Submitted in February 2020. It is a standard MDPI speed. Comments was given within one month (minor revision), and it was accepted 5 days after resubmission. After all, such open access journals face a problem of uneven manuscript sources. It is largely determined by the reviewers. But in fact, the reviewers of this journal can be very scary if you are unlucky as me. The comments required a minor revision. There were 3 reviewers (one reviewer only mentioned grammar issues, so I guess the editor ignored him directly), and it was fairly easy to revise the manuscript according to the comments. However, the fourth reviewer's comments were added on the third day of the major revision period. Although it focused on proof, it was particularly difficult to be revised, and dozens of comments were given. Then on the fourth day, the fifth reviewer comment returned... This one is more ruthless, and he started to frustrate me. I was already angry at the time, so I basically rebutted all the fifth reviewer’s comments. Finally, dozens of pages of responses were given to more than 80 comments from the fifth reviewers... I applied to the editor for an extra 3 days for revision, and at last I sent it back in 8 days. Successfully accepted. Here is a reminder for everyone. Although this journal is not as good as the old brand ones, the manuscripts would be sent to whomever they should look for. It may not be easy to deal with the people with strict requirements. But everyone knows the advantages. The decision is in the hands of academic editors. As long as you make revisions carefully, there is basically no problem. And the journal has limited the time for revision, so I think it’s okay. After all, the paper is completely revised once within 8 days...

(3) Thank | 欺言乐翁

I will say nothing else but directly say something useful: 2020.09.16, submitted in the evening; 09.16, pending review; 09.17, under review; 10.10, pending minor revisions; 10.14, resubmitted; 10.15, pending editor decision; 10.16, pending minor revisions; 10.17, resubmitted; 10.17, pending editor decision; 10.19, paper accepted; 10.19, paid the publication fee; 10.19, pending English; 10.20, English correction done; 10.20, author proofreading; 10.20, author proofreading-resubmitted; 10.21, pending conversion; 10.21, website online. There were 2 reviewers and one of them was in the same minor research direction as me, who was very professional. Minor revision was required, and 5 days were given. Because there were relatively many comments raised, the time was a little bit too short. The speed was fast, but the quality was still strictly controlled. This journal is recommended to those who have good articles and want them to be published in a short time

(5) Thank | ClaSSiC

received: 8 August 2019; major revisions: 3 September 2019; minor revisions: 18 September 2019; Revised version received: 21 September 2019; received: 22 September 2019; published: 26 September 2019. Three reviewers, fast review speed, high efficiency of the editorial office. I hope the journal to get better and better.

(8) Thank | 征途0612

24.12.17 Submitted
25.1.14 11:34 Minor Revision
25.1.18 Resubmitted
25.1.21. Pending editor decision
25.1.25. Accepted

(0) Thank | tommy-1

What step are you at?

(0) Thank | KARSTQ

Submitted on November 15th
Received editorial feedback on November 25th, requested revisions within 7 days
Returned revised manuscript on December 2nd
Accepted on December 5th
Extremely fast pace, a very good experience

(0) Thank | tommy-1

Save the journal, the PhD's living Bodhisattva.

(1) Thank | 滑肠

The academic editor of PED gave the decision to accept the minor revisions after more than thirty days of review, and then returned on the same day. Two days later, the paper was accepted, and everything proceeded quickly. It was published online on December 23rd, and surprisingly indexed on December 31st!

(0) Thank | zseason

The process was quite fast, and the reviewers and editors were very professional. Let me share my submission timeline:

2024-11-18 Pending review
2024-11-20 Under review
2024-12-2 Pending minor revisions
2024-12-4 Resubmitted
2024-12-4 Pending decision
2024-12-4 Pending editor decision
2024-12-6 Pending minor revisions
2024-12-6 Resubmitted
2024-12-6 Pending editor decision
2024-12-9 Paper accepted
2024-12-9 Pending English
2024-12-10 Pending English done
2024-12-10 Author proofreading
2024-12-10 Author proofreading - resubmitted
2024-12-10 Pending conversion
2024-12-10 xml2pdf done

(0) Thank | 战斗龙卷

Review and revision were very quick, with three reviewers in the first round - two positive and one negative, requiring major revisions. In the second round, only the negative feedback was returned. Despite dissatisfaction with the response, a thorough reply quickly garnered positive feedback. The manuscript is now pending editor decision for 25 days, despite two reminders indicating that the editorial team is still reviewing. Is this delay intentional or is there another reason? It seems unlikely that the manuscript is still under review.

