springbo 2022-10-18

I have submitted to several journals and received rejections. I will try my luck with Field Crops Research!!!

寒天晨晨 2022-10-18

Continuous updates..
7.27 Submitted
8.3 Under review
9.14 Received for revision - Major revision
10.11 Returned
10.18 With editor
10.23 Minor revisions, approximately 7-8 words changed
10.25 Returned
10.28 Accepted
This time, it is the fastest acceptance among the articles submitted, previously it took at least six months.

旧城IC 2022-10-17

Update again, 10.17 still with editor.

旧城IC 2022-10-11

9.24 submission,
9.26 with editor
10.11 still with editor
I'm not sure if it's because of the National Day holiday, so I'll wait patiently.

爱种水稻的小林 2022-09-28

The second field crop research, although I didn't receive a scholarship this year, I'm definitely getting it next year. Let me explain the specific process. I submitted the paper around January 25th, received a rejection and resubmitted it on April 23rd after careful revision. Then, I submitted it again on June 1st after a long period of time. In early September, I reminded the journal to review my paper. They replied saying that one reviewer hadn't responded yet (with a good attitude). On September 4th, the reviewer said they could accept it, but the article still had grammar errors and suggested getting it proofread by a native speaker. Surprisingly, the editor proofread the entire article and only provided a few minor suggestions. I received the revised version on September 27th and it was accepted on September 28th. Let me share my feelings. Just like the previous paper, it was accepted directly after minor revisions, and the process was quick. The journal was responsive to my reminders, and the editor even proofread it. Haha, thumbs up!

阿hao1 2022-07-08

Does the external review time have any relation to the acceptance rate of this journal? It has been two months since my external review, and I have received one opinion, but I am still waiting for another one.

PPPopcorn 2022-07-05

I battled with FCR for three years and submitted many articles, finally achieving my goal this time. The process of writing the article was also full of ups and downs. I submitted it in June/July 2021, and three months later, it was rejected in the first review. There were two reviewers, and one of them provided invalid feedback without suggesting any revisions. I felt that the reviewer didn't understand my article, and upon reflection, I realized that it might be because my writing was not good enough, resulting in the rejection. However, the editor was very nice and offered the option to resubmit.
After some modifications, polishing, rewriting the entire article, and redoing the figures, I resubmitted it in February 2022, along with an appeal letter. It was assigned to the same editor as before. It was quickly sent for review, and three months later, I received the reviewers' comments, and both reviewers agreed to accept it. One of the reviewers was the same as the first review, but I am not sure if the other reviewer was new. The lesson learned is that it is important to revise thoroughly, and there is hope even after rejection! I am very grateful to the editor for being responsible and supportive!

jdhuang 2022-06-30

First submission, hoping for some good luck.

jdhuang 2022-06-30

First submission, any experience to share?

寒天晨晨 2022-06-19

Awesome, the editor-in-chief of the journal left you a message.

寒天晨晨 2022-06-19

2022.1.16 Submission.
2022.2.23 Major revision requested.
2022.4.21 Revised manuscript submitted.
2022.6.7 Returned for minor revision.
2022.6.14 Another minor revision, returned on the same day.
2022.6.18 Accepted.
Overall, the first review cycle after submission took one month, while the second review cycle lasted for 40 days. The subsequent process of minor revisions was likely overseen by the associate editor, resulting in a faster pace. Initially, the reviewers' comments were sharp. After consulting with an expert in the field, their comments were perfectly addressed. Throughout the entire process, it must be said that responding to reviewer comments is also something that requires learning.

hanjingye 2022-05-17

2021-04-29 Submission
2021-11-30 Received feedback for revisions, major revisions required
2021-12-05 Resubmitted, made significant changes to the text
2022-02-26 Received feedback on resubmission, did not specify whether major or minor revisions needed
2022-03-07 Resubmitted, added a large number of examples
2022-05-08 Received feedback, but it was an exact copy of the feedback from 02-26 without any modifications, the editor rejected it.
2022-05-08 Sent an appeal email to the editor on the same day, the editor apologized and said they would confirm the specific situation with the reviewer
2022-05-17 The editor mentioned they were unable to contact the reviewer and will continue trying to reach them.

