The manuscript was submitted on October 15 this year. The reply was received on the next day, and original data was required to supply. The other party pestered me for a week on the grounds that the dyeing background was too low and the tubulin strip had no background. My boss was pissed off and wanted to withdraw the manuscript. Fortunately, associate editor assigned it on October 26, and revision was required on November 26. There were 2 reviewers, one of them positively affirmed the meaning of our work, and the other one gave many valuable comments and requested me to make major revision. However, the editor chose to reject it and did not give the reason for the rejection. Summary: The submission experience was extremely bad. The image review department was totally unprofessional. The review comments were very professional and benefitted a lot. My work will be more perfect. However, the editor rejected the manuscript without reason and I will not submit to Journal of Biological Chemistry in the future.

(9) Thank | ritsu

The review speed is relatively fast, and the review is very strict. Mechanisms required. The quality of the articles is relatively high.

(37) Thank | lodjlwhu@sina.com

I would like to ask the host, how long did it take for your second round of rework?

(0) Thank | 大头奕

Open sourced, the number of articles published has also decreased, although there are still review articles. However, the impact factor is not increasing. It is a good journal, but it is still at a disadvantage in various evaluations in China. Hopefully, it can return to the top tier.

(0) Thank | 关中的土里埋皇上

Hello, I would like to ask what original files are needed to review mass spectrometry data

(0) Thank | 小小毛驴

Century-old store, Nature Index magazine, high reputation, highly recognized in the field. Personally, I really like this magazine, it has many classic articles, but the impact factor is relatively low, so it is not suitable for friends who particularly pursue IF (impact factor). I just had an article accepted, timeline: Received Date: May 24, 2023; Revised Date: July 3, 2023; Accepted Date: July 9, 2023. From submission to acceptance, it took 46 days.

(5) Thank | Tommy87

Now, CNS has launched sub-publications and descendants of sub-publications, with endless abundance. Although the traditional journals like JBC have a solid foundation, their future days are estimated to be difficult.

(4) Thank | sangbiao

Currently, JBC magazine is receiving a large number of submissions, and the quality requirements for the manuscripts are becoming increasingly high.

(0) Thank | Lxk_75656

Submitted on February 27th, reviewed two days later, and received a rejection notice approximately 40 days later. There were two reviewers, the first one raised five major issues, of which I believed three were due to a misunderstanding of our research, while the other two issues were helpful for improving the manuscript's quality. The four minor issues were related to writing. Ultimately, the first reviewer provided an incomplete evaluation. The second reviewer gave an overall positive evaluation, only pointing out one minor issue. In the end, the editor decided to reject the paper, but allowed for resubmission after revisions. Sigh, it's a bit disheartening, maybe I should submit the revised version to another journal.

(0) Thank | Lxk_75656

I submitted on 2022.10.11, around 10.16 it was under review, and as of 10.28, it is still under review. Hoping for good luck for us~

(0) Thank | BossTiler

I have been waiting for two weeks, and it is still under editorial consideration. So speechless... It's the first time I've encountered such a slow process!

(0) Thank | Zi-yuan

The journal is very careful in reviewing manuscripts.

(0) Thank | lllooo

After submission, the manuscript was sent for external review within 7 days. After 1 month, the reviewers' comments were received. There were a total of 3 reviewers, one of whom specialized in reviewing mass spectrometry data within the journal. The other two reviewers provided a high-quality evaluation. After supplementing 4 months of data and making revisions, one of the reviewers was very persistent about minor details, but eventually accepted our viewpoint. This journal requires the original Western blot (WB) data to be uploaded upon acceptance. 

Overall evaluation: The journal is highly efficient, with rigorous and meticulous reviewers. It has a high international impact (as it belongs to the Nature Index journals) and a good reputation, but the impact factor is not high, being in the Q2 category. If not particularly focused on the impact factor, it is recommended to consider submitting to the JBC journal. Personally, I believe JBC is the most cost-effective journal with a score below 7.

