投了一次，一周拒
Submitted once, rejected in a week.

(0) 讚！ | 犬走从之

Actually, this question is quite difficult to answer. In our research group, we have submitted papers to both journals. From my personal perspective: EMBO J tends to be more comprehensive, with higher demands for novelty and broad interest, as well as requirements for mechanisms and integrity. Although some articles are very good, editors may consider the field too narrow and suggest submitting to a specific journal. Articles in Plant Cell must have mechanisms, relatively complete and comprehensive research. Overall, I feel that it is harder to be accepted by EMBO J than Plant Cell. However, for a specific article, it is hard to say. It depends on luck and whether the editor likes it

(0) 讚！ | storyhare

Despite the fact that there are many new journals that have surpassed the impact factor of Plant Cell (PC), PC is still considered the leader in the field of plant research. This is because PC does not only publish articles with high citation potential like Nature Plants, nor does it resort to questionable methods to artificially boost its impact factor like some other journals. It is one of the few classic journals that prioritize scientific significance and audience

(6) 讚！ | 渡渡鸟

Hello, how long does PC initial QC generally take?

(0) 讚！ | 金城武比我帅

The second-rate editors of NP only check whether your article has citation potential, that is, whether it is hot or not. They have no ability to understand the scientific significance of your article, let alone evaluate it.

As for MP, articles rejected by five-star bioinformatics journals are published in MP without peer review. What level is MP at? Of course, this is derogatory towards bioinformatics. After all, it is also a classic bioinformatics journal

(0) 讚！ | 素采

Some people say that MP and NP are more difficult than PC because the first two are very difficult to submit for review. 15 years ago, all PC articles would be submitted for review, but after 15 years of reform, half of the submissions would be rejected by the editors, and whether or not you can submit for review is related to the submission rules of the journal, not the quality of the journal. The low submission rate further shows that the editors of MP and NP are not responsible. Especially for NP, without top editors, they can still give you such a high rejection rate, why do you think that is? MP is difficult because you don't have connections, while Nature Plants is difficult because what you are doing is not a hot topic. One is a platform for exchange of interests, the other is a commercial journal, they cannot be compared with PC!

(2) 讚！ | 素采

MP hard because it's not your connection, nature plants hard because what you do is not popular. One is a platform for exchanging interests, the other is a business journal, can't be compared with PCs

(0) 讚！ | 素采

One of the top journals in the field of botany. The article requires a high level of workload and comprehensiveness

(0) 讚！ | 无糖汽水

In the field of plant science, plant cell = nature plants >>>>>>>mp =new phyto = plant physi = plant J > pce>jxb

This is roughly the ranking. In fact, the influence and quality of articles in nature plants are far inferior to plant cell. It's just that nature plants have more hot topic citations. PC and NP are at the top level, far ahead of the second tier. MP barely makes it into the second tier, but the reputation of this journal is extremely poor. Its high impact factor is also manipulated. Many articles that score five or six points would not be published in foreign professional journals. However, as mentioned below, plant science journals are too conventional. But plant cell has still published many groundbreaking discoveries, such as RNAi and transposons

(1) 讚！ | 茜54655

Hello, is it necessary to resubmit the manuscript as a new submission when making a new submission?

(0) 讚！ | 五河梓珊

Which one is better, it or EMBO J?

(0) 讚！ | 辉夜一莹

Research Purpose, Process, and Results:

The purpose of this study was to investigate the impact of social media on consumer purchasing behavior. The research process involved surveying a sample of 500 participants and analyzing their responses to questions about their shopping habits and social media usage. The results revealed that social media plays a significant role in influencing purchasing decisions, with 80% of respondents reporting that they have made a purchase based on a recommendation or advertisement they saw on social media.

Discussion of Data Results:

The data results of this study are consistent with previous research findings that have shown the power of social media in shaping consumer behavior. For example, a study by Smith et al. (2017) found that social media influencers have a strong influence on the purchasing decisions of their followers. This supports the idea that social media plays a crucial role in influencing consumer purchasing behavior.

Evaluation and Discussion of Research Contribution and Significance:

This study contributes to the existing literature by providing further evidence of the impact of social media on consumer behavior. By demonstrating the significant role that social media plays in influencing purchasing decisions, this research highlights the importance of businesses leveraging social media as a marketing tool. The findings of this study have practical implications for marketers and businesses looking to reach consumers through social media channels.

Conclusion and Future Research Directions:

In conclusion, this study has shed light on the powerful influence of social media on consumer purchasing behavior. Future research should focus on exploring how different types of social media content (such as reviews, endorsements, and advertisements) impact consumer decision-making. Understanding these nuances can help businesses tailor their social media strategies to effectively reach and engage with their target audience

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

Simply read the abstract and conclusion to determine how much of your content has already been published; then promptly organize and submit to journals with Impact Factors lower than those where your work has already been published

(0) 讚！ | 维尔娜菲茨杰拉德

What to do if the experimental data is published ahead of time?

(0) 讚！ | 平原文波

How to discuss?

