Frontiers in Plant Science

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

Two reviewers, a minor repair, a major repair, the editor refused, the 2 district is still very difficult, hehe....

(1) Thank | 林海浮沉

Submitted date: 06 Mar 2018Editorial assignment start date: 06 Mar 2018Independent review start date: 13 Mar 2018Interactive review activated date: 09 May 2018Review finalized date: 28 Oct 2018Final validation date: 15 Dec 2018The reviewer retired one and changed a new one. It was over, the editor retired, and a new one was changed. The new editor made a lot of comments and finally passed...

(0) Thank | niche

The journal has changed its water, and its evaluation in the country is not high. It is almost the same as Plos one, and regrets it!

(0) Thank | yzzhangxiang@163.com

Five-year average, 4.353, there are quite a few good articles on it.

(1) Thank | yufeiharmony

The three-year average impact factor is 4.15. It is a good journal in the biological field, and the second area of ​​biology.It is said that the review of the ecological direction of the plant community is very strict. There are 4 reviewers, more than 20 pages of opinions, single line spacing, very objective, and the editor is also very level. It has been revised three times and it is still very difficult.

(11) Thank | yufeiharmony

19 Nov Article accepted for publication.16 Nov Review of Review Editor 6 finalized.Re-submitted manuscript.01 Nov Review of Review Editor 4 finalized.31 Oct re-submitted manuscript.26 Oct Review of Review Editor 5 finalized.Reviewer 5 posted new comments.25 Oct re-submitted manuscript.16 Oct Review of Review Editor 1 finalized.18 Sep re-submitted manuscript.posted new comments.07 Sep Interactive review forum activated.02 Jul submitted manuscript.

(2) Thank | 281874283@qq.com

has already submitted an article on it, the second one is still in the final review for 8 months.But it is said that this journal has changed its water. It seems that the Chinese Academy of Sciences system does not evaluate this journal well, and regrets that it has not selectd for other journals.

(6) Thank | coolcartoon

This journal is currently the most disgusting journal I have ever seen. The second-instance reviewers can quit at will. If they can't find the reviewer, they will reject the draft. Some reviewers have to add a lot.RNA, PCR and enzymology data experiments, I have done these experiments, will you select for this journal, the reviewer is not a problem

(7) Thank | 恶心的审稿人

3There is no external audit result in the month.............

(0) Thank | Sky

How to say it!The quality of the articles that went through the normal process review was not bad.However, this journal has a large number of domestic editors, and some people have begun to work in this area. There have been a number of articles on irrigation, and the articles are very watery. If this is not the case, it is not a good phenomenon.The journal self-introduction rate is a bit high.

(2) Thank | nky

This submission is a bitter tear, and it has been delayed to get a degree certificate. Now the review of this journal will generally be very slow. If you are eager to graduate, you should carefully consider the decision.14 Jun 2018 Article accepted for publication19 Mar 2018 Review Editor 1 finalized15 Mar 2018 Review Editor 2 finalized20 Fed 2018 Review forum activated22 Dec 2017 Submitted manuscript

(0) Thank | Kiana

Predict Impact of 2018 is about 3.4

(0) Thank | AAA

2 Submitted on the 10th of the month, submitted to the trial on February 18th, the first reviewer gave the opinion on February 27th, and the other reviewer has not given the opinion, the editor re-reviewed the draftPerson, the opinion given on April 27th, will be rehabilitated on May 12th and will be accepted on May 23rd.

(1) Thank | 654187588@163.com

quickly selectd for three reviewers for one month, the first minor repair, the second overhaul, and the third comment was withdrawn.After the rehab, the first reviewer retired, and the second question was withdrawn. After the repair, he was rejected.It is not clear to the present why the reviewers have quit.

(0) Thank | 342252838@qq.com

4 on April 4th. On April 5th, the status changed to Editorial Assignment on. Now, the status has not changed for a month, and I am in a hurry.

(2) Thank | lipinghxy@126.com

17 After the submission in December, the editor is assigned one month later, 18 years.The editor was replaced on March 2 and has been in the external trial until now.This is the second time I selectd for this journal. It was published in the first three months. The result is more than 4 months. There is no external trial result. It is really super slow now

(3) Thank | leehg

17Submission in November, reviewer comments were revised in February 18, after one reply, the two reviewers agreed to publish, and the editor in March raised some questions, saying that the experimental design was unreasonable.I am waiting for the message after replying.I don't quite understand how the journal reviewed the manuscript, and finally stuck in the editor. The 6-month wait is not in vain?

(0) Thank | haihai

Submitted date: 27 Nov 2017Editorial assignment start date: 27 Nov 2017Independent review start date: 29 Nov 2017Interactive review activated date: 06 Jan 2018Review finalized date: 01 Mar 2018Final validation date: 22 Mar 2018

(0) Thank | boom

Super ink, ink for 5 months, refused......

(0) Thank | 123

This journal has been slow, it has been more than four months, one of the reviewers has already received it, and another reviewer has put a lot of opinions, waiting for me to reply one by one.After replenishing the experiment, I gave it back to me. It’s so speechless. Now I’m waiting for the editor’s news to see if I can find the third reviewer. It’s been quiet for a month. Edit, you are going to travel around the world.Yet?How long will it come back?

(2) Thank | LIN

submission at the end of June, review on July 20th, first review on August 10th, modification time on fifteen days, August 2On the 10th, the first reviewer received five days later, and the second reviewer had not given advice for half a month.....

(0) Thank | 1111

Half month is still submitted, ask for help, wait for

(0) Thank | 1469925225@QQ.COM

Publish fast journals, suitable for students who urgently need to graduate, but the layout fee is expensive

(0) Thank | chf

The article has been selectd "Frongtier in Plant Science", edit status display: Edited by: No Associate Editor assigned.Some people say that his article will display the editor's name directly after the select. What should I do with this situation?

(5) Thank | liaoyongxiang123@163.com