It was submitted in 2019, with a double-blind review. The experts’ opinion hit the key point, and after major revisions and another minor revision, it was accepted, although it was under the byline of the junior supervisor. This year an article is being reviewed externally, and we are waiting for the editor to decide whether to make a revision or... Pray!

(20) Thank | 远方儿

Submitted June 7, 2018. Decision on July 7, 2018, minor revision. On July 8, 2018, returned revisions. Accepted on July 9, 2018. During the review period, the editor e-mailed to say that the abstract format was incorrect. The double-blind review is now being implemented. Personally feel that this approach is very good. The journal editor is very good. In addition, the general system update time of the journals is from 18:00-22:00 in the afternoon. In addition, I suggest having figures and graphics professionally produced. The journal is extremely demanding on graphics. Ugly maps are generally likely to lead to a rejection. There is also a beautiful layout. The graphic abstract must be well designed and illustrated. In short, this journal is as good as GCB. Personally, if you think that you have an adequate study, and want to be published quickly, then quickly choose this journal. From submission to acceptance can take only 1 month! And the impact factor 6. Just sit and wait for awards!

(0) Thank | 364982725@qq.com

I wonder which one you think is better, GEB or GCB? Both journals seem to be top-notch, but they seem to have slightly different focuses – GEB appears to be more traditional in ecology, more hypothesis-driven, requiring some good macroecological patterns; while GCB focuses more on global change and ecosystem-level issues. I'm not sure if this summary is accurate.

(0) Thank | ahaha233

A very good journal.

(0) Thank | lee100

Hello, may I ask what does "Draft Returned by Editorial Office on 09-Dec-2024" mean? Does this mean it was directly rejected? The editor also did not say why.

(0) Thank | sonder

20230316 Submitted
20230316 Awaiting ED Assignment
20230317 Under review 
20230505 Awaiting EIC Decision
20230515 Major Revision
20230612 Revision Submitted
20230612 Under review
20230628 Awaiting EIC Decision
20230701 Major Revision
20230804 Revision Submitted
20230804 Awaiting EDO Processing
20230804 Under review
20230807 Awaiting EIC Decision
20230808 Minor Revision
20230816 Revision Submitted
20230816 Awaiting EIC Decision
20230817 Accept

(0) Thank | Jhonny Zuo

Choosing the right editor is crucial

(3) Thank | Jhonny Zuo

Just published online. Personal feelings:
1. Very picky about the quality of the article. The reviewers provided many specific comments, and the quality has indeed improved a lot. I feel that I can conquer GEB and can try to challenge GCB in the next step.
2. Slow progress. Submitted in January last year, rejected in the first review but could be resubmitted, directly minor revisions in the second review (surprising), followed by a third review, which took half a year. The third review only pointed out formatting issues (added some author introductions as required by the journal). The fourth review claimed that there was duplication with my previously published papers (the duplication rate was less than 1%, and they were all in the materials and methods section). It was not until the fifth review that it was accepted. The whole process took more than a year, and it seems that the reviewer was changed in the middle.

(2) Thank | 573574007

3. Requirements for innovation: Some peers may believe that having a large amount of data and a large scale is sufficient for submitting to GEB (journal), but based on my personal experience of unsuccessful submissions, it is not the case. A good dataset and a clear innovative point are necessary but not sufficient conditions for successfully submitting to GEB. In addition to this, statistics, charts, and writing are also very important.

(0) Thank | Yetnow

Global Ecology and Biogeography should be regarded as the number one in the field of biogeography, surpassing the well-established Journal of Biogeography and the fully open-access journal Diversity and Distributions. GEB receives very few submissions, typically only 12-14 articles per issue and no more than 150 articles annually. The rejection rate is over 80%, usually favoring the best among the best. Here are my deepest impressions of this journal:

1. Emphasis on large-scale research: Especially focused on global-scale studies, which leads to a relatively high number of integrative analysis or data synthesis articles published in the journal. There are also articles based on regional-scale survey data, but it is difficult to submit survey-based articles unless they have novel research focuses, relatively large scales (in a relatively complete geographical region), and close connections to basic ecological scientific assumptions.

2. The chief editor and editors are responsible and rigorous in the review process: This includes ensuring the accuracy of statistical analyses, the rigor, standardization, and aesthetics of figures and tables, and the logic, conciseness, and accuracy of paper writing. The review comments received (through three rounds of external review) are almost always focused on these three aspects and are strictly guarded.

(0) Thank | Yetnow

Hello, may I ask what does it mean when your journal is in the "under review" status?

(0) Thank | 闫文波

May I ask about the status of your article? I keep switching back and forth.

(0) Thank | 单昕

May I ask about the status of your article? Could you please give an overview of the process for this magazine? Oh, since we submitted it, it has been constantly switching between "under review."

(0) Thank | 单昕

Capitalization, lowercase, what is your situation and outcome?

(0) Thank | 单昕

Excuse me, what does your back and forth indicate? How is your paper situation now? Mine is also going back and forth. Sigh.

(0) Thank | 单昕

Has this now been changed to OA? Do we need to pay layout fees?

(0) Thank | 小大虎虎

What's the deal with switching between "Under review" and "Under Review"? I thought the capitalized one meant it was under review.

(0) Thank | Dogontheleft

Posted in July 2021, resubmitted for revision 5 months later, and has been under review since (July 2022); still waiting for the results of the second review...

(5) Thank | soil biodiversity

After submission, it becomes uppercase.

(0) Thank | Dogontheleft

Which one is in uppercase?

(1) Thank | Wdrn

Is it in uppercase or lowercase for submission?

(0) Thank | 话痨山羊

Is the time between these "Under review" and "under review" long?

(0) Thank | 飞雪寻梅

May I ask if you edited and resubmitted it for review after your minor revisions? Or did they accept it directly?

(0) Thank | 顿涅茨克

This journal "Under review" means that the responsible editor is reviewing the manuscript. "Under Review" means that it has been submitted for review. The difference in capitalization is significant. If the status changes directly from "Under review" to "awaiting EIC," it is mostly a tragedy.

(0) Thank | 中中中678

Agreed, I followed up once after two months but received no response. I kept checking the submission status every day until three months passed, and it remained under review consistently. On the eighth day of the third month, it changed directly to "Awaiting EIC Decision," skipping the "awaiting ED recommendation" phase. It feels very strange.

(0) Thank | schappi