Reviews for "Plant Phenomics"

Journal title Average duration Review reports
(1st review rnd.)
(click to go to journal page) 1st rev. rnd Tot. handling Im. rejection Number Quality Overall rating Outcome
Plant Phenomics 24.0
n/a 3 5
(very good)
Motivation: The beginning of the reviewing process was delayed, but probably because of the COVID-19 problems at that time. After the first revision, the processing was significantly faster.
I am very much satisfied with the reviewer's and the editors' competence and engagement. Because the opinions of the two reviewers in the first review round were not entirely in agreement with each other, the Editor-in-Chief got involved with an additional, pretty comprehensive review. All three reviewers suggested major but very meaningful corrections. After resubmission of the revised manuscript, it went over a new round of revision of both reviewers plus the editor, and the manuscript was finally accepted with minor revisions.
I am pretty optimistic about the future of this new journal if they manage to keep such a high quality of reviewing as in the case of our manuscript.
Plant Phenomics 8.7
n/a 2 1
(very bad)
Motivation: Overall would not recommend trying to publish in this journal.
* The aims and scope of this journal are not clearly stated. It seems to be in the area of plant science, but from the review comments, it seems to want to be in the field of agricultural engineering as well. In that case, it would be better to try and publish in journals such as CompAg or Bio-systems Engineering.
* Too much time (more than 1 month) for the paper status to change to "under review"
* The reviews were written in very poor English.