does this mean assignment editor?)
Currently in editorial assignment status.

(0) Thank | anjing123