汤小湘 2023-04-24

Posted on June 22, 2022, rejected on July 25 (allowed to resubmit, 3 reviewers unanimously requested additional experiments);
Resubmitted on November 5, 2022, major revision on December 14 (1 additional reviewer added);
Revised on February 24, 2023, major revision on March 21 (previous additional reviewer still has comments);
Revised on April 1, 2023, minor revision on April 11;
Revised on April 15, 2023, minor revision on April 19;
Revised on April 20, 2023, provisionally accepted on April 21.

PAHseee 2022-05-01

I would like to ask, is this journal chargeable? I didn't understand its guide.

PAHseee 2022-05-01

I want to ask, is this journal a paid journal? I didn't understand its guide.

joe888 2022-04-14

The article mentioned on the sixth floor may be quite cliché and lack originality in terms of methods, but it was actually quite difficult to achieve such a time scale and quantity scale for ocean samples at that time.

洪荒大事 2021-10-19

Is this your initial rejection of the editor's review?

wangzh 2021-09-23

The review process is quite fast. The editor said there is no problem with excessive analysis, but the results need further validation that is more advanced and suitable for priority publication. Although it was not accepted, there is no regret in trying, and it did not delay resubmission. The speed definitely lives up to the expectations of the author.

Stage Start Date
21st Sep 21 17:32:43

Decision Sent to Author 21st Sep 21 17:32:43

Under Review 20th Sep 21 06:44:51

With Editorial Office 20th Sep 21 06:44:51

Manuscript submitted 19th Sep 21 00:01:28

Author Approved Converted Files 19th Sep 21 00:01:28

Preliminary Manuscript Data Submitted 18th Sep 21 05:25:31

你这还不傻 2021-08-31

The review process was quite fast, but the reviewers did not understand the new analysis method we used, and the editor rejected the submission directly. It's too difficult.

wulitou 2021-07-26

Can you please give a review or comment on the ISME Communications journal?

TTao 2021-03-17

The peer review process was fast, but I encountered a crazy reviewer who doubted my conclusions based on a low-impact factor article and repeatedly asked me to conduct additional experiments. It took a whole year from submission to acceptance, which was quite a hassle.

TTao 2021-03-17

On the sixth floor, I also think that the mentioned paper is not very good. The statistical analysis is done well, but the content of the research and the experimental design are not good. The recent level of ISME articles is mixed, with good articles and also poor ones.

soil biodiversity 2021-03-01

I want to know, after my manuscript went through external review (with 2 revisions and 1 rejection), how did it appear as "under review" again after the decision was sent to the author? What is the situation? Can anyone analyze it for me?

yunqishi 2021-02-28

The previous ISME used to be the No.1 in microbial ecology. Now, journals like Nature Microbiology and Microbiome have also developed and have higher impact factors, giving everyone more options for submitting articles. This is great!