(0) Thank | zseason

What is the difference between a Special Issue and a regular issue? Is there any special indication for a Special Issue when the Science and Technology Information Center issues a citation report?

(0) Thank | TonyHSU

I'll reply to you. If your manuscript was rejected by a journal under MDPI, usually due to lack of novelty, it is unlikely to be sent to other journals for review because they are all in the same submission system. It would be embarrassing to send it to another journal. Secondly, the editorial capabilities vary, and if your article doesn't match their standards, it may be rejected directly. There is always a certain rejection rate, and your article might just be one of them. Thirdly, perhaps you have set high expectations for your own article. Objectively speaking, these are the three reasons for your rejection.

(1) Thank | 小小小小小林

Submitted on October 1st, reviewed on October 2nd. The review process was quite fast.

(0) Thank | C& AGWAII

I would like to ask why all the journals I submitted to MDPI were rejected by the template within 3 days. I later submitted to IEEE and got accepted, but MDPI, whether it's Electronics, Applied Sciences, or even Sensors, all were rejected by the journal editors. Can anyone provide some guidance? I believe the content of my articles (repetitiveness, innovation, etc.) meets the requirements of the journals, but I keep getting rejected. I have submitted many times using the templates provided by the journals, and the corresponding author's email address is also from the institution. Why is this happening?

(0) Thank | 向大牛学习

Can any expert provide some guidance? I believe that the content of the article (repetition rate, originality, etc.) meets the requirements of the journal, but it has been rejected repeatedly. I have used the template provided by the journal for many submissions, and the corresponding author's email address is also the institutional email address. Why is this happening?

(0) Thank | 向大牛学习

I want to ask why all the journals I submitted to MDPI were rejected by the template within 3 days. Later, I submitted to IEEE and got accepted. However, whether it is Electronics, Applied Sciences, or even Sensors, all submissions to MDPI were rejected by the journal editor template. Can someone guide me? I believe that the content of the paper (repetition rate, innovation, etc.) meets the requirements of the journal, but it has been consistently rejected. I have submitted many times using the template provided by the journal, and the corresponding author also used the institutional email address. Why?

(0) Thank | 向大牛学习

It has been a month and it is still in the "under review" status.

(0) Thank | QQ12QQ

It has been a month for me too, and still no news.

(0) Thank | QQ12QQ

Does the special issue take up the space of the regular issue?

(0) Thank | 铁牛铁蛋

I have the same feeling. I don't know why it has been such a long time, I submitted my manuscript a month and a half ago, and I still haven't heard anything.

(0) Thank | 135792468

I am soliciting contributions for the agronomy journal, with the focus on the effects of fertilization on greenhouse gas emissions and soil carbon turnover in agricultural fields. Contributions are welcome. The review process for the special issue is the same as that for the regular issues, and publication and SCI indexing are also the same, with the only difference being that it is relatively easier to submit for the special issue.

(1) Thank | doudou

This journal focuses on agronomy, so topics such as artificial intelligence and computer science are not suitable for publication in this journal. Most of the accepted submissions are related to field research.

(0) Thank | 风雨

1) Submission Received; the next day (Article Processing Charge Confirmation);
(2) one month (Minor Revisions); one week later (Accepted for Publication); the next day (Final Proofreading Before Publication); the same day (Paper has been published).
The overall speed was very fast, the reviewer's comments were pertinent, the questions raised were very targeted, and they greatly helped to improve the article

(0) Thank | Publish-maker

The pending view was rejected within three days. The content of the article had been reviewed multiple times by the supervisor and had a large workload, and the innovation was also good. However, the template was rejected after three days, I don't know what's going on with MDPI lately, they also rejected my submission to Remote Sensing a few days ago

(0) Thank | small master

Others are pretty quick, but it took me two and a half months to figure it out

(0) Thank | 洋洋洋