The journal has unexpectedly dropped to the third quartile this year. The responses to the reminders feel like automatic robot replies. How should we handle this situation properly? It's causing a lot of delays

(0) 讚！ | 我也科研

The initial review process was completed in just over a month, but it has been nearly 7 months since the revised manuscript was submitted. Throughout this time, the status has consistently shown as waiting for one reviewer's report. Only in the last week or two has there been a change, with three reviewers now assigned to evaluate the manuscript. However, today it suddenly reverted back to the initial status (waiting for editor assignment). I have followed up twice, but both times received the same response: "The paper is currently with subject experts for evaluation. The editor will render the decision once the required reports are in and you will be notified regarding the same. However, I contacted the editor to expedite the review process."

(0) 讚！ | 我也科研

Hello, are you also involved in cellular biophysics? Can we get to know each other?

(1) 讚！ | kangwei123

March 29th was rejected, with only one reviewer's opinion.

(0) 讚！ | woeiks

June submission, July review, now it's been over 5 months without any news. I don't know what to do.

(0) 讚！ | woeiks

In terms of the construction of biological soft tissue models, after working on it for a month, I received major revisions. One reviewer's question was more specialized and valuable, while the other reviewer raised several minor issues. The revision period was two months, and after making the necessary changes, the submission was accepted after a month.

(1) 讚！ | pan

There was a response two months after the submission. There was only one reviewer, who gave one big comment and two small comments. It was accepted after minor revisions. The editor-in-chief liked a novel point in the model very much, I guessed that it was related to what he made himself. He always emphasized that this new mechanism deserved the attention of others, which may be the reason why he was willing to only require minor revisions.

(0) 讚！ | cigarfish

Personally, I feel that this journal prefers articles that focus on the clarification and application of theoretical models. I did not have the most straightforward submission experience, but in the end my manuscript was accepted once the editor-in-chief contacted certain reviewers for clarification on a few of their comments. I recommend submitting to this journal if your research falls within the aim and scope of BMMB.

(0) 讚！ | xz0003@surrey.ac.uk

19号, submitted, 23 is still assigned by editor, anxious waiting

(0) 讚！ | LQ9365@sina.com

11.4 Submission, 12.21 was rejected, saying that I did not count as advance

(0) 讚！ | xinyao.zhu@warwick.ac.uk

engage in topology optimization, although the research content is new, but the expression is not good,

(0) 讚！ | 1213862687@qq.com