(0) 讚！ | 北国博达

Although npj is all about hot topics, Plant Cell is not that great. It is comprehensive but not innovative. It excessively emphasizes the completeness of the story, lacking originality. Once a gene in Arabidopsis thaliana is discovered, then it's followed by discoveries in maize and rice. Actually, it's not very interesting. Moreover, it seems like either cell biology or signaling pathways are the main focuses. In recent years, to increase the impact factor, there have also been publications on database genomics. In fact, the reputation is getting worse and worse.

(278) 讚！ | 我是一阵风

I feel that what the person downstairs said is not right. The influence of Nature Plants is far less than that of PC. NP is a new publication, and although its Impact Factor is high, it has hardly reported any important conclusions. It's just a halo of Nature.

(6) 讚！ | Laser5200

You say PC is the leader in the field of plants, but I feel it's not right. Currently, both Molecular Plant and Nature Plants have higher impact factors and submission difficulties than PC. I feel that Nature Plants should be the leader in the plant world.

(0) 讚！ | storyhare

If the editorial office of Plant Cell continues to be occupied by the group of cell biologists, then this journal will become more and more valueless. This journal cannot keep up with the times. Although contents of cell biology are easy to be cited, it is difficult to have unique innovation. Its impact factor may rise again, but it can’t escape the fate of being abandoned. For PC, PJ, PP, and some other good botany journals, just look at the titles and abstracts of the articles on them, you will know what they are talking about. How instructive can such research be?

(18) 讚！ | 千里秦川

The level of Plant Cell is ok. However, more and more attention is paid to the research of signaling pathway and cell biology. The innovation of such research is actually not high. The routines of millions of genetic are the same. Bioinformatics or other ways to target genes, gene knock-out / overexpression research upstream and downstream functions, plant phenotypic analysis, that is probably the case. It is complete, but it is very boring. This kind of thinking is suitable for the research mode of domestic foolish people with a lot of money. Previously, there were some relatively novel and interesting articles published. In recent years, there are fewer and fewer (this kind of articles).

(38) 讚！ | 我是一阵风

This journal is considered to be the best for the plant sciences fields. The review is very rigorous, so make sure your article is well written and innovative. The submission process was rather long, but that was to be expected.

(8) 讚！ | Anonymous

Review Speed: 1.0 Experience Sharing: Published in a top-tier plant cell journal. This journal is considered a leader in the field of botany, with a very rigorous review process that allows for longer articles, meaning that the research needs to be thorough and detailed. My work focused on studying a pair of protein interactions and their functional significance. I first submitted my paper in November 2014, and received the review result in mid-January 2015. The reviewers raised many questions, showing a high level of expertise. They also requested an additional experiment (to directly demonstrate the phenotype in plants when assessing functional significance), so the decision was to reject the submission but encourage resubmission (as Plant Cell does not have a major revisions option, any request for additional experiments inherently leads to rejection with encouragement to resubmit, known as ‘decline-resubmission encouraged’). I then conducted the requested experiment and resubmitted in early April. During resubmission, I carefully addressed each question raised by the reviewers along with my supervisor. I also reached out to the handling editor who had managed the initial submission, so I believe the reviewers remained the same. Ultimately, I was informed of acceptance within just 14 days (April 8th - April 22nd). When submitting to Plant Cell, I believe it is crucial to delve deep into areas with significant findings and thoroughly complete the research. The journal does not mind multiple figures and lengthy articles, but it does require a comprehensive and thorough presentation of the research

(0) 讚！ | 东风采蓉

Review Speed: 2.0 | Submission Acceptance Rate: 25.0 Experience Sharing: We have a new editor-in-chief and editorial board. Our first submission in May 2015 was rejected and required major revisions, almost redoing the experiment. In October 2015, we submitted again and received rejections from three reviewers and editorial board members, who suggested additional experiments before resubmission. We have now completed the experiments and are preparing to submit again, hoping for a successful outcome. It's so difficult to get accepted!

(0) 讚！ | 诗凡mio

Not only are there differences in top and second-tier schools, but there are also similar situations in different subjects. In the past thirty years, the subject with the most Chinese students who eventually became American academicians is plant biology (Peking University is the same): among the more than 20 mainland Chinese American academicians, 5 are plant biologists. The reason is not that China's botanical education is superior to the United States, but rather because the United States has long had an oversupply of agricultural products, and the vast majority of their excellent students do not study botany. If they choose to study biology, most of them prefer medicine (with the next being biomedical science). Our outstanding performance in the field of botany is the result of the situation being like the story of "Tit for tat," not because Chinese people have an inherent talent in botany, nor is China's botanical education particularly outstanding

(0) 讚！ | 血天西华

Not only are there differences in ranking between top and second-tier schools, but the same situation can also occur in different disciplines. Over the past thirty years, the discipline with the highest number of Chinese students who eventually become American academicians is plant biology (and this is also the case for Peking University): among more than twenty mainland Chinese academicians living in the United States, five are plant biologists. The reason for this is not that China's botanical education is superior to that of the United States, but rather because the United States has long had an excess of agricultural products, and the vast majority of excellent American students do not choose to study plant biology. If they choose to study biology, they usually prefer medicine (with biomedical sciences being a close second). Our outstanding performance in the field of plant biology is a result of the story of "Tian Ji's horse race strategy," not because Chinese people have an innate talent for botany, nor because our country's botanical education is particularly outstanding

(0) 讚！ | 留云鸿彩