ok 2022-05-22

The speed of reviewing is relatively fast. The external review takes about one month. Since there are no major issues with the article, it was accepted directly after minor revisions in two days.

Cyanide灰 2022-02-12

20210819 Submitted
20210821 With editor
20210829 Under review
20211111 Send letter to urge manuscript
20211112 Editor informs that they are contacting reviewer #2
20211231 Major revision but no additional experiments required. #1 suggests adding more discussion content, #2 emphasizes language expression.
20220201 Revised after proofreading
20220209 #1 Accepted, #2 revise Highlights. Revised again after 2 hours.
20220212 Editor directly accepts.

cc0777 2021-04-10

Posted on January 3rd, returned for major revisions on January 30th. Two external review experts and the Associate Editor provided constructive and professional suggestions, requesting additional experiments and modifications in the discussion section. It took half a month to improve two figures, and the revised version was submitted on February 16th. On March 10th, it was returned for major revisions again, with a continued request for additional experiments. Fortunately, we had the data from previous experiments, and the revised version was submitted on March 18th. We received a notification on April 7th that the paper was accepted after minor revisions, and we made the revisions on the same day. Overall, the review process was relatively fast, with high expectations for the amount of data and discussion section.

青柠22 2021-01-31

2020 Double Eleven submission, 2-3 days later it was returned due to spacing issues. Resubmitted after making the necessary changes. The editor reviewed and sent back the review comments on November 26th. The review comments were good, but the requirements for language and discussion were quite strict. After the first round of revisions, it was returned on December 12th due to the placement of charts. Resubmitted after making the necessary changes. The editor reviewed it again and sent back the review comments on December 28th. The second reviewer was not satisfied with the explanation for two specific issues. To address these two issues, a small experiment was conducted. Submitted on January 5th, 2021. Returned on January 12th, and the first reviewer had another question. After making the necessary modifications, it was returned on the same day. Accepted on January 18th.