Journal info (provided by editor)

The editor of Breeding Science has not yet provided information for this page.

Space for journal cover image
Issues per year
n/a
Articles published last year
n/a
Manuscripts received last year
n/a
% accepted last year
n/a
% immediately rejected last year
n/a
Open access status
n/a
Manuscript handling fee?
n/a
Kind of complaint procedure
n/a
Two-year impact factor
n/a
Five-year impact factor
n/a
Disciplines: Botany, Genetics

Aims and scope

The editor has not yet provided this information.

SciRev ratings (provided by authors) (based on 1 review)

Duration of manuscript handling phases
Duration first review round 1.8 mnths compare →
Total handling time accepted manuscripts 1.8 mnths compare →
Decision time immediate rejection n/a compare →
Characteristics of peer review process
Average number of review reports 2.0 compare →
Average number of review rounds 1.0 compare →
Quality of review reports 1.0 compare →
Difficulty of reviewer comments n/a compare →
Overall rating manuscript handling 0.0 (range 0-5) compare →

Latest review

First review round: 7.7 weeks. Overall rating: 0 (very bad). Outcome: Rejected.

Motivation:
In literature, there is a very simple method for estimating the genetic correlation matrix. Due to its simplicity, this method is relatively often used. However it has some undesired numerical problems. We submitted a note (not a full paper) showing how to solve these problems. The second reviewer seems not to have read the manuscript in detail, since he made several statements on the manuscript which were very wrong. The editor proposed that we should compare the method to ASReml and resubmit as a new submission if our methods is better than the latter. Our idea of this note was not to outperform a commercial software. In case a heuristic method which can be calculated with pen and paper would beat a commercial software, we would not submit this as a note, but as a full paper, and probably not to this journal...