JOURNAL OF ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

2019.10.29 submitted; 2019.11.03 Under Review; 2019.12.26 consider after substantial revision (requiring additional experiments, with a total of 40 questions); 2020.01.16 revision submitted; 2020.01.15 Under Review; 2020.02.13 consider after substantial revision (There was still a reviewer requesting further explanation for the mechanism); 2020.02.18 revision submitted; 2020.02.26 accept after revise (The name of a figure was changed); 2020.02.27 accept. It took about 4 months, and underwent two major revisions, so it seems that the editing efficiency is not bad. I feel that the requirements for innovation are not very high, but the overall structure of the article needs to be quite completed.

(5) Thank | 不会游泳呀

03-23 Submitted; 03-23 With editor; 03-28 Under review; 04-20 Under Editor Evaluation; 04-20 Under review; 04-27 Under review; 05-12 Under review; 05-15 Under Editor Evaluation; 05-21 Under Editor Evaluation; 05-22 Consider After Substantial Revision; 06-16 Revision submitted; 06-24 Under review; 06-28  Required reviews completed; 07-01 Required reviews completed; 07-08      Required reviews completed; 07-08 Accept.

(12) Thank | JEMA

I originally submitted my manuscript to The Science of the Total Environment, and the preliminary review said that the research direction of the article was not appropriate, recommending I try JEM. My experience with JEM was disappointing, as my manuscript was rejected after a half year of review and revision. The editor had found a new reviewer for my revised manuscript rather than sending it to the previous reviewer. The new reviewer recommended more revision and the editor decided to reject the manuscript. It was an unusual submission experience, and the first time I’ve encountered this situation. In general, the review cycle of this journal is slow, and the review process is also quite rigorous.

(0) Thank | zzkobe24

The article was submitted last May and experienced two major changes in the middle.The last time I submitted it to the editor was in December last year. The third trial was too long. It was about to collapse. Two emails have been sent to remind editors. The editors responded every time. The article is being reviewed by the reviewer.Crash crashHave friends who have the same experience?In this case, should I boldly talk to the editor about the retraction, but I can't bear it, after all, I have already made the second revision.Hey~

(0) Thank | Sophia

10 reviewer comments, 4 minor repairs, 6 overhauls, the editor directly refused!See the journal with 10 reviewers for the first time!!!!

(5) Thank | 912709969@qq.com

Contributions are now edited for nearly 20 days, reviewing 2 people, all minor repairsThe result of the return is not the original reviewer!!!One refused a major repair and the result refused!!

(2) Thank | as

A recent review, a lot of articles in this journalThere is a problem with the statistical method, and no control group is set....Such a high impact factor should not be

(0) Thank | 这期刊好奇怪

Hope to under review, take the first step, pray!

(0) Thank | Anonymous

Read the comments, a little scared ah

(1) Thank | 我怕谁啊

However, the review speed was a bit slow, and the reviewers were changed twice in the middle, but the final result was quite good, and it was directly acceptd after the minor repair.

(0) Thank | 1465796413@qq.com

has been with editor for 16 days, why not send it for review.Crash

(3) Thank | Bao-Jie

10 Monthly submitment in November to modify the comments, the mail did not see the revised draft in December, January recorded.

(1) Thank | ff

17 yearsThe manuscript was submitted in mid-November, and the notice received after the revision was received on January 24.On January 30th, the revised manuscript was submitted. With the editor for more than a week, the status changed to under review. After one month, it became required reviews complated to indicate that the minimum opinion has been received. If enough comments are received, the result will be obtained.On March 9, it was under reivew (indicating a reviewer's opinion conflict).
  The two reviewers in the first instance made a lot of comments. It may be that the two reviewers in the second instance disagreed..It feels like a tragedy..Time is tight, this journal is still not thinking about it...Really unhappy.

(1) Thank | 6351419@qq.com

feels super-god, with editor for 20 days, selectd the slowest journal, no one

(0) Thank | yudeyou92

with editor 10 days, the speed seems to be a bit slow.

(0) Thank | jojo-yudeyou

Review time is 4 months, after modifying twice, receive

(1) Thank | 1234

The content of the paper is to explore the characteristic pollutants and source analysis. After the submission, the review period is longer, but the experts look very detailed, even the grammar and punctuation have been changed, and the two small repairs are directly accepted.

(0) Thank | 244671497@qq.com

The content of the paper is to explore the characteristic pollutants and source analysis. After the submission, the review period is longer, but the experts look very detailed, even the grammar and punctuation have been changed, and they are directly accepted after two minor repairs.

(0) Thank | 244671497@qq.com

once selectd, the manuscript is about the research of sewage treatment reactor; online submission on December 25, received the comments of minor repair after 3 weeks; submitted the revised manuscript on January 25, 1On the 31st of the month, I received a notice of acceptance

(2) Thank | ranbin.liu@hotmail.com

This journal has a long review period, and the final result is uncertain. If you have leisure, you can select

(0) Thank | PKU

The direction of nitrate reduction in the water body may not be the reason for the mainstream direction of this journal. With the editor for more than two months, two reviewers have two opinions, repairedReceived twice, it feels good!There is another person, about the environmental pollution submitigation class, it is quite fast for more than two months, but unfortunately rejected

(3) Thank | Bao

with editor about 12 daysAfter that, three reviewers were invited.The two reviewers are basically making up the number...The first reviewer felt that the article was valuable and looked very carefully and gave a lot of comments;The second reviewer's opinion is: I think the article is good, but it is not suitable for publication in this journal.Then there is nothing wrong with it... Isn't this work edited?The third reviewer: I asked two questions that were completely irrelevant.Then rejected...

(3) Thank | 恭喜您，被拒稿了。

The review speed is slow, the middle asks once, and the 4th and a half months go back to the first trial.Comments, received after half a month of revision

(0) Thank | tian

editing level is super bad, not at all with the journal level on a level.No comments in the first trial, reviewer recommended, let's modify the format.As a result, the second trial refused to return, and the reason given was completely irrelevant to our paper.It is not recommended to select for this journal, hehe.

(0) Thank | siyuurai

really slow, selectd for a month, or with the editor, really can not stand.

(0) Thank | kqlee@njau.edu.cn