Note: Verified reviews are sourced from across review platforms and social media globally.

苦逼大田种地人 2023-06-22

WTF!!! When I submitted last year, it was still in the second tier. Is this considered an established botany journal? And now it has been downgraded to the third tier? The ranking system of the Chinese Academy of Sciences is becoming more and more ridiculous! This is absurd!!

bb111 2023-02-27

Can only say that the Chinese Academy of Sciences is awesome. This journal is considered relatively old in the field of botany. You managed to get it into Zone 3, and as for JIA, you directly put it in Zone 1's top 3 within 3 years. Hahaha.

lijiai 2022-10-25

Why is yours so fast? It has been almost four months since my first trial, and there is still no news.

lyxlyxlyx 2022-10-25

The first SCI paper was quite tortuous. When I received the news of resubmission and reevaluation during the first review, I felt like the sky was falling. One reviewer doubted the originality, but the editor did not reject it. So I wrote a tearful response emphasizing the novelty. Then came the lengthy second review, which took even longer than the first. Fortunately, the reviewer who rejected it during the first review was convinced, and another reviewer provided some minor suggestions. The editor then requested major revisions, which I completed, and without sending it for external review, they informed me of acceptance in advance and even provided free language polishing.

I feel that the resubmission and reevaluation during the first review was actually a major revision, and the major revision during the second review was actually a minor one. As long as the editor doesn't reject it, there is a chance. Overall, the review process for my paper is relatively long. It may be different from the journal's previous style. I've seen people accepting within forty-something days in the journal, but my first and second reviews have taken almost two months each, adding up to nearly half a year.

lyxlyxlyx 2022-10-25

First SCI paper commemoration
4.27 Submitted to journal, with editor
5.1 Under review
5.2 Under review
6.11 Under review
6.18 Minimum number of reviews have been received
6.18 Decision in process
6.19 Resubmit and re-review
7.10 With editor
7.16 Under review
7.24 Under review
8.4 Under review
8.29 Minimum number of reviews have been received
9.10 Decision in process, major revision
9.22 With editor
9.26 Decision in process
10.1 Minor revision
10.4 With editor, accepted
10.11 Online

lijiai 2022-10-25

Hello, I have been applying for nearly four months now, but still haven't received any news. I am anxious to graduate and wanted to ask if you have followed up with the editor.

lijiai 2022-10-25

Hello, how are you? I have been applying for nearly four months, but there's still no news. I am anxious to graduate, so I wanted to ask if you have followed up with the editors.

小李子 2022-10-13

My two-month trial has not returned either.

dabieshan 2022-10-13

It has been over 3 months since the submission, but there is still no feedback from the reviewer. I'm not sure if I should remind the editor or not. I'm getting anxious!

昆仑农夫 2022-08-01

May I ask how long the first trial will take? I'm in a bit of a hurry. Thank you all in advance.

西行樱吹雪 2022-06-13

I have reviewed and submitted papers for this journal before. I would like to share my experiences for everyone's reference.

Submission: This journal has multiple editors. The Chinese editor is specifically responsible for handling Chinese manuscripts. The Chinese editor is very efficient, going online once every day on average. As long as the submission shows "Under Review," it means that the manuscript has been sent to the reviewers, and we just need to wait patiently.

Review: I had one paper accepted before, and later I received an invitation to review a paper with a deadline of 10 days. The manuscript sent to me was honestly of poor quality, with language and content issues. However, the manuscript had some innovative aspects, so I provided major revisions. After I submitted my comments, another reviewer also submitted their comments a few days later, and our opinions were similar. The editor gave us an opportunity to revise. From this, it can be seen that for this journal, as long as the paper has some innovation, the editor will send it for review. Good luck to everyone!

lyxlyxlyx 2022-05-16

Hello, did you submit an essay? Your response was so fast.

hodor 2022-05-15

Apr 25, 2022 submitted to journal
Apr 26, 2022 with editor
Apr 26, 2022 under review
May 3, 2022 decision in process
May 3, 2022 minor revision
May 4, 2022 submitted to journal
May 4, 2022 with editor
May 4, 2022 under review
May 5, 2022 decision in process
May 5, 2022 major revision
May 11, 2022 submitted to journal
May 12, 2022 with editor
May 12, 2022 decision in process
May 12, 2022 Completed - Accept

Thumbs up for the efficiency of the editor and reviewers! ?

love & peace 2022-05-10

The difficulty shouldn't be too great, and it seems like I can move at a decent speed.

1005 2022-05-05

Excuse me, is this journal difficult? Is it fast-paced?

love & peace 2022-05-04

2022.3.17 Submitted to Journal
2022.3.18 With Editor
2022.3.29 Under Review
2022.5.2 Decision in Process
2022.5.3 Revise (Minor Revision)
2022.5.4 Revision
2022.5.4 With Editor, Accept

西域大漠 2021-09-17

Overall, it is quite fast. Submitted on May 18th, revised on June 22nd, returned later due to a business trip, and finally returned for revisions on August 22nd. After the return, the article was accepted on September 8th.

向日葵挥手 2021-09-16

I really want to complain. In March, I received the first review comments, but there were very few opinions from the two reviewers. The editor requested revisions. After submitting the revised manuscript, the second review took 5 months to complete. I then sent two reminders, but on September 14th, it was directly rejected. Sigh...

Discover Peeref hubs

Discuss science. Find collaborators. Network.

Join a conversation

Become a Peeref-certified reviewer

The Peeref Institute provides free reviewer training that teaches the core competencies of the academic peer review process.

Get Started