I initially didn't want to post this comment, but it is extremely infuriating. The review process took a week, went through three rounds of review, and in the end, I couldn't even receive a single "valid" review feedback. They simply copied and pasted the previous feedback. I even suspect that they didn't even read my revised manuscript. What is the point of such reviewers other than being disgusting?

Furthermore, I believe the editor tried their best for my article, but having such irresponsible reviewers who directly copy the previous review feedback led the editor to make the decision to reject it, which also made me sad.

The year-long review process has left me mentally and physically exhausted, and I have lost confidence in the attitudes of some researchers. However, I hope my experience is an exception, and I hope your journal will continue to improve.

尤四海 2021-12-12

2021.5.18 Submission
5.20 with editor
The process of finding reviewers was very fast. On 6.18, we received comments from two reviewers, which were relatively positive. There were delays due to other matters in between. The manuscript was returned at the end of August.
9.15 Acceptance
The whole process was very fast, possibly because the article closely relates to the editor's field of expertise.

稻黎黎 2021-11-23

The first review took four months, and after the major revisions were made and resubmitted, the second review has been going on for two more months, but there is still no news. I reminded them to review my manuscript, and they said they couldn't find a reviewer before, but they are currently reviewing it.

FastDuck 2021-11-06

Congratulations, you are really fast. The investment I made in May is still pending.

爱种水稻的小林 2021-11-04

First submission in early August, saying that it needs to be polished and the title needs to be changed before resubmitting. Then, after making the revisions on August 11th, the submission was made. It wasn't until October 13th that a revision notice was received, and the editor provided minor revisions. After two weeks of making the revisions, the paper was resubmitted, and an additional week was spent on proofreading (by the tutor's foreign friend). After four days of revisions, it was accepted directly. It was the first time experiencing such a fast speed. Also, finally, it's my turn to share my experience. This is great!

暮忆丶 2021-11-04

2021.11.03 required reviews completed. The date has changed, but the status has not changed.

暮忆丶 2021-11-02

2021.10.04 submitted - Submitted on October 4, 2021.
2021.10.05 with editor - Under review by the editor on October 5, 2021.
2021.10.06 under review - Under review since October 6, 2021.
2021.10.21至今required reviews completed - Required reviews completed as of October 21.

武先生 2021-10-06

Replying to [Wan Wenliang], after undergoing a thorough 6-month external review, my submission was rejected. The rejection letter only included the opinion of one reviewer, who recommended major revisions. However, the editor stubbornly rejected the submission. The editor, Daniel from Australia, claimed that they couldn't find an editor and didn't want to delay my submission process. They explicitly stated that they would not seek Chinese reviewers. This decision is somewhat puzzling, and I still haven't figured out the reason behind it. Later, I contacted three editors-in-chief to request a resubmission. One of the editors-in-chief informed me that my experiment had been conducted 60 years ago, and I had previously published data on yield in my previous articles, making it a case of duplication. The rejection was upheld. Well, I still believe that the Journal of Field Crops is a top journal in the field of agronomy, but this submission experience has been extremely unpleasant and frustrating. As authors, we can only accept such results.