(0) Thank | 杨杨

Rejected in the first trial after one and a half months.

(0) Thank | cd_0516

5.17 Submission 
5.20 Review 
6.10 Received feedback for revisions 
7.01 Revised 
7.17 Rejected
There were a total of two reviewers. The first reviewer gave high praise, but the second reviewer pointed out numerous issues. Some of the problems were indeed significant, but due to various constraints, there was no way to make changes, and starting over was the only option. After providing explanations and clarifications for each issue, the second reviewer was still unsatisfied and rejected the article. This was my first article, and it has already been rejected five times, which is truly disheartening. I have already graduated, but I still don't know when I will obtain my degree.

(4) Thank | 86869411

Do you need a layout fee?

(0) Thank | mafegqiu06

12.5 Submission
12.6 Under review
12.22 Rejection, 2 reviewers, suggested resubmission
Incredibly fast speed, even before Christmas. It's disheartening to be rejected, but follow the suggestions and conduct additional experiments. I will update again in the future.

(2) Thank | CaYoo

Has this journal now become an open access journal? Can domestic contributors apply for a waiver of page charges?

(0) Thank | GUG

During my PhD studies, I published an article which took three weeks from submission to receiving the reviewer's comments. There was only one reviewer, and it took a week to receive their feedback after revision and resubmission, which was done online. Now, I am fortunate enough to become a reviewer for the same journal and have gained a better understanding of the process. Typically, reviewers are asked to complete their evaluations within two weeks, and the editor will spend up to one week considering the opinions of multiple experts before making a decision. Editors usually seek at least two reviewers, and for articles related to fields such as proteomics, they may also consult the journal's own technical experts. The editor manages the review timeline well, and if the reviewer's comments are not returned on time, the editor will disregard them. The number of opinions considered depends on how many experts return their comments on time, so sometimes there may only be one reviewer's opinion. This journal is highly recognized in North America and Europe, being an esteemed publication in the field with significant impact. While its impact factor has been declining in recent years, I personally enjoy this journal due to its high efficiency, expert opinions, and industry-wide recognition.

(4) Thank | lOVEcb

Can articles on bioinformatics analysis without experimental support be submitted? Is the review process fast?

(1) Thank | BBBBLUE

May I ask if it is possible to publish articles on bioinformatics topics?

(0) Thank | BBBBLUE

JBC is a good journal, but it publishes around 1700 articles per year, and the quality of the articles varies. If the number of articles published is reduced by 50%, there should be no problem achieving a score of 10.

(10) Thank | 全式金

The impact factor has rebounded, with an instant impact factor of 4.537 in 2020, expected to exceed 5.

(118) Thank | haoren

This is the second article of my master's degree, and the process is quite smooth.Submitted in February, received the editor's mail within 20 days, the opinions of the two reviewers are not bad, but need to make up more experiments to improve.I made up for the second submission at the end of May, and I received an editorial email today, saying that I received it!I have to say that JBC is working very fast!In the same day, I was in Press.Although JBC's IF has been falling in recent years, it is indeed a classic journal in our hearts, which is recognized by the industry!I can't select for it, I won't select for other journals with 5 or 6 points.I hope to continue working hard in the future!More than a big article ~

(8) Thank | 豆虫

was originally submited in JBMR and HMG in our field, but the transgenic mice used were reported to be non-specific this year, and experts in the bone field said it was unacceptable.Changed to JCS, refused to draft, reason they only play cell biology.Later, he submitted to JBC under the advice of his mentor and peers.After submitting the manuscript for review, the model was re-submitted after 1 month.I thought that there was no drama. After carefully reviewing all the reviewers' requests for experiments in September, and carefully replying to them, JBC received less than 4 days to receive the test...Happiness comes too suddenly...I didn't consider those "junk journals" in the whole process, I would rather not select for them.After receiving many biochemical field friends, I would like to express my warm congratulations. They all say that this journal is absolutely suitable for the first SCI

(4) Thank | wu3248