This journal quickly entered the Under Review stage, but the review process is really long. There have been several reminders during this period, but they were of no use. Patient contributors can still submit their work. The review comments play a significant role in improving the quality of the articles. Apart from being slow, overall it is great, even though the impact factor is not high.

18-Jun-2023 submitted
24-Dec-2023 major revision
07-Jan-2024 revision submitted
17-Mar-2024 major revision
14-Apr-2024 revision submitted
28-Apr-2024 minor revision
06-May-2024 revision submitted
22-May-2024 accept

(1) 讚！ | 熊霸

03-Sep-2022 Post
07-Oct-2022 Major repair
05-Feb-2023 Minor repair
The current result is unknown.

(0) 讚！ | 石头娃

Hello, I have already been hired, but many times when submitting versions, it says there is a formatting issue. Could I have your contact information to seek further guidance?

(0) 讚！ | 包子

Generally speaking, the reviewers and editors of this journal are very serious. They made three rounds of revisions when I submitted my paper. In addition to the reviewers, the editors also provided some suggestions, ensuring the quality of the article. I hope that the journal will continue to improve in the future.

(1) 讚！ | tanruohai

Second review, three months. Hopefully it can be expedited. There are not many journal papers.

(0) 讚！ | llcc

It took more than three months to receive feedback, and the opinions were mixed. The journal only published 65 articles in a year. Is this impact factor indicating that the journal is declining?

(0) 讚！ | llcc

Overall, the editor is very responsible, although the review process is not fast, the quality of the journal articles is still acceptable.

(6) 讚！ | geeyow

5.14 submission
6.25 major overhaul
8.1 minor repair
9.1 reception

(0) 讚！ | rome123

November 21, 2020 - Submitted
December 5, 2020 - Under review
December 17, 2021 - Major revision (Three reviewers. One reviewer recommended rejection, while two recommended minor revisions)
January 30, 2021 - Revisions requested
February 25, 2021 - Minor revisions (One reviewer requested further modifications, while two recommended acceptance without further changes)
March 4, 2021 - Under review
March 26, 2021 - Accepted
Overall, the editorial efficiency is relatively fast, but the speed depends on the reviewers. The journal quality is average, with a stagnant impact factor and a stable rank in the third quartile.

(1) 讚！ | !.

As the experience shared by the authors, the review speed was slow. Of course, this was not the main reason. The main reason is the question raised by the reviewer was beyond the research content of the manuscript, which was kind of chasing dead ends.

(5) 讚！ | youyanya

Two major revisions, two minor repairs, two polishes. The experts agreed to accept it, but it was rejected by the editor in the end.

(8) 讚！ | Annie

This is a junk journal. The review speed is extremely slow, seven months for the first review, two minor revisions, few comments, but easy to modify. However, a new reviewer was assigned after revised submission. Here’s the review comments: the first review expert agreed to accept it, and the new reviewer gave some idiot comments and required a major revision. I'm really angry! They changed the reviewer, and the minor revision in the initial review changed to a major revision in the revised revision!!! That’s the reason why the IF of the SCI journal in China can’t rise, and why we all submit the manuscripts to foreign journals!!!

(27) 讚！ | 胖虎

Frontiers of Earth Science, SCI journal published by Springer Press, Germany, the review speed is generally good (may vary from direction to direction), fromCast to modify to receive three months.The advantage is that the regular publishing house, free of article layout fee (not open access), the editor will be free to modify the touch after the paper is received, this is still very good, the shortcoming is that the current impact factor is not high, I hope domestic editors come on

(0) 讚！ | letpub

Overall, the journal review speed is slow, and basically it is impossible to communicate with the editor. The editor-in-chief will only respond to our questions when he has time. We got a decision of major revision 2 months after revision. There were so many comments, some of which were even way beyond the scope of the manuscript. After our revision, the second round of comments came back after another 2 months, and there were even more questions, some of them really were not that necessary. The reviewers didn’t seem to be the same reviewers from the first round. I don’t know if I should still consider this journal, which has an impact factor lower than one. To get a PhD in geoscience usually requires a paper with an impact factor greater than 1, publishing in this journal is not good enough.

(2) 讚！ | shinjiono