会呼吸的鱼 2021-09-05

I have visited the comments section countless times to refer to other people's progress, experiencing anxiety and nervousness, and finally receiving it. Excited and happy, I am here to share the progress of the article:
2021.01.18 Submitted
2021.01.20 With editor
2021.02.27 Under review - It was reviewed after the winter vacation and Chinese New Year, one month after submission.
2021.03.28 Major revision - Two reviewers provided a total of 42 comments, and the editor requested significant revisions.
2021.05.29 Under review - The revised version was submitted on the last day of the two-month deadline, and the editor sent it for review three days later.
2021.06.22 Major revision - Three weeks later, feedback was received. One reviewer agreed to accept the article, while the other provided 17 comments. The editor requested significant revisions.
2021.07.26 Under review - After carefully revising, the revised version was submitted for review three days later.
2021.08.21 Minor revision - Three weeks later, feedback was received. The reviewers were satisfied with the modifications made to the article and pointed out a few language and spelling errors. The editor requested minor revisions.
2021.09.04 Accept - The revised version was submitted three days later, and finally, after 11 days, it was accepted!
The full text went through two major revisions and one minor revision. The suggestions provided by the editor and reviewers greatly helped improve the article. Thank you and grateful.

FastDuck 2021-09-01

With a slow speed, it is necessary to adopt an attitude of giving up on this paper and not submit it.

万文亮 2021-08-31

Has the host accepted it now?

万文亮 2021-08-31

Can I leave my contact information for further discussion? My supervisor has been revising it for almost 8 months. He said there's no problem, but I submitted it on April 18th, 2021, and until now, it has been continuously under review. The status time keeps changing.

飞翔的手机 2021-08-26

Posted on 4/29
Under review on 5/7
Then there were several times when the time jumped, the ones I remember are 6-20, a day in July, 8-12, and 8-26, a total of 5-6 jumps.
Currently it is 8-26.
I don't know what happened to my manuscript, why it keeps jumping time in the under review status.
Feeling desperate.

warming 2021-07-30

The text translates to: "First review comments are provided every five months, and second review acceptance is received every month."

武先生 2021-04-20

This journal has high quality, but the review process is too slow. I submitted it on November 30, 2020, and it took about half a month to send it for external review. It has been under review until today, April 20, 2021, and there is no clear information on its status. Around March 20, I emailed the editor through the system, and the editor said that the first reviewer had finished the review, but the second reviewer was still reviewing it. Now I dare not email the editor again, afraid of being rejected for pushing the review process, so I can only hope for the best.

好一个颖果 2021-04-02

The second article on field crops took more than a year from the first submission to acceptance, but the editor and editor-in-chief of the journal were really nice, and the handling efficiency of the manuscript was very high. The level of the reviewers was very high, especially professional, and they provided great help in improving the quality of the article. Here is the specific submission experience, hoping to be helpful to everyone:

2019-12-3: First submission;
2020-1-19: Received 2 review comments, but the editor suggested rejection and resubmission. The main reason was the lack of explanation from the perspective of agronomy or crop physiology on how cultivation measures affect crop yield and quality formation.
2020-7-7: Second submission;
2020-12-19: Major revision, received review comments from 2 experts, which greatly helped in improving the quality of the article; sent a reminder in between, and the editor replied on the same day, explaining the slow review process.
2021-1-9: Revised manuscript returned.
2021-3-15: Minor revision, only one small issue left;
2021-3-26: Revised manuscript returned;
2021-4-1: Accepted.
I would like to express special thanks to my two mentors for their guidance and help, as well as the time and effort spent by the editor and reviewers. I will strive to publish better research results in this journal in the future, even though the review process is long, it is truly worth it!

Cottonman 2021-03-26

This situation is relatively rare, but it should be taken seriously by the journal to avoid similar situations from happening. Has the problem been resolved now? Can you please provide me with more details so that I can see if I can be of assistance? My email address is donghezhong@163.com.

wsjd 2021-03-06

During my first submission, I encountered a good editor who provided many constructive suggestions. However, the editor's suggestions were contrary to those of the external reviewer. After making modifications according to the external reviewer's suggestions, my paper was rejected. They also suggested that I resubmit it. After resubmission, it took over a month to be assigned an editor, and it was only after I sent an email inquiring about the status of the external review that it changed. Since then, the process of external review has been slow. It has been over three months now, and when I emailed after two months, I received no reply. I also sent an email inquiring after three months, but still no reply. I have been requesting extensions for this article, but now I want to withdraw it and graduate. This journal has greatly disappointed me.