期刊名
AGRONOMY JOURNAL

AGRON J

ISSN / eISSN
0002-1962 / 1435-0645
目标和范围
After critical review and approval by the editorial board, AJ publishes articles reporting research findings in soil–plant relationships; crop science; soil science; biometry; crop, soil, pasture, and range management; crop, forage, and pasture production and utilization; turfgrass; agroclimatology; agronomic models; integrated pest management; integrated agricultural systems; and various aspects of entomology, weed science, animal science, plant pathology, and agricultural economics as applied to production agriculture.


Notes are published about apparatus, observations, and experimental techniques. Observations usually are limited to studies and reports of unrepeatable phenomena or other unique circumstances. Review and interpretation papers are also published, subject to standard review. Contributions to the Forum section deal with current agronomic issues and questions in brief, thought-provoking form. Such papers are reviewed by the editor in consultation with the editorial board.
研究方向

农艺学

CiteScore
4.30 查看趋势图
CiteScore 学科排名
类别 分区 排名
Agricultural and Biological Sciences - Agronomy and Crop Science Q2 #104/376
Web of Science 核心合集
Science Citation Index Expanded (SCIE) Social Sciences Citation Index (SSCI)
Indexed -
类别 (Journal Citation Reports 2023) 分区
AGRONOMY - SCIE Q2
H-index
113
出版国家或地区
UNITED STATES
出版商
American Society of Agronomy
出版周期
Bimonthly
出版年份
1949
年文章数
278
Open Access
NO
通讯方式
AMER SOC AGRONOMY, 677 S SEGOE RD, MADISON, USA, WI, 53711
认证评论
注: 认证评论选取于全球各个学术评论平台和社交媒体。
Well-recognized journal in the industry. Overall, the review process is strict and the cycle is slightly long. The reviewers and journal editors are very diligent and responsible. Although it is a 3rd-tier journal, the quality of the article greatly improved after three rounds of careful revisions by the reviewers (5 in total), and I gained a lot personally.

Submitted on December 3, 2021.
First major revision on March 10, 2022: Three reviewers in total, all very strict, provided comments and questions regarding experimental design, methods, data analysis, conclusions, etc. One reviewer questioned the accuracy of the experimental method.

First major revision returned on May 29, 2022: Carefully replied to each question from the reviewers and made revisions according to their suggestions. Conducted validation experiments. Due to the impact of the pandemic, the revision time was longer, so I explained the situation to the editor in advance and applied for an extension.

Second major revision on July 3, 2022: Two new reviewers this time, mainly provided revision suggestions and questions regarding language and writing aspects.

Second major revision returned on July 31, 2022: Carefully replied to every question and made revisions according to the suggested changes.

Third revision (minor revision) on January 30, 2023: The reviewers had almost no major issues, and I made detailed revisions on language-related details. (The review period from the second to the third revision was longer, but I received a quick response after reminding them at the end of January.)

Third revision returned on February 14, 2023: Truly admire the journal's diligent and responsible work attitude, as well as the reviewers' strictness and diligence.

Accepted on February 17, 2023.
2023-02-21
Our group has submitted to this journal once before, and most of the articles were published in journals ranked higher than the second tier. The first time we submitted to this journal, it felt particularly terrible. We are working on plant-based environmental pollution remediation, and after submission, it went through the review process. Both reviewers approved it, giving a few minor issues. After we diligently addressed each one, the editor ignored the reviewers' comments and our modifications, inexplicably stating that we did not have enough repetition and rejected the manuscript. Our experiments were conducted in a growth chamber using hydroponics. We really want to curse, wondering why we wasted time, and why we bothered to submit in the first place. Moreover, our research direction, with multiple locations and years of repeated experiments, would undoubtedly meet the standards of top-tier journals. Why would we want to publish in this less reputable journal? However, the biggest advantage of this journal is that all the author's information is hidden during the review process, ensuring fair evaluations by the reviewers. The problem lies with the editor. Our manuscript was rejected by a Chinese individual. This experience was extremely unpleasant. Rejection is not a big deal, as our work might genuinely not have been up to par, but encountering such an experience felt like an insult, showing a complete lack of respect for the reviewers and authors. Anyway, we will never consider this journal again in the future.
2021-06-13

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

Ask a Question. Answer a Question.

Quickly pose questions to the entire community. Debate answers and get clarity on the most important issues facing researchers.

Get Started